meeting_id
stringlengths 27
37
| source
stringlengths 596
386k
| type
stringlengths 4
42
| reference
stringlengths 75
1.1k
| city
stringclasses 6
values |
|---|---|---|---|---|
LongBeachCC_12132016_16-1092 | Speaker 5: to conflict of interest issues yourselves for supporting the signing of this until that investigation is complete. Thank you very much for your time and I appreciate you looking out for the concerns of your residents that that live here. Thank you so much.
Speaker 7: Okay. We're moving on to the hearing. Hearing item number one, please.
Speaker 1: Hearing item one is a report from Public Works recommendations received supporting documentation into the record. Conclude the public hearing. Find that the area to be vacated is not needed for present or prospective public use. And a resolution ordering the vacation of the alley adjacent to 4100 is Ocean Boulevard, east of Terminal Avenue and south of Ocean Boulevard , also known as Belmont Avenue District three.
Speaker 7: Staff report, please.
Speaker 3: Yes, the staff report was given by Shawn Crumby, our deputy director.
Speaker 14: Good evening, Honorable Mayor and City Council. Item one Hearing one moves for the vacation of the Allies south of Ocean Boulevard and east of Terminal Avenue. The recommended actions tonight are to conduct a public hearing. Make a finding that the alley is not needed for public use and adopt the resolution ordering the vacation, said Alley. A summary of the actions related to this item are as follows. General Plan Consistency finding was approved July 21st. Local coastal permit appeal was heard by the Planning Commission on November 17th, and a notice of intent to vacate of this alley was approved by the City Council on November 15th. One concern that has been raised or one discussion topic is in regards to that I'd like to highlight is that the property owner for 4100 ocean will continue to work with 4110 to 4120 to find an alternate suitable location for the trash pickup in the alley. And until that time or until such time, access will be granted to the end of the alley for for existing, for trash service. So with that, I'm available to answer any questions.
Speaker 7: Okay. Any public comment on the hearing? So, you know. Is this on the for the hearing? Yes. Please come forward.
Speaker 6: Good afternoon. Good evening again, Melinda Cotton in the third district. What has been presented to you is fairly. Not terribly complete. But let's begin. This alley is between Ocean and Olympic Plaza. It's 15 feet wide. It's 120 feet long. It provides coastal access for beachgoers. It provides public access. It provides emergency access. It provides trash access for the businesses around it. And during a period of time when Yankee Doodle was not well taken care of, it was pretty much abandoned. Yankee Doodle was abandoned. The lighting went out on the alley and apparently it turned into a place where homeless people gathered. That's no longer the case. Olympic fantasies coming in there. We certainly wish them well. But this is a port and access. This is a time of transition for this location. For one thing, the city is hoping to put the Belmont Beach and Aquatic Center, the new pool there. When they do that, they're going to close Olympic Plaza. Plaza Drive will be closed so that access will no longer be available. And the alley also there got a road diet coming. So they're going to be narrowing the streets down so that portion of the access to that area is also narrowing down. And so it really does not seem a good time to turn this over to the Olympics, fitness for their private use for exercise equipment or whatever, which is what was stated in the staff report. What I would recommend is that you're not to turn over this public access at this time until you're really sure that the city doesn't need it. And there's quite a distance between the other streets, the other access to the beach area. So I really recommend that you just hold on to it, allow it to be used and by the public, it allows to be used to help the adjacent people because there's going to be traffic problems if you don't and allow people to access the beach in this way. So those are the things that I think you should know. It's a shame to give away public property and public access without consideration of all the elements, and I don't believe that they've been as carefully looked at as they should be. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Any other public comment on this?
Speaker 4: Good evening. And Cantrell. And when you were. Were. Addressing this item back on November 15, I suggested that perhaps this was a procedural error because. The appeal that Melinda Cotton and others were bringing before the Planning Commission on this wasn't heard until November 17. And this appears to me to be a blatant done deal. The resolution was all written out on the 15th that this was going to be vacated. The Planning Commission as expected. Did up hold. The zoning administration's administrator's coastal permit. Today's staff report does not even mention that this is going to be gated. The alley is going to be shut off to the public at both ends. There's going to be a gate there. It not only stops public access, it interferes with views of the coastline. And this is in the coastal zone. It is becoming a private eye alley for. The gym to use for equipment that isn't in today's staff report, but it was in your November 15th. It's going to be an outdoor fitness activity and private passageway for business. We were arguing that this is access to the beach, if you will. Look at the. Sketch that's in your staff report. You. So on the back of this, you will see that this connects Ocean Boulevard to the beach area. And I know Mr. Snyder has said that he has spending $40,000 to pave this alley. It has been unpaved. And this is the reason that it isn't open for traffic. But if it's going to be paved now, then I think it should remain public access. The trash is going to be put out on the street, which takes trapped parking spaces.
Speaker 7: Thank you very much.
Speaker 4: And I would ask you to please hang on to this.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Next week, please.
Speaker 5: Hi. Laurie Smith, third district resident. Okay, so. When I hear about beach access being closed off, it makes me think I think Councilman Durango would be familiar with this. I think this week with the California Coastal Commission, there was $5 million and that they had sent out to people who were closing off access to the beach. So that's not something that I would think that the city of Long Beach would be in, interested in considering that Naples residents and that area they have had to open. We've been talking to them about making more access around their homes that that that we have not since. Looked into. So basically, I'm not sure why the city would be giving up land. So the trash cans that are currently in that alley are now going to be on the street. And it's just not something that I would think that the the council members would be interested in doing, that you're closing off the beach that you want more people to be coming to. So it just seems like a bad business practice again, that you are giving up land to someone that is having a development done. So. Well, we'll just have to look into what this gentleman who he has been talking with so and who he's been doing business with. So I'm excited to look at that at the planning commission. All right. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Okay. And you and the other have a comment. Come forward.
Speaker 3: Very good, you third district. I have a great deal of respect for Ms.. Cotton and Melinda. And and of course, I went down and I really had not paid that much attention to it. I said I was here at the hearing and I went down and scope that out and. Came to the conclusion that it is in fact. In the interest of public safety. To eliminate that coast or that alleyway as coastal access, there's ample coastal access. But that inherently leaving that there inherently it invites an accident. If you walk down that you. From the build it from the. If you're walking along the beach and then walk there. You're walking right into all the traffic, zooming down Ocean Boulevard. And there's a median in the middle. So it it really is not a coastal access route. People are, most people will go to an attractive route. An easy route where they don't have to dodge traffic. What you're doing is inviting an accident. By encouraging people if that were to be open to go to cross that street. And I invite you if you are undecided now, I invite you to hold this over and go down and put your boots on the ground. On several different days. Busy days. And see for yourself. The danger that is presented by enticing people. Down into the roadway. So far, there's ample access to the beach on either side as well as views. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Okay. Thank you. We're going to go ahead and go comment. Please come forward.
Speaker 3: Hey. Good evening. My name's William with Olympic Fitness. Been on the project for a little bit over a year and a half, so I'm very familiar with the location. And I want to talk about a couple of things. You talk about having a pathway to the beach and there is no real. Uh. Media where you can cross the street. I've actually seen people that try to use the alley as a pathway to the beach. And what happens is they sprint across the the street, which people you're driving 35 to 40 miles an hour and they're jaywalking across the street, about 100 feet on each direction. There's there's crosswalks which you can safely get to the beach, which would be more safer for pedestrians to actually cross. A couple other things, too. Is this this alleyways? Obviously not well lit for the last year and a half, probably on every other day, even picking up alcohol bottles. Sin Drug saw some marijuana there a couple of weeks ago, too. And it's just really an alley used for drug trafficking and just people just hide out and drink booze, unfortunately. We've hired a security guard there and her last report is there is two people in the last two days have been urinating in the alley and that's been something that's been happening last year and a half as well. And I would you take in consideration that we have a daycare close by too as well, in addition to a pool which you got tons of great kids programs going on in there as well. The facility that will have we'll have a daycare there where kids can be dropped off and their parents can work out and enjoy work out why their kids are being tended to with some fitness activities as well in the daycare. And with this Allie continue on what we have going on with drug trafficking, alcohol, it's not the right place to have that kind of stuff going on with all the kids and families. So appreciate consideration on this. We try to bring some healthy energy to this area that needs it. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Speaker.
Speaker 4: I'd probably say goodnight, but that sounds too formal, too final. Mayor and City Council Members Lucy Johnson I live in the fifth District. However, I am frequently down in the third district at the pool area and near Olympics. I've been going there since the pool was built in 1968, and I cannot tell you that I've ever seen anybody using that out. As one of the other speakers mentioned, it's not paved. It's never been paved, to my knowledge. People really in their right mind wouldn't walk through there.
Speaker 3: And it will be much improved.
Speaker 4: If it's vacated. And Mr. Snyder and the other property owners and.
Speaker 9: It's basically it's not.
Speaker 4: Theoretically owned by the city, it's an easement to the city.
Speaker 3: And the property will revert to the.
Speaker 4: Both owners, the daycare center and the Olympics fitness center. It's not just people walking from Belmont Avenue and trying to cross the Ocean Boulevard, but it's not it's not useful for vehicle traffic. It's not useful for pedestrians. And there is plenty of access.
Speaker 9: Around either side. It's not blocking access like in Malibu, where the homeowners are adjacent to each other and completely fence.
Speaker 3: Off any access. So it's not.
Speaker 4: Going to be that kind of a detriment to public.
Speaker 0: Access.
Speaker 4: Also, one of the other speakers mentioned.
Speaker 3: Olympic Plaza will be closed to vehicle.
Speaker 4: To be closed and it will not be.
Speaker 9: Reduced to public access because it will be closed when the pool is built to vehicular traffic but still available for use by emergency.
Speaker 4: Vehicles. And so the public access along that, it'll.
Speaker 3: Be mostly, as I understand it, a walkway through there too. So it does not reduce any public access. So I encourage you to approve the vacation and let's move on with it and clean up that area. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Final public speaker.
Speaker 3: Good evening. I'm Kurt Schneider, a developer of the property that's adjacent to the alley. Lucy was correct in stating that there's no giving of real estate here. As I stated last time before you, city council, the property owners that surround it own the land. The simple land is owned by the adjoining property owners. It's strictly an easement and the city is relinquishing that easement. So I'm just reiterating that point. So there is no giving. I'm not getting a gift. What we're looking forward to is making it a much cleaner spot in our community. Currently, when we started, when I bought this property three years ago, it was the armpit of Belmont Shore. I think you'll find it'll be a fantastic property when we're done. It already is remarkably better. I want to clarify just one point regarding Chuck's trash. We're happy to work with him as a good neighbor. We'll help him find an alternative suitable location for his trash over time. We're going to work with him. And until that time, we'll have a spot at the end of the alley for his trash can. Again, we try to be a good neighbor. I think the best way we can be a good neighbor is to improve this neighborhood and to make it so that you get more people coming down to the beach. The access to the beach on terminal as well as Bennett is much easier. And again, thank you so much. You've been here for 5 hours. I hope you all are able to go home soon. I'm going. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Case. I want to go back to the council. Councilman Price.
Speaker 8: Thank you. So I want to just ask a few questions in regards to some of the comments that were made. Sean, you've been kind of the lead on this project since it came out, was presented to the city. Do you believe that there's any information outstanding that you would need to help you assess this request and determine whether or not this is an alley, that the city where the easement is is continuing to be needed?
Speaker 14: So when an alley is vacated, the finding that the city council makes is that it's not needed for public benefit or public use. And so through that process, all those types of public uses are investigated to see if those uses are still necessary. And in this case, they were not found to be needed for traffic, circulation, coastal access. Some of the items brought up tonight were emergency access. And for those concerns, our emergency service departments of the city are consulted with a vacation for coastal access. In this case, it did include the zoning administrator for the coastal development permit. But we also do site visits and investigations to make sure that coastal access or access in general is not necessary or public benefit for this alley. And the investigation, the staff was that public benefit is not needed for this alley.
Speaker 8: So staff conducted an investigation. Yes. In regards to this. And that's consistent with what we do any time such a request is made.
Speaker 3: That's correct.
Speaker 8: We did have a community meeting and I don't believe Miss Cotton or Ms.. Smith and or nor Ms.. Cantrell or anyone from the gym were there. It was on homelessness, and we received a lot of feedback regarding this particular area, not just at the alley, but near the pier, the businesses near the pier regarding homeless activity and syringes and things being found in this alley in particular, is this an alley that the city currently patrols or maintains in any way to ensure that there's no homeless activity taking place there?
Speaker 7: I would say.
Speaker 14: That the city responds to two calls and as they come in for service and has done so in this alley, I don't know that there's any routine, necessary patrols or anything that particularly targets this area.
Speaker 8: During your investigation, did you determine whether or not the surrounding business owners were okay with this alley vacation?
Speaker 14: So as part of the process for a vacation. Outreach is done to all of the surrounding property owners and any potential issues that arise as part of the vacation. It is encouraged that are worked out between the surrounding properties and that was done so in this case.
Speaker 8: Miss Cotton mentioned the road diet. I'm very familiar with that project, but I am unclear how that relates at all to the alley. Does it relate to the alley?
Speaker 14: So the road diet would be a change in the configuration of Ocean Avenue, but that does not alter access, particularly this. This alley has two streets that border it. Those are Termino and BURNETT. And so access to the coast is not impacted by the road diet.
Speaker 8: Thank you. I have nothing further.
Speaker 7: Councilman Gonzales. Anything? No. Councilman Supernanny.
Speaker 2: Yeah. I'd like to thank Mr. Goodhue for the invitation. As much as we'd enjoy going down and visiting the site with him. I just looked it up on Google Maps and Mr. Crumby, it looks like the the alley parallels terminal. And it's like within a couple of hundred feet, correct?
Speaker 14: That's correct. I would estimate it's probably 150 feet.
Speaker 2: Okay. So beach access is 150 feet away at Termino. And then it was also mentioned about Bennett. The other advantage there is both Termino and Bennett have crosswalks across ocean where the alley does not. Is that correct?
Speaker 3: Okay. That's correct.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 7: Okay. There's a motion and a second. Members, please go ahead and cast your votes. | Resolution | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing, find that the area to be vacated is not needed for present or prospective public use; and, adopt resolution ordering the vacation of the alley adjacent to 4100 East Ocean Boulevard, east of Termino Avenue and south of Ocean Boulevard, also known as Belmont Avenue. (District 3) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12132016_16-1113 | Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 7: Okay. Next item. And I just I think I also want to make a comment about consent to having someone who spoke to an earlier consent was done at the beginning of the agenda. And so I just want to make sure that we're clear the consent calendar.
Speaker 5: Not have a chance.
Speaker 7: Actually, actually. Let me. Let me be sad, actually. I don't believe that's correct. Mr. City Attorney, what happened was. Is asked for consent calendar. I no one pulled any items except for item number seven. We pulled item seven and we did public comment for every any item besides item number seven. I don't think there was any public comment or maybe there was one. And then we did put out a number seven. I think that's I believe that's exactly what we did.
Speaker 3: That's correct. Now. Okay.
Speaker 7: Ma'am, I think that that's exactly how we did. We can go back and look at look at the it's all recorded. We asked for public comment during the consent and we'll even take a look at it right now just to make sure we'll go on to the next item. Okay.
Speaker 1: Item 22 is a report from Development Services. Recommendations to approve the city's assessment of fair housing for the period of Tober first 2017 through September 30th, 2022. City.
Speaker 7: Is there any public comment on this item? CNN. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Councilwoman Gonzalez. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to approve the City’s Assessment of Fair Housing
or the period of October 1, 2017 through September 30, 2022, in accordance with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Final Rule, and authorize City Manager, or designee, to take actions to further the goals identified in the Assessment of Fair Housing. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12132016_16-1130 | Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 7: Okay. What's next? Before we do the next item, what is the next item coming up?
Speaker 1: 27.
Speaker 7: Okay. Before we do 27, we're going to go. And I was just chatting here with the city attorney. So there is there is going to be a motion to and I think this will I think the same item that Ms.. Smith wants to speak on anyway. So what we're going to do is we're going to take a motion from one of the council members that wants to do a motion to reconsider an item which we'd have to vote on first. And then here the item, which I am guessing is the same item of interest here. So I just wanted to make that announcement. So we're going to get to this last couple items and we're going to get to that motion. Okay. All right. So please read the item.
Speaker 1: Item 27 is a report from City Clerk recommendation to adopt a resolution declaring results of the special municipal election held on Tuesday, November eight, 2016.
Speaker 7: There's a motion and a second. Any public comment? Nope. Please go ahead and cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 7: Okay. Councilman Austin wanted to make a motion.
Speaker 0: Well, yes, Mr. Mayor, in light of the news that we received today and the fact that there was an investigation going on with the particular item on item 13, I'd like to motion to reconsider our vote. There was a lot of confusion going on this this this afternoon when the council convened. And I didn't you know, the concert calendar was pretty, pretty robust. That one got by me. And so I like the motion to reconsider.
Speaker 7: Okay. There's a motion and a second to reconsider. Repeat the item. Item number again.
Speaker 0: Item number.
Speaker 7: 13. Item number 13, which will then get pulled off consent. So the first is going to be a motion to reconsider any public comment on the motion to reconsider. Seeing nonmembers. Please go and cast your votes. Please come forward. This is. And this is just to reconsider, not the actual item. Please cast your votes. | Resolution | Recommendation to adopt resolution declaring results of the Special Municipal Election held on Tuesday, November 8, 2016. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12132016_16-1104 | Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 7: Okay. So now we're back at the items. Item 13.
Speaker 1: Item 13 is a report from Long Beach Airport recommendation to authorize city manager to execute all documents necessary for sublease between Millennium North. And the city of Long Beach for office space at 4400. Donna's Donna Douglas drive to house the Engineering, Accounting and Security divisions of the airport department and District five.
Speaker 7: IT Councilman Austin.
Speaker 0: Yes. And I would love to get a staff report on this this item. I have a few questions as well.
Speaker 3: Assistant City Manager Tom Morgan. So I will do my best to give an overview of this item. Essentially, we have been looking for some space at in the airport's area regarding some of our staffing needs. We currently have staff in the third and fourth floors of the terminal. It is a historic terminal and there are issues. There's only stairs. There's no elevator access. And so we've been looking for some appropriate accommodations for our city staff. The item before you outlines a lease or that we've identified a building and gives you a sense of, you know, what that amount is. It's about $302,000 for the lease and the annual base rent costs will be $152,000 and will increase annually by 3%. We can certainly try to.
Speaker 14: Answer as many questions tonight or we can bring back additional information later.
Speaker 0: So is this a time sensitive matter?
Speaker 3: We do want to be able to move staff at some point, but if we need to take another week to answer questions, we can certainly do that.
Speaker 0: I move to continue this for another 30 days, to gain some more clarity and allow for new information to to come up and help and instruct our staff to look at potential alternatives.
Speaker 7: Okay. The motion on the floor is to take another look at this, to bring this back in 30 days, in addition to look at other alternatives. There's a motion, I believe Catherine Herring is at the second on that. Okay, Catherine, your anger.
Speaker 11: Yeah. In light of the new information that we just received today and factually that we did have a busy agenda at the beginning, it sort of got by everybody. I totally supported the motion.
Speaker 7: Councilwoman Mongo.
Speaker 5: I to support the motion. I guess my question.
Speaker 4: To city staff would be what their opinion is on the potential conflict of interest. As I read some documentation from the city attorney that they believe there wasn't one.
Speaker 3: Mayor members of the council. Yes, we have been advised of the potential issue. We have looked at this under government code 1090. We have discussed it with the SPC on other issues, not this particular contract, but we had a Planning Commissioner in a similar situation. I received an opinion from the NPC which found that there was no conflict because the Planning Commission did not and was not involved in either recommending approval of the contract or in the making of the contract. And that same situation is true here. The Airport Advisory Commission, this lease is not presented to, nor do they recommend, nor do they refer or have any input into the contract. The contract is approved by the Council as a body, not the Airport Advisory Commission. So in his capacity or as a seat on the airport advisory commission does not create a legal conflict, in our opinion, under 1090.
Speaker 5: So I guess my my thought would be that this is a member of our community who we believe to be an upstanding citizen, so much so that this council chose to put them in a position to represent us and to.
Speaker 8: Volunteer their time. As mentioned at several community meetings.
Speaker 4: Recently, we're always looking for people to stand up and volunteer to participate. I mean, there is quite a bit of data that they need to provide and put forward, including form seven hundreds and go through trainings and the such. And so I just want to make sure that we do our diligence and we.
Speaker 8: Look into this and that. We don't punish someone or put them in a less favorable position for volunteering and for it to be looked at and other considerations to be taken.
Speaker 4: But perhaps bring it back.
Speaker 8: Whenever city staff feel confident that. The situation is significantly similar or completely similar to all other situations, and that we.
Speaker 4: Are clear that there's no potential risks. I see you have a.
Speaker 3: Mayor and members of the council. If this motion, the substitute motion to continue this item for 30 days is passed, we would have an opportunity to reach out to the NPC and talk to them.
Speaker 4: That would be great. But if it came back sooner, Mr. Councilmember, would you be comfortable if everybody responded more quickly or even later that we wait until that comes back?
Speaker 0: Yes. The reason I pull the item and ask for a continuance was just to make sure just to make sure it better safe than sorry.
Speaker 3: Absolutely.
Speaker 0: And you know, there's been an allegation and only an allegation that's been looked into.
Speaker 7: And so it sounds like Mr.. Mr. Parkin wants the consultation with the LPC is kind of complete. You'll bring that back to the council in some form.
Speaker 3: We will certainly do so. Okay, great.
Speaker 7: I see no other council comments. Any public comment on the item?
Speaker 5: Laurie Smith, third district. I guess I'm just curious why the city managers did not. It doesn't sound like the staff report had any other places that they looked at to be leasing from. So that is a curious, curious thing. Also, I met with the city attorney Mays when I did my. A administrative review of the last airport director for 4 hours in a facility that housed airport staff. So I'm just curious why that would not be something else they'd look into. This lease would be for upwards of $800,000. And the conflict of interest is not just about the vice chair of the airport commission and the city. It is also that he's part as a board member on a lobbying group with JetBlue. He's also filed an annual report in which he has worked with the commission to recommend the FISA facility to you, and that has been filed on your website. So since we had a JetBlue issue on tonight's agenda, as well as his lease for $800,000 over five years, it seems very, very interesting. A conundrum. So this would just be something else that, you know, the California Fair Political Practices Commission, as well as the L.A. County DA's Office of Public Integrity will be alerted to. I'm happy that you are postponing it. I wanted to make you aware that the L.A. County D.A. does not talk about current investigations until the investigation is through. So I would really like to have the this motion held over until we until possibly the city attorney or we could check with the L.A. County D.A., Alan Johnson, to be sure that there is no investigation going on. It apparently it is a confidential thing. I understand that once they've been alerted to something, that they're not allowed to talk about it until it's done. So that would be something that I would recommend that they hold off until they are absolutely clear that the L.A. County D.A.. Public Integrity Division looks into this. So I appreciate you allowing me to speak about this. And I. I hope that you continue to use good judgment. Thank you.
Speaker 7: See no other public comment on the item? There's a motion and a second. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Motion carries. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary for a Sublease to Lease No. 9351 between Million Air North, Inc., a California corporation, and the City of Long Beach for office space at 4401 Donald Douglas Drive, to house the Engineering, Accounting and Security Divisions of the Airport Department; and
Increase appropriations in the Airport Fund (EF 320) in the Airport Department (AP) by $303,036. (District 5) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12062016_16-1090 | Speaker 3: Great. We're going to take item eight with the rest of the items as they come up. We're going to go ahead and begin some of the items that are here. So let's go and begin by taking item 31.
Speaker 4: Report from Long Beach Airport. Recommendation to authorize the city manager to execute an agreement with transportation network companies to provide transportation services under a nine month pilot program at the Long Beach Airport and authorize the imposition of a $3 pickup and $3 drop off fee citywide.
Speaker 3: Councilman Mango.
Speaker 1: Yes, I'd like to slightly modify the motion submitted by the city. I'd like to direct the city manager to meet and take input from our stakeholders, including ground transportation providers at the Long Beach Airport, and solicit input from members of the public as well, so that we can develop a TNC rideshare program for Long Beach Airport and return to the progress report within 90 days and prepare for implementation program in 2017.
Speaker 3: There is a motion and a second by Councilman Price on Price.
Speaker 2: I would just like to request that when we're considering this item for the for the networks that we're considering that we include See Jane Go, which is a new, new transportation network with female drivers designed for female rider. So if we could include them in the mix in terms of who to consider, I'd appreciate that.
Speaker 3: You and see no other public thing, no other council comment. We're going to get any public comment. Okay. Senior public comment members, please go ahead and cast your votes. So for those that don't know what TNC is, it's basically a technical term for rideshare. It's a.
Speaker 4: Membership runoff.
Speaker 3: With the councils voting on is beginning a process to allow the lifts and and the Ubers and the and the C Jane goes allowed at the airport so that that's what taxis are. Okay. Motion carries. Moving on to the next one that we pulled out, which was I'm sorry I skipped the hearing. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary for an agreement with Transportation Network Companies registered with the California Public Utilities Commission to provide transportation services under a nine-month pilot program at the Long Beach Airport, and authorize the imposition of a $3.00 pick-up and $3.00 drop-off fee. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12062016_16-1059 | Speaker 3: With the councils voting on is beginning a process to allow the lifts and and the Ubers and the and the C Jane goes allowed at the airport so that that's what taxis are. Okay. Motion carries. Moving on to the next one that we pulled out, which was I'm sorry I skipped the hearing. I think so. Let me do hearing number one.
Speaker 4: Hearing one report from Development Services recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record. Conclude the public hearing. Declare ordinance amending the use district map by amending portions of part six from CNR to R2 one for the property to 61st place, read for the first time and laid over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for final reading approval. Local Coastal Development Permit 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 and adopt a negative declaration. N.D. Dash zero three Dash 16 District three.
Speaker 3: Stafford Port Yes.
Speaker 5: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council. The staff report be given by Linda Tatum, our planning bureau manager.
Speaker 2: Good evening, Mayor, and members of the council. This is an application by a property owner for a rezoning from the current seat in our community or neighborhood.
Speaker 4: Commercial residential.
Speaker 2: Designation to rezone to the AR two I.
Speaker 1: Which is the.
Speaker 2: Two family intensive.
Speaker 1: Residential zoning district. The purpose of this request is to construct a new single family dwelling on this property, and the property is located.
Speaker 2: At on.
Speaker 1: 61st place.
Speaker 2: The reason for the request for the rezoning is that the are two eyes zone that's.
Speaker 4: Being requested allows a height of up to three stories.
Speaker 2: And the current seat in our the neighborhood. Commercial zoning allows only a two story development. So I'd like to show you a quick slide to give you a little bit of context. This is the peninsula. And just to give you a context, there is this what we call the dog bone there. That's his own seat in our neighborhood on commercial and residential. And the subject site is located here on the.
Speaker 10: Very westerly edge.
Speaker 2: Of that sea in our zone.
Speaker 1: The this strip of.
Speaker 2: Sea and our zoning on the peninsula dates back to approximately the fifties. And the intent, when it was originally designated for CNR from the previous R two zoning, was to allow or to accommodate some very low density commercial within that that community. However, the market never did turn over that those residential properties to commercial. So to date the the entirety of this area is still predominantly developed, predominantly as residential. Of those 49.
Speaker 4: Addresses within that.
Speaker 2: Property, only only and 37 buildings in this strip, only.
Speaker 4: Three are actually developed as commercial.
Speaker 1: The rest of it is.
Speaker 2: Is.
Speaker 1: Residential.
Speaker 4: So therefore.
Speaker 2: Let me just give you another context. This is. You can see the.
Speaker 4: The location here where the error.
Speaker 2: Was showing this.
Speaker 1: Is the location of the the proposed property.
Speaker 2: That's the subject of the rezoning. And just another slide with a sketch of the proposed home there interspersed. You can see the context of the property. It's a proposed three storey dwelling unit.
Speaker 0: Whoops. The three storey dwelling unit.
Speaker 2: And it fits within the current context of the existing development within the CNR zone.
Speaker 1: Just to talk real briefly about the general plan for this area. The the general plan designates this area as.
Speaker 2: Eluded number two, which allows mixed style homes. And the C an R zoning currently.
Speaker 1: In place does not.
Speaker 2: Conform to this designation.
Speaker 1: However, the R2 I.
Speaker 2: That they're requesting is consistent with this general plan designation and changing the zoning as requested to the R one or the R2 ISO will bring this property into conformance with the general plan. So staff, when this.
Speaker 4: Request came through, staff.
Speaker 2: Did an analysis of.
Speaker 1: The property and the request.
Speaker 4: And.
Speaker 1: Essentially given the location of this property adjacent to.
Speaker 2: The the rest of the C, the existing two is owned throughout the rest of the peninsula on the edge. We felt that this is not considered support zoning. So the request.
Speaker 1: Is certainly appropriate. The zoning also would afford the applicant who.
Speaker 2: Happens to be the property owner for this property.
Speaker 4: It affords that property owner the same.
Speaker 2: Development rights.
Speaker 1: To do.
Speaker 4: A three storey project as is enjoyed by.
Speaker 1: The majority.
Speaker 2: Of property owners currently on the.
Speaker 1: Peninsula. It's also important to note that the scope and scale of the.
Speaker 2: Development that's being.
Speaker 4: Proposed is is.
Speaker 2: Entirely consistent and compatible with the general development pattern within that area. And the zone change will not create any.
Speaker 4: Unanticipated impacts to this site or into the surrounding property.
Speaker 2: The zone change will.
Speaker 1: Also meet all of the requirements of the city's on the existing certified.
Speaker 4: Local coastal program and approval.
Speaker 1: Of the local coastal.
Speaker 2: Development permit is an appropriate action.
Speaker 1: For this.
Speaker 2: The City Council to take. According to secure I a an environmental.
Speaker 1: And.
Speaker 2: Environmental analysis was done and a negative declaration was prepared to the project for the project. And we found no significant impacts to the environment and no impacts that are needed to mitigate this project in order. So the project does comply with the California Environmental Quality Act.
Speaker 4: We did receive.
Speaker 2: One letter and one phone call in opposition to the.
Speaker 4: Project.
Speaker 2: However, all of the communication that was received for this project is included in the council packet.
Speaker 1: We also received a letter of.
Speaker 2: Support from the property owner immediately north of.
Speaker 1: The project site in support of the project.
Speaker 2: In conclusion, based on the staff analysis that was done for this project and the finding that there are no.
Speaker 1: Significant impacts, it's compliant with sequel.
Speaker 2: Also based upon the feedback.
Speaker 1: Staff is recommending that the City Council affirm the recommendation that was made by the Planning Commission when they heard this item.
Speaker 2: And that the City Council.
Speaker 1: Adopt the negative declaration for.
Speaker 4: This project.
Speaker 1: Approve the zone.
Speaker 2: Change from CNR to R2.
Speaker 1: I also approved the local coastal development permit as well as adopt a resolution submitting.
Speaker 4: A local coastal.
Speaker 2: Program amendment to the California Coastal Commission. That concludes the staff's presentation. I'm available along with Scott Kinsey, the project planner, and we can answer any questions the Council may have.
Speaker 4: Regarding this request.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Is there any public comment on this item? Seeing none. Members, please, please cast your vote count.
Speaker 2: I just want to speak to the item.
Speaker 8: Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't. Forgive me.
Speaker 2: For it. I want to thank Staff Scott and Linda for your great work, your thorough presentation on this topic. I think that the analysis is is very comprehensive in regards to the local area. And your your presentation did a good job in educating my colleagues and myself as well regarding the proposed development and how it fits within the current existing development in the area, as well as the general plan objectives that we have shared with the Peninsula community. I really do think it's an it's an issue of fairness. This proposed project really falls very clearly into the current housing scheme, development scheme in the area, and I urge my colleagues to approve staff's recommendation as to this item. Thank you.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Councilwoman Mongo.
Speaker 1: I think that everyone did an excellent job and I will be supporting this item.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Councilmember Arango.
Speaker 6: Thank you. QUESTION The height of the of the property is 35 feet. Is that it?
Speaker 3: The excuse me, the maximum height under our tri zoning is 32 feet, with a additional maximum of 35 to the ridge, only to the ridge of a slope, but everything else 32 feet.
Speaker 6: And the buildings that are adjacent to it, how tall? How high are they?
Speaker 3: We have a number of three and four story buildings in the immediate vicinity.
Speaker 6: Okay. Just ask it. I know it's going to be coming through the Coastal Commission, so it's going to be an issue of the height requirement. And hopefully from what I can tell, it's compatible with the rest of the territory, with the rest of the buildings around that area. So I'll be supporting this. Thank you.
Speaker 8: Thank you. And seeing no public comment, members, please cast your vote. You know me? Yes. | 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; and
Adopt Negative Declaration ND-03-16. (District 3) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12062016_16-1071 | Speaker 8: Thank you so much. So that concludes public comment. So we're still a little out of order. So we're going to we're going to take item 21. Madam Clerk, please queue up item number 21, please. And I'll make the motion on this item.
Speaker 4: Report from Economic and property development. Recommendation to improve the Uptown Property and Business Improvement District Annual Report and assessment for the period of January 1st, 2017 through December 31st, 2017. An authorized payment of $54,500 in see property assessments from the General Fund and $3,700 in city property assessments from the successor agency fund districts eight and nine.
Speaker 8: Thanks. Please have a staff report, please.
Speaker 5: Jim Fisk.
Speaker 6: Honorable Vice Mayor and City Council Members. This item is the annual approval.
Speaker 7: Of the Uptown Property and Business Improvement District.
Speaker 6: And report and ongoing assessment. The recommended action on this item continues the assessment for another year. There are no proposed changes to the basis of the assessment, nor any significant changes with the proposed activities or programs. Therefore, staff requests that City Council received the supporting documentation of record and approve the recommendation to continue the levy of the assessment and authorize the.
Speaker 7: City manager to extend the agreement for one additional year. And that concludes my report.
Speaker 8: Thank you. And what I'll do right now is we have a presentation from the Uptown Business District Manager, a brief presentation. So I want to just introduce Tasha Hunter.
Speaker 1: Great. Thank you. Good evening, Vice Mayor. Council members and city staff. Okay. Let's see if I can work this. Okay. This is our annual report. And this is our Uptown Business Improvement District right there in North Long Beach from Atlantic and Artesia, as far south as Atlantic and Market. And we go east on Artesia to Orange Street. So we encompass Council District, a portion and Council District eight and in council a larger portion in Council District nine. So here is our annual report. I'm very excited to say that so many wonderful things are happening in Uptown. We are having monthly security meetings where we bring together public safety stakeholders, private security teams of businesses and properties, as well as our own private security team. CSI, the Long Beach Police Department and Long Beach Police Department for Jordan High School, or I should say officer at Jordan High School and other businesses with security. And we take the recommendations of the businesses and the property owners, and one of them is increase security patrols. So that's one of the things that we've done. We've increased our bike patrol as well as added a mobile patrol during weekend hours. And our businesses and our property owners and our community, business community are engaged, bringing all of these security stakeholders, safety stakeholders together as key. Another thing we'd like to talk about is that our our police department is giving literature and information to our business owners about how to remain safe. We have also increased our cleanliness. When I came on board some months ago, we were utilizing the services of one porter to clean the entire business improvement district. We've since contracted with the Conservation Corps, and the Conservation Corps is doing a phenomenal job. It's been awesome having them there. So we're averaging about 5 to 10 young people. They are young adults in a program which is environmental preparedness, and they're helping us clean the area. And we're averaging about £3,000 of trash and debris monthly. So that's over a ton. That's incredible. We have increased our pressure washing instead of twice a year. We're pressure washing weekly so that the visibility and the and it's noticeable that it's being cleaned throughout the bill. The bid's, the business improvement district, we're reporting graffiti. We had about 128 reports of graffiti over the course of six months, averaging about 18 a month. And working with the city to get that cleaned is, is is very important also working with the businesses and the property owners to let them know that there are some where they can remove that themselves. And we're working on Fridays with the city prosecutor's office to have community service workers come and help us clean the bit. So we're really excited about the work that we're doing as far as the the security, the safety and the maintenance in Uptown, £3,000 of trash is is is a big number and we're excited. The Uptown Renaissance, we've heard these words and it's all happening. We are we have some great developments that are coming. We do have some that are here, I should say the Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library. We partnered with Council District nine and Long Beach First and our Foods, the Business Improvement District. We were able to create our learning garden at the Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library, and it is for the community to come and take some of the fruit and vegetables that are there. It's a nice garden. We have tomatoes and strawberries grown right now. We'll into strawberries. And the Conservation Corps has been trained on how to maintain this beautiful garden. Also, it's available to for classes. I'm moving along community. We have amazing developments that are happening throughout the business Uptown Business Improvement District. We have coffee shops coming. We have a financial institution coming, a neighborhood brewery, sit down, restaurants and much more. And we're going to be seeing a lot more of these grand openings happening. We have businesses that are coming to North Long Beach in the Uptown Business Improvement District. And when businesses come, we have an increase in jobs and that's always wonderful. At this time, I'd like to say thank you to Vice Mayor Rex Richardson and the city staff for the facade improvement funds which have been given. One of the developments that we've done is El Pollo Imperial, which is there. That's what it looked like before. And this is what it looks like now. Nice renovation to that that business improvement district. It's a major it gets a lot of traffic there. So this is one of the many improvements. We also have Robert Earl's Barbecue, which is our first sidewalk extension and patio dining in the Business Improvement District. So it's a little look of what it looked like before. That's the sidewalk extension. And this right here is the outside dining patio, which is right there is absolutely gorgeous. And we're about to enter our third phase where we're going to do a complete facade improvement for the majority of the block. So these are some of the things that we've been doing with the funds. There's a lot and there's Robert Earl right there, a lot of improvements throughout the Business Improvement District. With one time funds, we were able to bring on a creative consultant, Ryan Smoller, who helped secure a grant. He's been helping with programing and media exposure, social media exposure and developing ideas for the bid. One of the some of the funds also went towards our new office space. We had to move because our building that we're in, city property is in the process of being sold. So we were able to move and we had a nice event up there in the business district and we created the first co-working space in North Long Beach, which is it houses the bid and this is what it can look like, a shared office space for those individuals that may want to save some money and just have a space. Co-working space is the way to go. Very inexpensive. This is our grand opening. We had a lot of community members that came up to support us and take a peek. We have a couple of renters and we have more space available. Got some awards for that. That's the team. And once again, we're excited about what's happening in Uptown and excited about what's to come. If you're ever in North, the Long Beach, Uptown Long Beach, come and take a peek. Give us a call. Visit us at uptown Long Beach dot com and thank you all. And we're available for any questions.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Tasha. And so I'll be the first to say it's the Uptown Business District. Is has come a long way. I remember was just a twinkle in the eye of a few people. And and now it's it's clear that we can put our faith in you when we give you and partner with you and give the best business district support. You can turn that and transform that into real results. And so I want to just say thank you for coming back to the council and saying thank you and acknowledging that support the council has given you. So we're going to go ahead and have comments from the councils. We have Councilmember Turanga.
Speaker 6: Thank you very much, Mary. Wonderful job. This is a great presentation. Keep it up. It's looking wonderful up there.
Speaker 1: Thank you.
Speaker 8: Next. Councilwoman Mongo.
Speaker 1: I want you to know how much your success means to other business groups since your original inception. Another group in the city decided that they would come together and work on a business association. And we have two more coming as well. So I appreciate you making this presentation from the materials like this really help when we go out and meet with other businesses that are in a geographic area together, they're not necessarily a bid. They do theirs more as a5013. But the work that you're doing is really what's important. So thank you for that.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 2: Thank you. I want to echo the sentiments and just you have a certain energy that you bring to the work that you're doing there that is really infectious. In fact, hearing you do the presentation made me think how valuable it would be for us if we had a presentation like that from all of our business districts or business collaborations in the city, because we we don't get to see the work that is happening in the individual districts unless we have a presentation like this, even if we go to the district. I know I've had the opportunity to meet Vice Mayor Richardson in his district, and he has driven me around in the past. But just hearing you kind of summarize everything you're doing is really valuable for me, at least as a council member. So I appreciate you doing that. I love that you're using the Conservation Corps and that you're getting such great, you're getting such a great service that you're able to talk about. I share an office with them in East Long Beach, and I'm always trying to promote us, hiring them whenever we can, because they do excellent work and do it with a very great purpose and intent. So I'm glad to hear that feedback. The Learning Garden at the library. First of all, though, you know, a lot of times we talk about big projects in the city and sometimes the discussion gets to like, this is only for this district or that district, or just because we don't visit something daily doesn't mean it's not a city asset. The Michelle Obama Library is such a sense of pride and joy for all of us in the city, regardless of what district we live in. I mean, it's just phenomenal. Yes. Let's give it a round of applause. And they're open on Sundays, which I love. Yes. But I love that you incorporated a learning garden out there because we are trying to incorporate that more into the Long Beach Unified School District Education. And I think we just recently had a chance to go and see it. And I'm just so incredibly proud of the work that you guys have done. It's a tremendous source of pride for the city. I'm excited for all the changes that are coming. I want to thank my colleagues who represent North Long Beach for the excellent work that they've done individually and together to make it such a great source of pride for the city. And I look forward to you helping them get to that vision in the years to come. So thank you.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 7: Thank you and thank you, Tasha, for the excellent presentation. Thank you for sharing it with the city. I've actually lived and breathed this and been a witness to the great work that the bid has done, as well as being an original author with the Cubs and starting the the bid. I'm really happy to see where it is today. In in your board, the development of your board. It's a very, very important that that chemistry stay engaged and strong today are our corridor along Atlantic and north. Part of our city is much more cleaner it's safer in the community is is far more engaged than it was just a few years ago and in the presence of a business improvement district has certainly paid dividends thus far. I want to just say that I have in the bid has my full confidence and you know, you always have had my full confidence as the manager there and will continue to enjoy that and look forward to working with you on projects even outside of the bid. And to Suzy's point, I really appreciate your energy, your commitment and professionalism. You've taken the bid to another level or just in the short time that you have been the manager. And it's important to note for the city and city council that the city, because of the former redevelopment agency, the successor agency Properties, is really a major stakeholder in that bid. And, you know, hopefully you in a very short period of time in the very near future, that won't be the case because the properties will be sold off and we'll have new stakeholders. But right now I think we are almost a third of the bid. And that's a that's a that's an important point to bring home. So keep up the great work and I look forward to working with you in the future.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 8: Councilwoman Pearce.
Speaker 2: Well, everybody.
Speaker 9: Already said everything, so I have to have a faster finger, but just congratulations, everybody that's doing work in Uptown. It's great to be in downtown and know that we've got great work up there and everything about connecting us in between is really important. And just I know, Jim, you nerd out on these things. So also congrats to you. And I'll say lastly again, I mean, I thank you for coming in presenting. I think that I remember when they were looking to hire in your position and I just feel it fills the energy up and it's really exciting to be a part of that. And we have a lot of things to learn from what you guys are doing. So thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 2: Tasha, congratulations. You do great work in uptown. I know we've talked about some policy items that have been very important for small businesses. And I think, you know, in downtown, I think you all have created such an amazing, unique place for uptown. And now we're kind of modeling what you're doing in downtown in some ways because we were like, okay, how do we get more creative? So I think you're doing a fantastic job. And someone who has been raised in North Long Beach when I was younger, I am so proud of all the work and all of the residents I know and Vice Mayor Richardson and Councilmember Awesome have a lot to be proud of too. So congratulations. Great job, Jim. Always.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Councilman Andrew.
Speaker 5: Yes. And Tasha, I don't think you need any more. Congratulations. What you really need is a consultant's job to come to all the districts and show us how this is done. Congratulations. And you're doing a great job. Keep up the good work. Fantastic. You know, you need to start getting paid.
Speaker 0: And that's a thank you.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Councilmember. Super now.
Speaker 5: Okay. From the slowest finger on the dais. Thank you from all of us. And we have two bids and a business association in my district. So I'd like to echo what my colleagues said. We'd love to have you out to demonstrate what you're doing. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 8: Thank you. So I'll just what we have public I'll say thank you again for coming down that presentation. I do want to acknowledge also, you know, Councilmember Gavlak has been a part of this as well. When she was when she was here, it started as a twinkle in the eye of Steve Neal and Ray goblets and happy to continue to support this moving forward. We haven't had anything like this in District nine and to see how far has come has been fantastic. So at this point, I just ask for any any public comment. Seeing nonmembers, please cast your vote.
Speaker 0: Oh, there was a comment.
Speaker 8: Okay. Come on for sir. Thank you, Tasha.
Speaker 3: Hello, Vice Mayor and council members.
Speaker 5: Hi. My name is Enjoyment of. I am a legislative intern for Lena Gonzalez.
Speaker 3: My question is actually directed to you, uh, Councilmember de Andrews.
Speaker 5: I do not live in Long Beach. I do live in Signal Hill, but I do frequent.
Speaker 3: The sixth District a lot.
Speaker 8: So is this related to the Uptown Business District presentation? Yes. Okay.
Speaker 3: I was just wondering, is there any type of development just like that happening in the sixth District, specifically on PCH?
Speaker 5: Not on PCH, but on Anaheim? Okay. We're working on as you as we speak. Okay. Thank you so much, PCH. I don't think so. Yeah. In our business. Well, okay. We'll talk about that and some of that.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you. Members, please cast your vote.
Speaker 5: Toshi, we need to get with him. He wants to know some.
Speaker 8: Go ahead. You got it. And I mean yes obviously.
Speaker 4: On some an Andrews Councilman Andrews okay but here's.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Motion. Okay. Motion. Pass around. Good. Thank you. A little slow. Let's go ahead and have our number 15 clerk please read. | Contract | Recommendation to approve the Uptown Property and Business Improvement District Annual Report and Assessment for the period of January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2017, automatically extending the current agreement with the Uptown Property and Community Association for a one-year period; and, authorize payment of $54,561 in City property assessments from the General Fund (GF) and $3,668 in City property assessments from the Successor Agency Fund (SA). (Districts 8,9) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12062016_16-1069 | Speaker 3: Great names. Congratulations. We're going to have just had a request to quickly hear item 19 and then we're going to go to 14.
Speaker 4: A report from Economic and Property Development Recommendation to declare the city owned property located at 60136141 Atlantic Avenue as surplus and authorize the city manager to execute all documents necessary with amusement industry for the sale of the subject property in the amount of $655,000. District nine.
Speaker 3: Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 8: Proud to support this. Encourage my colleague support. This is the first development project to move forward in District nine North Long Beach. Thanks.
Speaker 3: Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 1: I think this is a great idea.
Speaker 3: Thanks for any public comment on this item. Please come forward.
Speaker 5: Mayor Garcia. City Council Members Jim McCabe. Many redevelopment properties have been sold in the city of Long Beach for less than the highest bidder, and I think that's sometimes justified. However, when that's done, I've looked at quite a number of them on the agendas. The City Council is never told what the highest bidder is in this. This case really has the potential, and I'm not saying it exists, but potential for a kind of corruption that the citizens should not tolerate. The property was appraised for a value of $1.2 million. The management proposes to sell for about half of that to the developer that has left the property next to it. Go derelict. How can the best use and the best sale of this property be to a property owner who has let this happen to his property? And when we're getting less than half the appraised value. I challenge any council member here. To ask, and almost certainly this won't happen. But I challenge them anyway. I challenge someone to ask what the highest bidder, what the highest bid rather was, how much was bid for this property? The City Council is in no position to make an informed decision on any of these sales. If it doesn't know what the highest bidder was, no well-run organization would operate that way. I. Earnestly ask you to consider this advice. As I've always said, my view of a council member is job is to ask questions. This is not a council, I think, renowned for that, but it does happen. Someone ask how much the high bid was. Thank you very much.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Any other public comment? Seeing no other public comment. Go back to the council. Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 8: Sure. I just want staff to just walk us through a little bit of this project as brief as you can.
Speaker 3: Sure. I'll turn it over to Catherine.
Speaker 5: McDermott, who is our interim director of economic development and Property Services.
Speaker 2: Thank you, mayor and council members. I'll just go through this really quickly. This is just a.
Speaker 1: Map of the.
Speaker 2: Property, both the city owned property, which is vacant and the privately owned property. The property to be sold was categorized as future development in the long range property management plan, included in the guiding principles of that plan or disposition strategies, which include providing priority opportunities for acquisition and development to adjoining landowners, tenants and other businesses and business owners within the Redevelopment Project area. Accordingly, we solicited an offer from the adjoining owner Amusement Industry Inc, more commonly known as Westland Development, which would include development of the city's property as well as redevelopment of his owned property. The purchase price is $655,578. It is less than the fair market value of the property. However, as contemplated by the long range property management plan, it's an opportunity for us to take an under-performing retail center owned by an adjacent property owner and make it more compelling. The development plan includes 10,610 square feet of new office space, retail and restaurant space, as well as new community open space. So we are asking the council's approval of this purchase and sale.
Speaker 8: Thank you. So I'll just say what? What's probably most special about this project is that the city only owns one half of the block and the adjoining property owner has come forth and is willing to make deep, dramatic improvements, creating a full city block of development. No, no other project do we have that type of leveraging in our redevelopment properties to to now we will have a full city block of development, signalized intersections, amenities that we simply do not have in North Long Beach. And I'm really excited about this project end to end. And what I would say is I don't there was us, you know, there was community engagement and community meeting here where the residents came to the table, talked about their highest and best use and needs for this project. And I am I am just, you know, having, you know, been a part of the city family for almost seven years. I've never seen anyone take this type of development approach in North Lobby. So I stand behind this wholeheartedly and I encourage you to ask some better questions. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Okay. Thank you. There's a motion and a second. Please cast your votes. | Contract | Recommendation to declare the City-owned property located at 6101-6141 Atlantic Avenue, Assessor Parcel Number 7125-036-900 (Subject Property) as surplus, authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute any and all documents necessary, including a Purchase and Sale Agreement, with Amusement Industry, Inc. (Buyer) for the sale of the Subject Property in the amount of $655,578, and accept Categorical Exemption CE 16-273. (District 9) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12062016_16-1070 | Speaker 3: 20 I think we thought we had done. Yeah we did. 20.
Speaker 4: Oh, excuse me.
Speaker 3: Not 20. Okay. 20.
Speaker 4: Number 20 Report from Economic and Property Development Recommendation to approve the Midtown Business Improvement District Annual Report and Assessment for the period of January 1st, 2017 through December 31st, 2017, and authorized payment of $25,200 in city property assessments from the general fund districts four and six.
Speaker 3: Okay, there's emotionally the second. Any public comment? Please cast your votes.
Speaker 5: Oh, excuse me. Excuse me. Excuse me, please, ma'am. I have a young man. I like. What? See here.
Speaker 3: Mr. Moran. Net. Is he here?
Speaker 5: Oh, please. I like when.
Speaker 3: Councilman Austin wants to. Yes, absolutely. Fine.
Speaker 5: Thank you.
Speaker 3: I'll meet you at Andrews. What did I say? No. Yes.
Speaker 7: Sir. Good evening, Mayor. Councilmember. My name is not on that. I'm the new executive director of the Metropolis Improvement District. And first of all, I want to thank City Line, which for having the. The Beach walk, big street. Last man in Midtown. And I think so. Uh, compliments of another councilman. The D.A. would agree it was probably the best beach street ever in Long Beach. Right?
Speaker 5: Yes, you're right. You're right. Yes.
Speaker 7: Thank you. So I'm here to.
Speaker 3: Say thanks for all your support.
Speaker 7: And I cannot wait for next year to give you a PowerPoint presentation of our success.
Speaker 5: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. | Contract | Recommendation to approve the Midtown Business Improvement District Annual Report and Assessment for the period of January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2017, automatically extending the current agreement with the Midtown Property and Business Owners Association for a one-year period; and, authorize payment of $25,255 in City property assessments from the General Fund (GF). (Districts 4,6) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12062016_16-1076 | Speaker 3: As you mentioned a second, any public comment scene and please cast your votes. Motion carries 26.
Speaker 4: Report from Long Beach Airport. Recommendation to submit an application for the Airport Improvement Program Grant for fiscal year 2017 to the FAA for funding for capital improvements to runway seven R 25 L District five.
Speaker 3: Can I get a motion in a second? Any public comment? Please cast your votes. Oh. Councilman Austin had a question, please.
Speaker 7: So I'm noting a $12 million improvement to runway two five. L just wanted to get a staff report from the airport director to find out exactly how the that airport runway will be utilized.
Speaker 3: Jess Romo. Good evening, honorable mayor. Honorable Council members just remove from Long Beach Airport. This runway, which is actually our shortest on the field, supports a good number of our general aviation operations. So it is still actively used but used really to support the smaller aircraft of your airport.
Speaker 7: So during the construction, well, with the general aviation aircraft, you what air, what runway and how will they be able to come to and from Long Beach Airport?
Speaker 3: Well, as they're accommodated now, all the aircraft, including general general aviation, can use any of the three. So while this runway is being reconstructed, they will either move to either runway one, two, three, zero or on to seven left to five right.
Speaker 7: And what are those general aviation aircraft subject to noise ordinance?
Speaker 3: They are subject to the noise ordinance. Keep in mind that relative to the noise budgets, only runway 1230 is the runway which actually measures and captures the noise for purposes of accumulating the noise limits. The other runways, the two five runways are used for a single event for violations.
Speaker 7: Okay. So if we are running regular aircraft on two, five and two five. Right, and we're only using one way dirty to measure noise for purposes of our noise ordinance. Is that does that. That doesn't add up. It means that there's noise that we're not capturing. Is that correct?
Speaker 3: For purposes of the noise budget? That is correct. That is the way that the noise ordinances has been has always been crafted as far as as far as I know.
Speaker 7: Okay. Look forward to talking more about that later.
Speaker 3: Great. Next item.
Speaker 4: We need to finish the vote.
Speaker 3: Okay. Please cast your votes if you have not logged in.
Speaker 4: Councilwoman Price. Councilwoman Mongo. Emotion carries. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager to submit an application for the Airport Improvement Program Grant for Fiscal Year 2017 to the Federal Aviation Administration for funding for capital improvements to Runway 7R-25L and to accept such grant, execute grant documents and amend grant documents and grant amounts with the Federal Aviation Administration for entitlement and discretionary funds in the amount of $12,881,879. (District 5) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12062016_16-1089 | Speaker 4: Motion carries.
Speaker 3: Him.
Speaker 4: Item 30 Report from Health and Human Services and Economic and Property Development. Recommendation to adopt resolution declaring a shelter crisis for the operation of a winter shelter between the dates of December 7th, 2016 and March six, 2017. Inclusive and authorize the city manager to execute a lease and sublease for 12,000 rentable square feet of industrial space at 6845 Atlantic Avenue District nine.
Speaker 3: Okay, there's a motion and a second and if any public comment. Saying that public comment staff are you putting out staff? Okay. Okay. Kelly Colby.
Speaker 0: So that the person that we are, the organization will be running the winter shelter this year.
Speaker 3: Is called.
Speaker 0: First to Serve.
Speaker 10: In the past, we've had a Long Beach rescue mission.
Speaker 0: We'll be opening the shelter in the next couple of weeks. We're working with the provider to make sure that it.
Speaker 10: Is safe and ready and then it will end on March.
Speaker 0: 1st. And that's my staff report. I know, for questions.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We're good.
Speaker 3: Now, you know. Thank you. It's a long night. I'm gonna start singing in a minute. Next item.
Speaker 4: Need a vote on item three, please.
Speaker 3: Let's take a vote. Any public comment first? Nope. | 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 between the dates of December 7,2016 and March 6, 2017, inclusive;
Authorize City Manager to execute any and all documents necessary for a Lease between Eddie N. John #1, a limited liability company, and the City, and a Sublease between the City and First to Serve, Inc., a California nonprofit organization, and any necessary amendments, at the discretion of the City Manager, for approximately 12,000 rentable square feet of industrial space at 6845 Atlantic Avenue, at the monthly base rent of $6,750 plus utilities and incidental costs for use as a winter shelter; and
Increase appropriations in the General Fund (GF) in the Health and Human Services Department (HE) by $20,250. (District 9) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11222016_16-0940 | Speaker 0: We're going to move that item up. And we're also item 14 has also been withdrawn. And there are also no presentations tonight. And so with that, we're going to go ahead and get right into the hearings. And Madam Clerk, if we can begin with hearing item number one.
Speaker 1: Report from financial management recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the hearing and approve the hearing officer's recommendation to deny the business license application submitted by all seats. Lorraine Fine Pastries located at 40 334 Atlantic Avenue. An oath is required.
Speaker 0: If we can do. The oath.
Speaker 1: Okay. Everyone is going to be speaking on this. Please raise your right hand. You and each of you do solemnly state that the testimony you may give in the cause now in pending before this body shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So help you God.
Speaker 0: Thank you. With that, we're going to go ahead and turn this over to city staff for the report.
Speaker 2: Mayor. City Council members giving the presentation today will be Bret Jacobs from the Finance Management. Good evening, our mayor and members of the city council. Tonight you have before you a recommendation to uphold the hearing officer's decision to deny the business license application for Alsace-Lorraine Fine Pastries Inc doing business as RC salary and find pastries located at 4334 Atlantic Avenue in Council District eight. The hearing was continued at the October 18th, 2016, council meeting. The direction provided at that time was for the city to conduct outreach to the attorney representing the property owner, Mr. No. As a last good faith effort to see if a reasonable settlement offer would be forthcoming prior to tonight's hearing. Outreach was conducted by the City Attorney's Office, and it is my understanding that there have been no reasonable settlement offers submitted to the city. They will conclude my staff report and I stand ready to answer any questions council may have. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. With that, let me go ahead and turn this over. Is there any public comment on the hearing before we get into council comments? Please come forward.
Speaker 3: Good evening. My name is Ten West and I'm actually the attorney from the bar, the law firm for also sorry fine pastries. I'm to update the city council on this issue. There actually has been a settlement offer communicated to the city attorney, Mr. Zinger, dated November 17th.
Speaker 0: And just so you know, if we can just stop the clock because it's a hearing, you're going to have a reasonable amount of time. So 10 minutes under 10 minutes, if you can give you.
Speaker 3: Share, it will be less than five, hopefully. Okay. But just show up to the city council. A sort of make communication has been has been delivered to the city attorney's office. I don't know if the council has received that information. Hopefully, the city council can take that into consideration. But mainly I just wanted to discuss. This matter only in the sense that the denial of the business license to assist Lorraine was was due purely to the failure, I'm quoting. Failure of the property owner to comply with the global laws and regulations. It wasn't anything that the bakery did. It was what the landlord did. And such a license was denied to the bakery. I also want to point out that there was an article recently in the press telegram that stated that. The city expected the issue to issue a final denial and that the decision cannot be appealed again. The statement is actually not true. The appeal will take its course in the Superior Court, where it is now pending and thereafter. The bakery is ready and willing to take the matter to the Second District Court of Appeal if necessary. So. So. The City is aware and the City Council is aware. The matter does not end tonight. If needed, we can take the matter to court. And with that, I just wanted to update the city council on that information.
Speaker 0: Great. Thank you. Any other public speakers on the hearing? Seeing none. I'm going to go ahead and close the public comment for the hearing and go back to the council. So, Councilmember Austin.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And and I want to thank the council and the rest of city staff for indulging us over the last several weeks. We did continue this matter in an effort to get a reasonable settlement agreement, as I understand it, and I've read some some news reports, press reports about this particular matter that I think we need to really work to to clarify this matter in terms of what's really at stake and what we're really dealing with here. And as I understand it, this case really boils down to the property owner does not have a business license to lease a commercial property because it was revoked doing due to his leasing space to an illegal marijuana dispensary. Because the property owner does not have a business license, the city cannot issue a business license for a business to operate at that location. Is that correct, Mr. City Attorney. That is correct. So I'd like to go over a few questions over the regarding the timeframe. And as I recall, the City Council enacted a ban on medical marijuana dispensaries in February 2012 after a court ruling. And before that time when the city was allowing a limited number of permitted dispensaries to operate. Was the medical marijuana dispensary operating at this location prior to the ban going into effect affected the city? Was it was it operating prior to the ban going into effect? Does anybody have knowledge of that? Councilmember Austin Yes, it was operating. However, it was not one of the lottery winners or one of the approved applicants under 5.7. So it was operating illegally. So it was an illegal operation, correct. Okay. And it was not one of the lottery winners permitted to operate under our order? That's correct. So even when the city had an ordinance in place allowing certain dispensaries, the dispensary at this property location was operating illegally in violation of our ordinance. Is that correct? That's correct. And was the property owner owner ever notified that he was leasing his property to an illegal business prior to the revocation of his business license to lease the property? Correct. We gave several warnings and then there were also 424 citations issued to the property owner, letting him know that he had an illegal business operating on his property. Did you how many citations did you say? 424. 424 citations. And what period of time was that? We issued citations from March 13, 2012 to August nine, 2014. Okay. Thank you. And according to the information in this agenda, item, ALSACE-LORRAINE applied for a business license in June 2014 to operate as a bakery . However, the bakery was in operations before 2014. Was there a previous business license issued to Alsace-Lorraine? No. So Mr. No had the bakery license under his personal name, and that license was suspended on April 30th, 2014. We then received an application from All Syrian Fine Pastries Inc on June 19, 2014. So. So is the same Mr. No. Is it the same Mr.. No. Who had the business license under also is lowering the bakery the same property owner? So the property owner was also the bakery owner at one point in time. And so since April 30th, 2014, there has not been a valid business license for a bakery at that property. Okay. And so less than two months after his license was suspended, a new license application was received by a new owner from all states. Lauren, is that correct? That's correct. But Mr. No is still the property owner. That's correct. Okay. I'm just trying to get some clarification. I want to make sure that we're clear on this. So the bakery has been going has been operating without a business license in the city since 2014. Well, it goes to the appeal process. Is that correct? That's correct. So there has been, in my opinion, some some leniency in that regard, because do we normally allow businesses to operate without a business license knowingly? No. We knowingly do not allow businesses to operate well without a license. And what does the property owner currently owe the city? And fines and penalties. Can you work? Currently the amount that's owed is over $1,000,000 with penalties and interest. Okay. Last month, I made a motion to continue this hearing for 30 days to give the property owner an opportunity to reach a settlement with the city. Can the city attorney provide an update on what, if any, communications have taken place over the past 30 days to reach that objective? Councilman. Yes, our office did reach out to the business owner, the applicant, through his attorney, and indicated the motion that was made last month and gave them an opportunity to make what we would have considered to be a meaningful offer. We did not receive anything substantial compared to the outstanding debt of over $1,000,000. Okay. In terms of what we define as substantial. Ken, is is that is it possible for us to share the find the amount that they offered was $25,000. Okay. And as I recall, this appeal was referred to an independent hearing officer prior to it coming to the city council 30 days ago. That's correct. And what was the recommendation of the independent hearing officer? The recommendation was to uphold the decision to revoke the business license. Okay. In this matter, I think the city has has expended a tremendous amount of resources with a a property owner that has really shown no contrition, no remorse, and no regard for the the law for that established by the city. I don't think we have any other choices as a city at this point. And so I'd like to move to receive the supporting documentation into the record and conclude the hearing and approve the hearing officer's recommendation to deny the business license application submitted by Alsace-Lorraine Front Pastries, Inc. Thanks.
Speaker 0: Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 4: I support the motion.
Speaker 0: Okay, there is a motion any second. Is there any any council comment on this? There's a motion and a second on the floor. There's been public comment for the hearing. So at this time, we'll go and call a vote on the motion for the hearing. | Public Hearing | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the hearing and approve the hearing officer’s recommendation to deny the business license application submitted by Alsace Lorraine Fine Pastries, Inc., dba Alsace Lorraine Fine Pastries, located at 4334 Atlantic Avenue. (District 8) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11222016_16-1026 | Speaker 1: Lucian Karis.
Speaker 0: Thank you. We'll be going on to hearing number three.
Speaker 1: Report firm financial management recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the hearing and grant an entertainment permit with conditions on the application of Ramona Orozco doing business as Barbie's Bar, located at 1008 East Artesia Boulevard for Entertainment Without Dancing District nine and oath is required.
Speaker 0: If we can do the oath, please.
Speaker 1: Everyone is going to speak on this. Please raise your right hand. 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 0: Thank you. We can have a staff report, please.
Speaker 2: Mayor, members of the city council providing the report today will be Brett Jaquez, business services officer for Finance Management. Good evening, honorable mayor and members of the city council. Tonight you have before you an application for entertainment without dancing for Ramon Orozco doing business as Barbie's Bar located at 1008 East or TiSA Boulevard. Operating as a bar tavern lounge in Council District nine. All of the necessary departments have reviewed the application, have provided their recommended conditions as contained in the hearing packet. I, as well as Police Department, stand ready to answer any questions Council may have, and that would conclude staff's report.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Anything else on the staff report side?
Speaker 2: Not at this point.
Speaker 0: Okay. Any public comment on the hearing? Please come forward.
Speaker 5: Hi. My name is Mon about a bear and I am a homeowner. I'm representing myself as resident board member in the community, as American Youth Soccer Association Organization, board member, Little League Board member, program manager, as a home visitation program for Healthy Families America and a member for Prevent Child Abuse and Neglect in the City of Long Beach. So I have a couple of concerns in regards to Barbie's Spa. I've been a resident for 13 years. I am the second home in the area and I don't know for what reason. Things have changed in regards to having loud music. We've had noise control issues, parking. They have about 8 to 9 parking spots. They're able to manage to squeeze in anywhere from 20 to 22 cars in that area. We can no longer play catch outside with our kids. I brought my family. We are in baseball and soccer. Like I mentioned before, as well as softball. And we have a big charter bus that parks right on our street. And so along with taking having that big view, wonderful view, as you guys can imagine, we also have trumpets. I love Mexican music. I am a mexican myself. But when you are dealing with a large band like they've been bringing in as the beginning, I would say about this year, the bar has always been there. We're not opposed to that. I didn't even know it existed for many years. There must be a new owner. I don't know what it is, but now the interest is in the back. We have various women coming in and out being dropped off. So that's kind of a concern for me. I cannot come home and get out of my car without sleazy comments. I do not need to be talked to inappropriate. I do not need to come out in the morning and find all these bottles in the front of my house. I don't I want to come home and be able to park in my parking lot without asking people to move. Now they have a taco truck and they are bringing in taco trucks. So we have people ordering, thinking it's drive thru and that it's okay to come and park and block the residents driveways as you can. As you might already know. Been aware a lot of people are scared. Residents are scared to speak up ever since our election. So you won't have residents speaking up at this moment. I wish this hearing would have been before our election, but it's not. And so, therefore, we are speaking with the residents. They're not going to be speaking up. But I can tell you that here I brought my family to represent that we are role models in the community and that I hope that as much as we live Long Beach, that language allows us to.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. And the next speaker. Please, please come forward. Oh, yeah. Please just come to the mike.
Speaker 2: Hi. I'm a mayor and city council manager. I'm one of those condos, owner of Bobby's bar and 449 of the occupancy that I have, I have probably one security guard as the police department advised me to do so. I also do neighborhood watch in the neighborhood. I have provided the building with lighting and in the street of of California, which it did not have any lighting. It was very, very dark. I have provided that also. I'll provide. I have. Lighting in the sidewalk for a bit for a safer. Safer neighborhood. We check everybody's IDs as they go in and out. If I was provided with the entertainment permit, I could bring more business to the uptown side of Long Beach. I also do walks neighborhood walks around the neighborhood on Lois and California and Artesia. The neighborhood has been safe. And. Well, that's all I have to say about that.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Any other speakers? Please come forward.
Speaker 5: Evening. My name's Vivienne Span.
Speaker 2: Homeowner in the north district.
Speaker 5: Not too far from this location. I wasn't aware of this. The gentleman says he does. Patrols and neighborhood watch.
Speaker 2: But there was a.
Speaker 5: Shooting at that location maybe three months ago where someone, I believe was killed. There's a church in next door to that facility, as well as another church on the corner. And it's only a couple of blocks from Jordan High School. And like the lady said. You would pass.
Speaker 2: By. I think it's.
Speaker 5: A nonstop party. They are parked on the sides of the street, which is a residential street.
Speaker 2: You're only getting, you know.
Speaker 5: That little view. And there is development coming to the north district. And I don't think this is the development that we need. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Casey, no other comments. Well, sir, I think you did there the your public commentary. Mr. Attorney, can the owner speak one more time?
Speaker 2: Is this under the hearing?
Speaker 0: Under the hearing?
Speaker 2: Yes. If there is a rebuttal to anything or should come forward. I have an I have an example of the neighborhood watch. One of the churches left its doors unlocked. I was doing my patrol work. I have pictures of it. They left their door locked. Other equipment was inside of the church when I opened it. I went in. Light up the place when my flashlight took video recordings of others stuff still in place. I locked up the church for them. I put a chain and I text the owner of the of the church. That is that his church is safe. Now, there was no break in. That's all I have to say about. I never watched.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Okay, we're gonna take this back to the city council so much that it's over to Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Mayor Garcia. And thank you to the speakers who came down. This is pretty easy for me. I. I think there's. Mr. Roscoe, thank you so much for your interest in doing business in North Long Beach. But there's sort of a new pep in its step. And the standard of operation in the past is no longer the standard of operation today. And the bars on Artesia Boulevard, it's been a significant area of focus for our city in cleaning up those bars and making sure that the nuisance activities that have plagued residents for a long time, that we've abated those and gotten rid of those. So I don't think this application is quite ready today. So I'm not going to I'm not going to reject it or approve it. I'm going to make a motion to the council to continue it for two months and try to give you an opportunity to. You've never come in to meet with my office. The neighborhood association hadn't heard about this. Let you do a little bit of due diligence and try to build some neighborhood support, because if we vote on this today, it will not be approved. So my motion is to continue for two months. Thanks.
Speaker 0: There's a motion and a second to continue the item. I see no other council questions or comments. Members, please go ahead and cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. We're going to be moving on to the regular agenda. Now, one councilmember has to leave a little bit early tonight. There's been a request to move one of the items up. So we'll be carrying item number 13 and then going into public comment. | Public Hearing | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the hearing and grant an Entertainment Permit with conditions on the application of Ramon Orozco, dba Barbie’s Bar, 1008 East Artesia Blvd., for Entertainment Without Dancing.
(District 9) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11222016_16-1045 | Speaker 0: We're going to go ahead and move on to number. 15.
Speaker 1: Communication from Councilwoman Price. Recommendation to request City Attorney to draft an amendment to ordinance number c7814, which describes the requirements for service on the Belmont Shore Parking and Business Improvement Area Advisory Commission.
Speaker 0: Can I get a motion in motion in a second? Councilman Price.
Speaker 3: Thank you. This is just a cleanup item. We're just changing the residential requirement to be in at large as opposed to a resident from any particular organization. Thanks.
Speaker 0: Any public comment on this? Mr.. Here, please come down.
Speaker 2: Larry, could you click as the address, as I suggested to counsel in the Council of Advisors office that. This item be held over pending a review by the city auditor. I have attended a number of the meetings and certainly the commission does a credible job. But. It never struck me until somebody pointed out. At a different hearing. The inherent conflict of interests that now exist. And we need to make sure that does not exist. We have. Members that are residents. Members that are property owners, business owners. But we have a situation where we have. One is a landlord and the other is a tenant. Other the landlord. So that raises the red flag to. Any form of equity. I.e. You've got to vote this way or your rents going up. So I think to make for the integrity of the process. Let's first. See what the city auditor finds and get some direction out of the city attorney's office. So the. Cloud of hankie. Panky does not exist. I think. And I think that would best serve. Not only the business businesses there, but the residents and the city as a whole. It's just a question of ethics and that I don't know why. No one's ever caught that before, but that's certainly not a terrible situation. And waiting a couple of weeks to examine the facts is not going to rock the boat rushing into it. Ignoring that fact would not speak well for this city council. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Members, please cast your vote. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Attorney to draft an amendment to Ordinance No. C-7814, which describes the requirements for service on the Belmont Shore Parking and Business Improvement Area Advisory Commission. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11222016_16-1036 | Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Item number six Please.
Speaker 1: Report from Economic and Property Development and Public Works recommendation to approve the Magnolia Industrial Group Property and Business Improvement District Annual Report and assessment for the period of December 1st, 2016 through November 30th, 2017, automatically extending the current agreement with the Magnolia Industrial Group and authorize payment of 1500 dollars in city property assessments from the General Fund in the Public Works Department District one.
Speaker 4: Thank you, City Manager West.
Speaker 2: With a report from Jim Fiske Garman, one of our managers in economic development and property management department, honorable vice mayor and City Council Members. This item is the annual approval of the Magnolia Industrial Group Property and Business Improvement District and report and ongoing assessment. The recommended action on this item continues the assessment for another year. There are no proposed changes to the basis of the assessment, nor any significant changes with proposed activities or programs. Therefore, staff request that City Council receive supporting documentation of record and approve the recommendation to continue the levy of the assessment and authorize the city manager to extend the agreement for one additional year. That concludes my report.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Councilmember Gonzalez.
Speaker 3: Yes, I'll just say, Jim, you know, you do such an incredible job with our business improvement districts, especially MiG. And they also are great, incredible, hard workers. So it was great seeing you last month at the meeting and continue the amazing work. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Councilmember Arango. Okay. Is there any public comment on this item saying non please cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Number 17, please.
Speaker 0: Before we go to 17, just an announcement that will be we continued the closed session earlier. We'll be continuing that to the end of the meeting. So just wanted to make sure that we announce that as well. | Contract | Recommendation to approve the Magnolia Industrial Group Property and Business Improvement District Annual Report and Assessment for the period of December 1, 2016 through November 30, 2017, automatically extending the current agreement with the Magnolia Industrial Group, Inc., for a one-year period; and authorize payment of $1,511 in City property assessments from the General Fund (GF) in the Public Works Department (PW). (District 1) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11222016_16-1037 | Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: 18.
Speaker 1: Report from Human Resources Recommendation to adopt resolution amending Section 19 of Resolution Number Rez 16 Dash 0083. Authorizing City Manager or other appropriate appointing authority to extend the use of accumulated carried over vacation and in lieu holiday time for a period not to extend 180 calendar days citywide.
Speaker 0: Thank you. There's a motion and a second. Any public comment? CNN. I'm sorry. Council. We're asking that you have something. Let's let's hold 1/2, please.
Speaker 2: Yes, just clarification of Mr. two to the city manager to what employees does this implies apply? Is this across the board for all employees, city wide? It'll be mayor councilmembers. It'll be managed by the department, through the city, managed by the city managers, through the department. So primarily we're concerned about our police and fire departments, but it certainly will be available to some of the other departments that have staff that are not been able to take vacations. Okay. And and does this preclude a bargaining unit of employees that have contracts in place? I'm going to turn that over to our deputy director of h.r. Cindy stafford.
Speaker 5: Good evening. This is an amendment to the Saudi resolution. Was it adopted by council, which means it affects all of our employees with a representative non represented.
Speaker 2: Okay. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Question.
Speaker 1: Motion carries Councilwoman Price. That's all right. Motion carries. Item 19 Report from Human Resources Recommendation to adopt resolution approving the amendments to the existing Memorandum of Understanding with the Long Beach Lifeguard Association citywide. | Resolution | Recommendation to adopt resolution amending Section 19 of Resolution No. RES-16-0083 (Salary Resolution), authorizing City Manager, or other appropriate appointing authority, to extend the use of accumulated carried over vacation and in-lieu holiday time for a period not to exceed 180 calendar days. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11152016_16-1001 | Speaker 0: Thank you, Danny. Appreciate it. Okay. So we're going to begin with our hearings and we have the first hearing, which we're going to do, I believe we want to have it read.
Speaker 1: Be great report from Development Services. Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record. Include the public hearing and declare ordinance amending sections of Title 21 of the Long Beach Municipal Code relating to alcoholic beverage manufacturing and accessory tasting rooms read for the first time and lead over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for Final Reading.
Speaker 0: I don't believe an oath is required, so with this, I'm going to turn this over to Mr. Modica.
Speaker 5: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Members of the Council, the staff report tonight will be given by Carey Tai, our current planning officer.
Speaker 6: Mr. Mayor, I'm going to do it for Kerry.
Speaker 1: Carey is going to be sitting here answering all the technical questions.
Speaker 6: The short staff report.
Speaker 1: Is that you asked us to look at potential revisions to the Alcoholic Beverage Manufacturing Ordinance to to create more flexibility and to reduce some inconsistencies that exist between our downtown plan and our ABM ordinance. So we did.
Speaker 7: Come up with some proposed.
Speaker 1: Flexible flexibility, submitted those to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission did approve them unanimously. And now we are before you. We are reducing the parking requirements for ABM'S and we are allowing them to to get a consistency.
Speaker 7: Issue eliminated with the downtown plan, allowing accessory.
Speaker 8: Tasting rooms to.
Speaker 1: Remain open on Friday and Saturdays until 11:00.
Speaker 7: Or ask.
Speaker 8: For later hours through an AUP.
Speaker 1: Process and then allow facilities that are over 6000 square feet to.
Speaker 8: Go through an AUP.
Speaker 1: Process instead of a Q P.
Speaker 7: Process. We originally.
Speaker 1: Anticipated that most of these uses would be of the 6000 square foot or.
Speaker 7: Lower range. We do have some that are coming in that are a larger size. We do need a little bit of control over them to.
Speaker 8: Make sure that the interface with the neighborhoods are not creating nuisance.
Speaker 7: But other than that, we do believe that these.
Speaker 1: Amendments provide the flexibility that you are looking for. With that.
Speaker 6: Kerry or I are here to.
Speaker 8: Answer any.
Speaker 1: Questions.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Are there any public comments on this hearing? Please come forward. This is just on hearing, number one. Nothing else, please. Good evening, Mayor. Councilman.
Speaker 2: Um, my name is Kellen Carlson, a lobbyist beer company. For the last year and a half, I've been working all throughout the city to try and find a location, and I really want to support the recommendation of lowering the parking. I know in the Planning Commission, what about doing this thing with the cities of Denver, Minneapolis, Portland, for suggestions which are built a bit differently than our city, which is somewhat landlocked. And what we have, Victoria, is what we have. And the biggest concern or problem we've encountered is parking our warehouse warehousing districts. And what we have for brewery facilities are very limited on what parking is there as they were built for warehousing requirements ten, 20, 30 years ago. So I just want to really support the recommendations. I don't know exactly what the reduced parking is, but I really want to support that and move that forward.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you so much. And thank you for opening up a business and window open up in Long Beach. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Hi, my name's Belinda Delgadillo. Thank you so much for listening to our comments and I'm just here to support the amendment as well. I think it'll bring tremendous growth for the city and an opportunity, as we've seen in San Diego, growth in tourism, bringing a new customer base to the area and and really supporting local businesses, which is what I've seen in breweries. So, yeah, I'm just here to show my support for that. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you so much. And our last speaker.
Speaker 4: Hello. I'm Dan from Liberation Brewing Company. We're hoping to open.
Speaker 3: In town in the new year. And I just wanted to stop by and then.
Speaker 4: My support for amending this this bill here. It, it. It's been a great process working with the planning department and the city. They've been very receptive and getting on the phone with us and helping us through everything. And I just wanted to say that we're looking forward.
Speaker 3: To working.
Speaker 4: With the city.
Speaker 0: And.
Speaker 4: The continued evolution of this this measure. Thanks so much.
Speaker 0: Great. Well, thank you, Councilman Price comments.
Speaker 8: I want to thank staff for putting together these amendments. I'm very supportive of encouraging more businesses like these to come to the city of Long Beach and have seen the benefits of these businesses in my district and citywide. So thank you for everyone who's here and thanks to staff for putting this together. I asked my colleagues to support this item. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 9: Thank you. I completely support this. I think it makes a lot of sense. Thank you to Ms.. Bolek and her team for walking me through this and making sure that we have a good, sound policy. And to you brewers out there and they're looking for a location has plenty of space in north Long Beach thanks.
Speaker 0: Thank you councilwoman Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 6: Everybody knows the second district is where all the breweries are. Come on, guys. I just wanted to thank staff so much for all your work on this and for the council members that were on this item previously for your leadership.
Speaker 1: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And I'm just going to add and say that the beer economy is real. It's growing. There's been incredible success in a bunch of of breweries that have been safe and very positive for the community that have opened up across the city. There certainly are a large amount in downtown. There's been incredible success in Alamitos Bay and what's happening over there along the shore and the coastline. And now we know that there is interest up in north Long Beach and in the Bixby Knolls area and now in parts of a councilman uranium district, which I think is where liberation brewing is is going, I believe. So there is there is a lot of interest. And I'm just grateful that the staff has been so expeditious in looking at this and the council's been so supportive of supporting these businesses. This is a very good thing for business. And it's all about anytime you can cut the red tape a little bit and make things easier is always a good thing. So thank you all. You can please go ahead. And Castro votes.
Speaker 1: Motion carries. | Ordinance | Recommendation to declare ordinance amending Table 41-1C of Chapter 21.41, and Section 21.45.114 (2), (5) and (8), all relating to alcoholic beverage manufacturing and accessory tasting rooms, read and adopted as read. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11152016_16-1003 | Speaker 0: Thank you. Okay. With that, we are going to begin by going to hearing to we can read that.
Speaker 1: Report from Development Services and fire recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing and declare ordinance. Adopting and amending the 2016 addition of the California Building Standards Code and the 1997 edition of the Uniform Housing Code by amending and restating Title 18 of the Long Beach Municipal Code in its entirety. Read the first time and lead over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for Final Reading and declare ordinance. Amending and restating Title 12 related to Long Beach Oil Code in its entirety. Read for the first time and lead over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for Final Reading and declare ordinance amending certain sections of titles three, eight, ten and 21 of the Long Beach Municipal Code read for the first time and laid over for the next regular meeting of the City Council for final reading and adopt resolution making, making expressed findings and determinations relating to the adoption of more restrictive code provisions where appropriate, and adopt resolution authorizing the Director of Development Services to submit a Zoning Code Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment to the California Coastal Commission for approval and accept categorical exemption C 16, two, one, one and C 16 to 2 for city wide.
Speaker 0: Great. Thank you. With that, I might turn this over to the staff.
Speaker 5: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The staff report for this item will be given by Oscar Orsi, our deputy director of development services and his team.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Mayor and council members. Our building official, Mr. David Karem, is here to give you a brief presentation.
Speaker 5: Good evening, honorable mayor and.
Speaker 3: Members of the city council. I'm David Coram, the city building official, and I'm honored to present to you the 2017 proposed amendments to the Long Beach Municipal Code. The Code Amendments package presented to you comprises of the Building and Safety Code updates, including Title 18. All code updates included in Title 12 and Zoning Code updates, including Title 21 and some administrative updates to Title three, eight and ten of municipal codes. Every two years, the State of California adapts the latest.
Speaker 5: Edition.
Speaker 3: Of the California Building Standards Code and Uniform Housing Code to establish a uniform standards for construction and maintenance of residential and nonresidential buildings, plumbing, mechanical, electrical.
Speaker 5: Fire and life safety systems.
Speaker 3: Green building and energy codes. This desert state published a new building codes July 1st, and that gives the city of Long Beach and local jurisdiction under 80 days to amend the state regulations based on the local climatic, geological and topographical conditions. According to Sea of Long Beach staff from the Building and Safety Fire Code Enforcement Planning, an Office of Sustainability.
Speaker 0: Has compiled.
Speaker 5: The necessary amendments and code cleanups.
Speaker 3: Under one package that is being presented to you for this first hearing tonight.
Speaker 5: These amendments have been through several public.
Speaker 3: Hearings, and more specifically, the zoning code. Amendments have also been presented to the Planning Commission prior to the Council meeting. Upon the final reading. And at the next City Council. These amendments will become effective January 1st of 2017. In summary, majority of the proposed amendments are state mandates regulations such as building fire and model water efficiency. Landscape ordinance. Some are based on direction received from this body, the city council, such as expedited and streamlined permitting process for electric vehicle charging stations. And some are based on recommendations received from the staff to make the Long Beach Municipal Code more consistent. And they are in a cleanup in nature. With this introduction, our team is prepared.
Speaker 5: To answer any questions that you may have. And with me, I had a general building.
Speaker 3: Superintendent of building and safety.
Speaker 0: Thank you. With that, I'm going to go ahead and ask, is there any public comment on this hearing? Casey, no public comment on this hearing. I'm going to close the hearing and go back to the council.
Speaker 10: Mayor, I'd just like to point out there's five separate actions required on this. Okay.
Speaker 0: So we'll take a vote on on on all five separately, correct? Okay. Great. So. But we only need. But we can do. But the public comment and the motion could be for. All right. Okay. So, Vice Mayor Richardson, any comments? No. Okay. Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 8: I have no comment.
Speaker 0: And Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 6: Yeah, I just wanted to highlight something that was pointed out to me about the stations, which I think is really exciting. The fact that we've had a lot of community members asking for more stations in the city and that this is going to help us get to scale in a really exciting way. So new development will be in the city required to have that and so I just a shout out for Sierra Club folks make sure you read this in detail. It's exciting news.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. See no other comments. We'll go ahead and take each vote separately. So do we want to read? Do you want to read each different motion? And we'll take the vote.
Speaker 1: Recommendation to receive supporting documentation and to the record conclude the hearing and declare ordinance. Adopting and amending the 2016 addition of the California Building Standards Code and the 1987 addition of the Uniform Housing Code by amending and restating Title 18 of the Long Beach Municipal Code in its entirety. Read for the first time and lead over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for Final Reading.
Speaker 0: Please cast your votes. | Ordinance | Recommendation to declare ordinance amending and restating Title 18 in its entirety, and adoption and local amendments to the 2016 Edition of the California Building Standards Codes and the 1997 Edition of the Uniform Housing Code known as the Long Beach Building Standards Code, read and adopted as read. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11152016_16-1019 | Speaker 9: Thank you. So that concludes public comment. So we're going to go a little out of order. We have a I know there's a lot of people waiting here, but we have one more brief item to get to before that item. So we'll take item number 11, please.
Speaker 1: Communication from Councilman Austin, Councilwoman Gonzalez, Councilman Andrews and Council member would UNGA recommendation to refer to the Parks and Recreation Commission and the Housing and Neighborhoods Committee. The request to consider naming the park at Del Amo Boulevard and Oregon Avenue after C David Molina.
Speaker 9: Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 4: Thank you. And I want to thank council members Gonzalez Andrews in Urunga for signing on in support of this item. As many of you may know, we will start very soon work on a new 3.3 acre park at the southwest corner of Delano and Oregon Avenue in a district. The neighborhood has been anxiously awaiting this park ever since it was originally acquired by the redevelopment agency almost a decade ago. Now, thanks to the actions of this City Council last year in the partnership with Integral Communities, this park is about to be built. This park will provide athletic fields a lot and a playground walking paths and access to the Dominguez Gap wetlands to an underserved community. After discussing this issue with many people, I would like to recommend for consideration that we named this park after someone who was a pioneer in the health care field and left a lasting legacy not only for Long Beach but throughout the nation. Dr. C David Molina was born in Yuma, Arizona in 1926, and he studied education at San Diego State University. He began his career as an elementary school teacher at Yuma Indian School and later taught in Long Beach. After earning his medical degree, he set up a private practice in Long Beach in 1962. He started Long Beach's first intensive care unit at Pacific Hospital, where he also served as the director of emergency department of the emergency department for 21 years. He earned a grant to develop a paramedic system for the Long Beach and trained the city's first firefighters to become paramedics. Dr. Molina noticed that low income, uninsured and non-English speaking patients were coming to the emergency room in need of general health care services. So in 1980, David Molina opened the clinic to Long Beach to provide low income families with a place to get personalized health care. He soon found it Molina Medical Center's and served as its president and chief executive officer. By 1994, Molina Health Care was a licensed health care plan in California. Dr. Molina, unfortunately, passed away in 1996, but his legacy continues. His children Mario, John, Martha, Josephine and Janet and the extended Molina family continue to serve this city in a number of fields and endeavors. Two of them are joining us today. John and Janet, thank you. Today. MOLINA Health care's a Fortune 500 multi-state health care organization. It serves more than 5 million individuals and families. Melina Health care is still headquartered in Long Beach. And David Melina's grandchildren I'm sorry, his children now run the company. His grandchildren are still involved in the city as well. Given the lasting contributions of Dr. David Melina to the city of Long Beach and his legacy of providing critical medical services to underserved communities throughout the nation, it is fitting to consider the new park at the Alamo, an organ in his honor. I move to refer this recommendation to the Parks Recreation Commission and Housing and Neighborhoods Committee for consideration and recommendation back to the City Council. And I would ask for my council colleagues for support in this endeavor. Thank you.
Speaker 9: Thank you. Council member. Would you like to make the motion this item? Is there a second? Great. Next up, Councilmember Ringa.
Speaker 3: Without question, the Molino family has been a staple and a steady source of hope here in the city of Long Beach. Their philanthropic endeavors in Long Beach and elsewhere is unquestioned and welcomed. And I see no cause to name this part anything other than the Sea Molina Park. Thank you, supporter.
Speaker 9: Thank you, Councilwoman Mongo.
Speaker 1: I too am very supportive of this. I think that they are a staple of our community.
Speaker 7: And when you go to anywhere.
Speaker 1: Else, Washington, D.C. or otherwise, and people.
Speaker 7: Say, wow, Long Beach is not only.
Speaker 1: Diverse, but one of the largest Hispanic owned businesses in the country is right here in Long Beach. And it's not just about being the biggest for them. It's also about providing quality. And I think that they provide not only quality to their customers.
Speaker 7: But knowing people that work there. They really provide a quality work environment and a lot of jobs to our neighbors. So we appreciate.
Speaker 1: All of that. Thank you.
Speaker 9: Thank you, Councilman Andrews.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Vice Mayor. You know, I want to thank Councilman Osman bringing this item forward. You know, I have a lot of respect for the Parks and Recreation Commission. I hope they take into consideration this suggestion. John Molina was a wonderful person who looked out for the underserved. His legacy carries on, but we should honor him in a special way. And this park will be it. And I want to thank you guys again and thank you again.
Speaker 3: The stars of the great news for.
Speaker 9: Thank you, Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 6: I also wanted to say this is a great item. I think honoring people that have done great work in Long Beach is always a great opportunity. A park where we talk about health as as we try to engage our youth to be active is also really important. And I also want to thank the Molina Foundation for their support of things like the aquarium, places of education. I think that you guys are doing a great job and we're really lucky to have you in Long Beach. So thank you.
Speaker 9: Thank you, Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 8: I want to echo everything that my colleagues have said, and I want to thank Councilman Austin for bringing this item forward. It's fitting and appropriate. And this is exactly the type of situation that we should keep in mind when we're talking about naming our public spaces. So thank you very much. And thank you to the Molina family for all they've done and all that you continue to do for our community. It's very much appreciated.
Speaker 9: Thank you, Councilman Andrea.
Speaker 0: So I mentioned John, but I know it's David was just trying to name a park after you already, so just stick around, buddy.
Speaker 9: Thank you. And I'll just add congratulations and thank you to Councilman Austin, everyone who signed on this, I think. MOLINA It's no secret these folks are very present in the community and this just sort of reaffirms that commitment. So you'll have my my clear support on this. So is there any public comment on this item?
Speaker 7: Hi. I'm Janet Molina. What? I just wanted to say thank you for considering.
Speaker 11: Honoring this our father by considering naming this park after him as one of five children. Parks are very important. Growing up, we were at Eldorado.
Speaker 7: Whaley taking different parks and.
Speaker 11: Rec classes from when we were growing up and then to our families. Now we still use the parks our kids ride, their bikes, their walk, their Greenspaces are so important.
Speaker 7: To the livelihood of communities and the health and well-being of.
Speaker 11: Everybody. So we really consider this an honor. Thank you.
Speaker 9: Thank you. Any further public comment? Is this the last public comment? If so, we'll close it after this.
Speaker 11: Good thinking, honorable mayor and members of the city council. My name is Rita Cox and I live in the eighth District and in Long Beach all my life. I love Long Beach and everything that it has to offer. I treasure the city's past, and I'm confident the future holds many positive changes. One of the positive changes that I'm happy to speak to you about tonight is the importance of the new 3.3 acre park at Alamo Boulevard and Oregon Avenue and the naming it in honor of Dr. Molina. This is an exceptional, wonderful opportunity for the community of the eighth District. There is more to a livable community than the development of property for residential and commercial uses. There is a need for parks, libraries and open space. Parks and open spaces are necessary components of a healthy, well-balanced community in the eighth District. There is just this need. As you're probably aware, the district is a high density residential community with mixed commercial uses. This new 3.3 acre park will improve and add to the quality of life for many. A place where people can go and get away from the everyday hustle and bustle. The location is ideal next to the Los Angeles River, with its additional benefits of walking, hiking trails, horses, ducks, a bike path to the beach. Just as importantly, I sincerely hope the park will remain open space now and in the future for the people. We need to protect our parks and open spaces for the precious resources they are. This is truly a win win situation. More open space for the community and also importantly, no fiscal impact for the city. I hope input from the surrounding community will serve to be a valuable part of the planning process and I hope plans will be available online along with the new library and the improvements of the first wetlands. This new park is a much needed and welcome addition to the district. Thank you.
Speaker 9: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 11: CARROLL Sean and I live two.
Speaker 7: Blocks down the street from this park. And what better.
Speaker 11: Way to remember somebody.
Speaker 7: Continually by naming a park after them, especially since they've done so much for this city. Thank you.
Speaker 9: Thank you. And we have someone queued up up top to speak next. Wave your hand if you queued up to speak of top. Okay. Seeing none will move forward. The next speaker here.
Speaker 11: And Control. And no, I don't live in this district, but I am very happy to see that there is going to be another park in Long Beach. When this was being proposed. The developer who is providing the money for the park said that. The city wanted to put in artificial turf for the sports complex or the soccer field there. And he. Would be willing to put in natural grass with all of these people talking about open space. I hope you will consider putting in natural grass instead of artificial turf. As you are aware, artificial turf has to be fenced so that there is no damage to the field with food, with chewing gum, with bicycles, all the things that can tear up artificial turf. And so the general public is not going to have access to this section of the park that is going to be a soccer field . That's I'm glad that you are naming it after Dr. Molino, but I think you should also be considering having open space for the whole public. And this would be accessible to everyone, not just soccer. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I don't see any other public comment. I'm going to turn this back over to council member Austin.
Speaker 4: Thank you. And I want to thank my and my colleagues for all of the supportive comments. I've heard a lot of supportive comments from the public as well. I want to make just a couple of points on this. This park has been been the long awaited resource for for the city. Again, it's been almost ten years getting to this point. And we have a lot of great assets that are connected to this park, including the DeForest Wetlands area, which is beautiful, natural open space just across the Alamo. We are developing the the Forest Wetlands Restoration Project, which is going to be beautiful, natural open space. It's right along the L.A. River, where people have the access to ride their bikes through recreation. And in the future, we hope to have uses of the L.A. River as recreational opportunities for for the public. And so when we talk about creating open space, that's exactly what we're doing in the eighth District in North Long Beach. There's going to be acres and acres of open space created. This is going to be an active, mostly active recreational space, which I think is going to be a tremendous addition to this community. And so, again, members, I would ask for your support.
Speaker 0: Thank you and great recommendation here. So we're very happy about this. Please go ahead. Cast your votes.
Speaker 11: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Great. Thank you. And that moves on to the Parks and Recreation Commission. And now we're moving back over to item number ten. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to approve naming the park site located at Del Amo Boulevard and Oregon Avenue as "C. David Molina Park". | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11152016_16-0985 | Speaker 0: Great. Thank you. And that moves on to the Parks and Recreation Commission. And now we're moving back over to item number ten.
Speaker 1: Communication from Councilmember Wodonga Councilwoman Gonzalez and Councilmember Pearce. Recommendation to request the city attorney to draft a resolution in support of humanitarian parole for Jose Luis Alvarez Sandoval.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. I'm going to turn this over to Councilmember your.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Mayor. I would like to move that. We request the city attorney draft resolution in support of humanitarian parole for Lewis Iris. And the. Humanitarian parole is granted by Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to focus on that meeting for residents who cannot otherwise qualify for an immigrant visa to the United States , but who merit entry for compelling reasons. Persons granted humanitarian parole are permitted to remain in the US only for the period of time that is necessary to fulfill a humanitarian need or to tend to an emergency situation. Humanitarian parole is only valid for a period of one year and the applicant can resubmit to be considered for additional time after that period of time expires. Here's a little more information about what brought us here today. About a month ago, on Sunday, October 9th, I found myself with congressman member with Congressmember Alan Lowenthal on my way to Friendship Park at the US-Mexico border. While that tradition he spent weekends with my family, I felt compelled. Compelled to meet a man who had been separated from his. I went there to meet a man who had settled roots and had created a family in the United States, a man who called Long Beach Home, and unfortunately, a man who was unjustly removed from this country and forced to live to leave his children and wife behind. As an individual who comes from an immigrant background and who has witnessed firsthand political scapegoating of immigrants in dire need in dire times, including this presidential election. I found myself that Sunday morning. Talking to a man through a wall that tears millions of families apart. I witnessed firsthand the tragedy of our misguided and dysfunctional immigration system. Earlier this year, Jose Alvarez was on his way home after picking up his son from work, a seemingly non-threatening activity that would forever change their lives. On their way home. A California State University Long Beach police officer was on patrol and noticed the broken taillight across his car. The officer signaled all said to pull over. So initially we seemed like a routine traffic stop turned into a nightmare for the Alvarez family. After communicating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials, ICE, the officer helped Hosier due to a 21 year old nonviolent felony drug conviction. Under current immigration policies. These types of criminal records prioritize individuals like Jose for deportation with no consideration for the family and the life he created in the United States or the comments he made after his arrest. Jose was held that was held at CSB before ICE deported him unable to communicate with his family. And the following morning, Jose found himself in Tijuana, Mexico, alone. Hozier is the father of six children and a grandfather all born in the United States. His youngest children attend school to Long Beach. One of his sons attended Long Beach City College before dropping out to financially support the family as a result of his father's deportation. His son Horace is a US Marine Corps veteran who served his country for seven years, including a tour in Iraq. Joseph is a family man and he recognizes a mistake he made in the past. After you. After he was convicted, he turned his life around. But none of these factors were taken into consideration as ice removed him without notifying his family. This heartbreaking incident created financial instability, emotional turmoil and trauma within his household. They now have to make weekly visits and alter their schedules to visit their father and husband at the border, as I witnessed that Sunday morning. To experience a separation this family must endure made me realize the injustice brought upon the Alvarez family. Current immigration policy has allowed one mistake to define his legacy and that of his family. At the time of his original conviction, Josette was penalized under the illegal under the Illegal Immigration Reform and Responsibility Act of 1995, which sped up deportations, deportations, increased detentions and criminalized entire communities. This scenario has played out in a million times, and families are being separated on a daily basis. As we celebrated Veterans Day this week or this last week. A day where we recognize those who have served our country. Emerging. My fellow colleagues at City Council to support the evolution of this humanitarian parole case. To reunite a soldier who was willing to give his life for our freedom with his father. Seeing the Alvarez family interact with their father through a wall that that Sunday morning made the criminalization of immigrants and a broken system all too apparent . This deportation did not affect only Jose, but that of his loved ones and the broader community and the broader immigrant immigrant community in Long Beach. Cal State. Long Beach students and their families questioned their own safety in a place meant for learning. Therefore. As a consequence of that arrest, California State University Law Week responded. By issuing general order 55, which stipulates that campus police officers may arrest a foreign national with an undocumented status only if there is probable cause to believe he or she has violated a state law, a law, a local ordinance, or a federal law unrelated to immigration laws for which a warrant has been issued by a judge. In other words, our pursuit officers shall not stop or detain persons for determining immigration status or arrest persons solely for alleged undocumented entry into the United States. This is called profiling. In a time when this country is discussing the criminalization of people of color, are reforming the criminal justice system. We cannot forget our immigrant community. The lives of millions of people count on it, and our economy depends on it. The hall where his family has given so much to our city and our nation, and as demonstrated by their son, George Walker, and his military service, we should support or celebrate. His request were given a terrible role as lawmaker. Families who live and work in our city should be able to live without the fear of being separated. Tonight, I support and urge my colleagues. To support the effort to bring Joseph back to his family through humanitarian parole. Thank.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next up is Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 6: Thank you, everyone. Who standing up today for jose and many families like him. I want to thank the council member, councilmember ranga, the immigrant rights coalition, the greater language interfaith community organization for bringing this resolution forward, one which is a city of immigrants. And we pride ourselves on that diversity despite what's going on at the federal level. I'm proud that in Long Beach we continue to take action to protect our diverse communities. Like Josie, many immigrants in Long Beach own their own business, work at our hotels. Our restaurants contribute greatly to our local economy as workers, consumers, students and taxpayers. Mr. Alvarez's story represents more than just his own experience of deportation. He's already sparked significant policy changes at the local, state and federal level. On September 28, 2006, Assembly Bill 27, 92, The Truth Act went forward to continue to make changes, and that's due to Josie and all the community support that has been surrounded by him. Every day we have people that are deported throughout this country and often they don't have community members like yourself standing next to them, fighting for them and advocating for them. And so we really want to applaud everybody for your courage today. I ask that my colleagues here in Long Beach support this resolution. Again, I want to thank everybody for their work. I know that family is where you base so much of your day out of and that being torn apart from your children, your grandchildren, your wives or your husband is not a place where you can be a productive member of society. And so my heart broke the first time I heard the story. I believe it was at portfolio coffee shop. Thank you, Andrea. And I am inspired by your leadership and by Jose's family's courage to continue to speak out and advocate for what's just. And so I hope that my colleagues tonight will do the right thing and vote to support this. Thank you so much.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 9: Thank you, Mayor Garcia. I want to thank Councilmember U. Ranga for taking leadership on this issue and all the co-sponsors who signed on to this item. I'm happy to voice my support here. I know that sometimes these issues are challenging, but what really got to me was when I sat down with the Immigrant Rights Coalition and was able to speak directly with the family and understand from a firsthand perspective what they're facing. And it can't be easy for your family, your personal life, to be thrown into the public space on a very contentious issue. So I want to applaud you for your perseverance. And and I know that our government doesn't have it all together and within this space, but at least we can be right in our hearts here in local government. So I feel one 100% good about my vote tonight in support of this resolution. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. We're going to we're going to go ahead go to public comment the first. But before we do that, I think there's a representative from Congressman Lowenthal office who's here. Is that correct? Okay. So we're going to have her speak first. And then if I can have if you're planning on speaking on the side, if you can please just line up at the podium right now so we can be expeditious in the comments and then we'll go back to the council. So thank you so much, please.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much for the opportunity. And thank you, Councilmember Ranga, for bringing this to the Long Beach City Council. The congressman is in Washington, D.C. today, but he wanted me to read this statement on his behalf. I ask you to please support Jose Alvarez and his family's request of humanitarian parole to the Department of Homeland Security on Thursday. I will just join Jose's family in Washington, D.C., to urge Secretary Johnson to change the policy within DHS that prevents family members of current and former members of the U.S. armed forces from qualifying for parole in place for military families based on nonviolent criminal convictions. While these convictions must be considered, they are just one factor and should not outweigh the fact that Jose has led an exemplary life as a Long Beach resident and family man for the past 21 years.
Speaker 7: Policy decisions that.
Speaker 1: Involve keeping families together should not be seen as black and white, but as one of many factors to be waiting, considering an applicant's petition for parole in place. This is especially true for family members of our servicemen and women who already face disproportionate stress in service to our country today. Please think about all those immigrant families in our community and about all the invaluable contributions they have made to our city's social, economic and cultural fabric. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you so much. Give the congressman our best. Next speakers, please.
Speaker 11: Good afternoon. My name is Susanna Alvarez, and I am the oldest daughter of Jose Alvarez today. I'm here to thank Councilman Aranda and council peers and Councilman Gonzalez for taking the leadership in an issue that is not only impacts me, but millions of immigrants across this country. I also want to thank the mayor of Long Beach and the offices of Congressman Alan Lowenthal for having our back in these times of open racism and disregard for human life. I am here in the Chambers of LAMP because of the horror of the City of Long Beach, singing the song of justice for my father to support his return to us. His return to his family has returned to the city of Long Beach. My father was unjust, unjustly deported with the contribution of one police officer from California State University in Long Beach. There's one officer alone who acted like an ICE agent. Took my father to the campus, held him there until ICE came to deport him to Mexico. His deportation, of course, so quickly that the lawyers and immigration rights organizations didn't have enough time to intervene to stop it. However, we have been receiving support from organizations locally and nationally. As a Latina mother and woman, I am concerned for the future of my children. I am concerned about my kids growing up without their grandfather. I am concerned for the seven generations of children who will grow up without their grandfathers or their mother, simply because the deportation machine has no regard for who has no regard for human life. Today. My tears won't be of sadness. My tears would be of hope. I hope and have faith. Though we approached President Obama, we will plead and urge him to bring back housing. I want my father back. And President Obama has the authority to approve his request to come back. And today, the resolution will help in bringing my father back. On a related note, when we held an event at the border. So for my father coming back, my mom and my siblings were in an unfortunate car accident. My mother is in the hospital in San Diego right now being treated for her injuries. Now more than ever, we need our father back. Thank you for the city of Long Beach, for protecting immigrants, and for urging President Obama to try to bring back Jose, my father. Thank you from the bottom of my heart.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much for speaking. That's speaker.
Speaker 9: Hello. Good castle. I just want to say, hopefully this resolution passes very. Thank you for your time and for all the effort, you guys, from the effort of the, uh, the, the people who has helped us as well. Um, thank.
Speaker 0: It's Victor, right? Yes. Well, first of all, Victor, I just want to thank you for your service to our country. My grandmother, your other brother, his portrait. Okay. I thought it was you. So it's okay. Well, thank him for his service to the country. And thank you for being here. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 7: Good afternoon. My name is and that I don't know. And my community organizer with the great Long Beach Interfaith Community Organization. I started organizing with ICA about more than a little more than two years ago. So start a. Mary was one of the first leaders that came with me and has been organizing with me. She's been volunteered by her husband and other members of her family. Now, is the sister involved who today is in a hospital in San Diego and couldn't be here if I was Joseph's wife? This case hits home today. I urge you to please support Josef Albers and his family. This vote doesn't is not just to bring Josie back, but this vote will also give the students the hope and insurance that the city will start with them. And he also will give the immigrant community in Long Beach a message that the city stands with them. And in these moments of fear, you are willing to take action to bring and to keep families together. And that's what we need today. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 7: Well, I mean, Maria Reyes, yesterday I keep our eye on a general gathering of those Gonzalez, kipper poblano salpointe Potrero, Jose Burger. They are more important. They're separate to Casa. Forgive me. And why not? So from an accident in Tijuana, yesterday was probably not anyone missed hospital hospitalization. You know, you're not supposed to recuperar it. You alone operate on Cinco versus a mere man on a particular in L.A..
Speaker 0: So, you know, they may get less noticed that that translate. But at the OC, you know, just go ahead and just translate for what she said. That'd be great.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry I didn't catch it. Can we start?
Speaker 0: Sure, I can. I can translate the beginning. So I think it's okay. What what she said essentially was, is she's very concerned, obviously, about the case, and she's very concerned about her sister, who was in a terrible accident in Tijuana. She spent she still been in Tijuana for five months, I think is what I think is what you said.
Speaker 7: In May as.
Speaker 0: Well. Five surgeries. It's for one month that she's had a variety of surgeries. And it's very important for you for for him to be able to return to the United States. And if you want to continue, let her continue in the police and you're.
Speaker 11: On.
Speaker 7: See reality what or may not be Yeltsin corporacion this is I.
Speaker 1: Would say my sister has already had five surgeries.
Speaker 7: You know, what I'm aware of within the U.S. generally went through the process Albania the and then came over LA.
Speaker 0: So what we'll do is just so we can understand it, we'll let her say a few sentences and then if you want to translate, then let her speak and then will translate. It'll just be easier to hear because it's a little hard. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Let me. Okay.
Speaker 7: Okay, okay. Okay. Yeah. And Barcelona is one area.
Speaker 1: And my concern is that when they bring her home.
Speaker 7: I'll wait to see who told us that.
Speaker 1: All of her children work.
Speaker 7: Experience so they.
Speaker 1: They'll have their jobs and there's no one.
Speaker 7: There's.
Speaker 1: There's not there's not going to be anyone. There will there's not going to be anyone to be able to tend to her. She'll have to go to the doctor.
Speaker 7: Danny gave up, and we'll have to retire. We'll, uh.
Speaker 1: We'll need to take her to therapy. She needs her husband so that she can get around.
Speaker 7: But as we all know, some point in the story you wouldn't say.
Speaker 1: And that's the reason why I'm asking for your support to help us to get hotel back. It is very important.
Speaker 7: So is we majekodunmi and also prone to the necessity of his.
Speaker 1: His youngest has also suffered an injury. He all he also needs his father so that he can take him to the doctor because she is not able to.
Speaker 7: He is no necessity. Welcome in parochial throwback. One royal reporter on the throne.
Speaker 1: We also need him so that he can work. And he is he can support his family when he was deported. Now, she was the one that was working.
Speaker 7: But a border parliamentary in Montana and also.
Speaker 1: In order to pay the rent and support the family.
Speaker 7: But what a blessing. Why again, not the people? Most people.
Speaker 1: Now there is no one that can look after the younger children.
Speaker 7: Whereas the more important. He at the end.
Speaker 1: And that is the reason why it is so important that he comes back so that he can look after his family.
Speaker 7: It is one more in York and why not the end as soon as this little girl get on? Well, I know, I know.
Speaker 1: It is very difficult to know that my sister is down there and that there is no one there that can help her if she needs to be moved around.
Speaker 7: So I get one day you get a certain amount of nothing for a man of the year. And up in there.
Speaker 1: She's there all by herself. And there are times when she needs to use the restroom. Restroom, and there's no one. So she needs to call on the nurses. And the nurses aren't always available.
Speaker 7: Where would you say Margaret ICAC would appoint.
Speaker 1: That is, that is all. Thank you very much. And please support us. Please help us.
Speaker 0: To send you to this next speaker, please.
Speaker 7: My name is Elena macias. Good. Good evening.
Speaker 11: Ladies and gentlemen. The United States is a nation of immigrants. Over the past 240 years, the nation has gone through four periods of immigration policies, the last three largely founded on fear and prejudice that tended to escalate with each period of national instability. Only the first 85 years of immigration were relatively free and open. Citizenship, however, was limited to Anglo-Saxon Protestant men of property. Citizenship for women was limited. In 1804. It was restored with the passage of the 19th Amendment in 1920, but was not fully realized until 1940. The second period resulted after the rise of worsening economic conditions in some parts of the country. Congress passed the Chinese Exclusion Act and the Immigration Act of 1882. These laws sought to limit competition for worker wages and set the national quota system. The policy to preserve the national origins of the United States population to that of the previous census. It would not be until 1965, at the height of the civil rights movement, that immigration would open to Latin America, Africa and Asian Asia. 30 years later, the opening was cause for a backlash in some quarters against diversity. The third period changed from economic security to national security issues due to the threat of World War Three excuse me, World War Two. Enforcement of the borders and strict numbers of immigrants were instituted as well as targeted deportation. Fear of communism exacerbated concerns. We moved from free and open to terrorism as a current and fourth driver of migration policies in 1996. After terrorist attack, the Federal Government made a radical shift to limit habeas corpus and create a new detention industry. The result is widespread arrest and deportation of immigrants. With the passage of two laws the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act and the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, the net cast for terrorist was even wider for foreigners that included the unauthorized immigrant as well as the authorized and the legal permanent resident. A simple stop for a broken tail light that used to result in a fix it ticket became grounds for detaining immigrants. A misdemeanor, if committed by an immigrant became a felony, thus grounds for immediate deportation. An individual who had served a sentence for nonviolent offenses became a target for deportation the minute he was released from jail.
Speaker 0: We got to serve the time as I was going to wrap it up.
Speaker 11: I urge you to support the return of Mr. Alvarez under the California Trust Act. The police officer had no duty to detain him. It happened because the policeman was informed. Had this happened to an immigrant in a similar situation just two decades before. The family would be intact. I urge you to support the question before you and reunite this family again.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Hello. My name is Maribel Cruz and I'm with the Long Beach Immigrant Rights Coalition. I am here today in support of Jose Alvarez to his family. Just as you heard, his family has suffered through the tragedy of family separation, which is one of the biggest fears in the undocumented community. As a representative of this organization who has fought for immigrant rights locally for the last ten years. We cannot let the injustice, of course, this case go without a fight. California has supported undocumented people through providing access to health care, driver's license and other programs. And we cannot let the deportations and the separations of family go unchallenged. The average family represents thousands of families here, locally and regionally. They represent millions of families across the nation as well during the election process. Immigrants were used as scapegoats and talking point. And we cannot turn a blind eye to the real pain and the injustice that is that this family is experiencing. This is why organizations like LBI Mercy I go in and Dawn came together to support this family in this year. We have held press conferences, actions at the border and circulated petitions and even testified at the state legislature in support of the Truth Act and will continue to support Jose in his appeal to come back to this country, to his home as an undocumented person and resident of the fourth District. I am disappointed that my council member is not here to listen to the testimonies and to vote on this resolution because family separation happens in the fourth district as well. Every day, immigrant communities are threatened with unjust policies and practices that target the immigrant community. I stand here as a beacon of justice and organization, will not stop fighting for his say, his family and our community. I urge all the council members to support this resolution and bring Jose back. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Good evening, Mayor. Good evening. City Council and city staff. My name is Tanya Omalu IU and I am a resident of the First District. I am a member of the Building Healthy Communities Long Beach Steering Committee and also the founder of Project Alpha, our organization advocates for the reentry of formerly incarcerated individuals. And as a proud member of all of us or none. A national, grassroots, civil and human rights organizations fighting for the rights of formerly and currently incarcerated people and their families. We are fighting against the discrimination that people face every day because of arrest or conviction history, as we see with our brother, Jose Alvarez. Through our grassroots organizing, we are building a powerful political movement to win full restoration of our human and civil rights. I'm here tonight to ask you for your support of the humanitarian parole of Jose Alvarez in June. The Beach c Long Beach Steering Committee wrote a letter asking President Obama to stand by Jose and his opportunity to be reunited with his family. And today I stand here to ask you, the city council, to please do the same. Jose, his case is unique, but his story is shared by so many others. Jose served his time for his 21 year old felony conviction and has since worked hard to support his family. California voters are recently increasingly asking for second chances for our community and reform of our justice system. From the passages of Proposition 47 to Proposition 57 to the success of many community based efforts, these propositions fill me with hope that we do not have to live a life sentence of incarceration for the time we spent behind bars . Jose was caught in the middle of a very harsh immigration policy and local law enforcement's collaboration with immigration officials. His individual situation was not considered. He was simply labeled a high priority system, some even at high risk and deported, disrupting his and his family's life. Deportations like this tear Long Beach families apart. And it's not just the Latino community. It's Cambodians families. It's Filipino families. It's Samoan families and so many others. This instability leads to stress trauma impacting our community's health and well-being. As a formerly incarcerated individual. I was given a second chance by many of you sitting here. I was allowed to share my passion for community service by getting involved and giving back to my community. You see, I cannot and do not really want to give back, but I do, because that is the only way I can heal . I believe that a safe and just community includes embracing those who have made wrong decisions and are now courageous change agents in our community. I thank you and the City Council for second chances and for the opportunity to be rehabilitated and now reunited with my family. Jose, too, deserves this opportunity to be granted humanitarian parole and the necessity to be with his family.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please. Um.
Speaker 5: Well, my name is one where I come from. Bixby North. So, uh, just a few things I got to say. Make it quick. Um, well, first of all, this paranoia of immigrants is really. I mean, it kind of goes against the very creation of our country since. Our country was literally built from immigrants, whether they were from England, Africa, France. Everywhere. Okay. Okay. Now we're feeling now we're just here fearing people coming from our southern borders that are mostly that are mostly natives, I mean, generally mixed natives, but they're mostly natives. But, you know, I mean, originally this was this was their land. I don't see why we have to keep doing this. And then another thing is that, like, look, like many people said, these minor offenses should not be basis for deportation. I mean, come on. Not not having your lights fixed properly. Like how? Getting deported for that. How is that going to fix anything, really? And then. Because of this, these things, people tend to live in fear. And, you know, it's it makes it hard for people to live in everyday life and support their families. And then here's another thing, because many because these people have to support their families and sometimes even the rest of the country working in farms, manufac, you know, manufacturing plants and other such places. Well, we're limiting their ability to do that. And my last point here is that we should serve as an example for every other city and basically the rest of the country as a sanctuary for immigration, for for workers. And this this will be another step towards a truly free United States of America. I am done.
Speaker 3: Excuse me. What is your father, Juan? Why are you here? I'm right there. You know, you went. I remember. I remember you when you were very small. Good job. Thank you for being here.
Speaker 7: Well, our future is bright. I want to thank you for putting this on the agenda. You know, I realize that it was on the agenda about two weeks ago, but it's really taken on a different a different color now, a different tone. And so I think it's important that everyone's here. You know, Mayor Garcetti said, we see something that is hostile to our people, to our city, bad for our economy, bad for our security. We will speak up. We will speak out. We will act up and we will act out. He went on to say that the Los Angeles Police Department will continue to enforce a special order for the Gates signed directed that bars officers from contacting someone solely to determine their immigration status and went on to quote Our law enforcement officers and LAPD. Do not don't go around asking people for their papers, nor should they. That's not the role of local law enforcement, he said. And I would suggest that that's the same for the campus police. You know, we're not supposed to be afraid of our president. We're not supposed to be afraid of our police chief. We're not supposed to be afraid of going to school or picking up our kids from school. We do that every day and everyone else should have that freedom. The word of the day is fear, as that gentleman up there said. I think he's left now. But as community and civic leaders, we cannot let our community live in fear. If you don't address the fear your community is feeling, if you remain absent or you stay at home, or if we have leaders, do not stand in front or stand besides our community to keep the city from feeling unsafe . We're not part of the solution to calling the fears of our community. LAPD Chief Beck said, We are not going to engage in law enforcement activities solely based on somebody's immigration status. We are not going to work in conjunction with Homeland Security on deportation efforts. That is not our job, nor will I make it our job. And for that, I take my hat off to Chief Beck. This is me wondering what about the city of Long Beach? I want to first highlight and thank Mayor Garcia. I he was on the stage was senator our new senator, Kamala Harris at the table a presentation where they came out and also said that there needs to be some assurances for our immigrant populations and others. But I would like to know what actions will you take to help residents of Long Beach? Students at Long Beach Unified School District, students at Cal State, Long Beach, Long Beach City College. What actions will we take to make them feel safer? President Johnson. Jane Connelly, after those deportation initiated by her campus officers, said that temporary orders in place to protect undocumented people from being detained for immigration violations by campus police are now permanent. You can be certain that we will continue. Cal State, Long Beach, long standing tradition of welcoming the family and friends of our students regardless of their status. So we have an opportunity to act to make a statement. It's just a resolution. It's a nonbinding, non enforceable action that is symbolic to show support and acknowledge the fear in the community. But it matters and it matters to us. It matters to the community, matters to everyone behind me. So I ask that you send a message to our community that you care, that we want everyone who calls Long Beach home to feel safe and leaders in L.A. have come forward. Cal State, Long Beach, the leaders have come forward. And I know that we're looking for you to come forward as well and support this resolution. I thank you for your time and consideration.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Hi. Good night, council and everybody here. My name is Alexis Namatjira and I'm staff organizer at the National Day Laborer Organizing Network. We work for we work with low wage workers, day laborers. When I those who are not let us who are most of the time some of the most impacted by immigration enforcement. When we first heard about the Jose Alvarez case, we decided to take it on a pro-bono basis and working alongside WRC and ICAO. And now we're here. Hi. On behalf of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network, I would like to commend what's going on right now. I would like to commend the sort of the bravery with you are elected officials who are about to take such an important action, even though it's not binding. Even though we know that you don't have the authority to bring their back, but you do have a microphone that you can amplify and you're staying true to your constituents and their actions. So I would like to really commend you for that. You know, we're we're extremely happy to work under the you know, with the leadership of Congressman, I don't know, one time their staff, you know, not only will we be able, if this passes, to deliver this resolution to President Obama next week, but also to deliver a congressional sign on letter.
Speaker 3: To amend that.
Speaker 0: 2013 policy that Iran to start from law and his office addressed, where the administration sort of, you know, failed to take a step further to protect the entire lives of sort of the diversity of experiences of American soldiers. You know, we absolutely support a change in our policy as well. And we know that we're in extreme danger and we have a target in our backs because of President elect Trump. But we vowed to, you know, continue to work with the most impact that we vow to continue to work with our partners, including, you know, to come in defense if there are any attacks whatsoever from this action. Thank you very much. Have a great night. We expect a positive outcome and we look forward to bringing Rosette back and taking this message to the White House later on this month to urge President Obama to bring her back. Thank you very much. Thank you. And before the next speaker, I'm going to close the speakers list and the other speakers that are going to get in line. Please get in line. Any other speakers? Okay. So what I'm going to do also is unless there's counsel. Objection, I don't think there is. Because of the the length of time we have, we're gonna go down to 2 minutes. Okay. So. And if you need translation, I'm at double your time. Okay? So don't worry. If you need translation, you'll be fine. But, Madam Clerk, if you can reflect that and please continue.
Speaker 9: So, first and foremost, thank you for taking the time and, you know, hearing our resolution, hearing all of our stories. My name is Luis Flores. I'm the president of Fuel Future underrepresented educated leaders, as well as a dog and youth coordinator for the mayor's Office of Immigrant Affairs here at L.A.. So, you know firsthand to have the experience of, you know, working with these communities, working with all of our undocumented students on campus at Calle Colombia, there's close to 1000 undocumented students. So, you know, when when the news broke out that, you know, Jose had been deported, it created an uncertainty between just not just the campus community , but between, you know, a lot of us here at home. You know, this was a story that was heard around the media. It wasn't something it was something that was more locally known. You know, there were students even doubting taking their parents to a graduation ceremony because they feared even having, you know, their parents being deported just for seeing them graduate, which is not something that's supposed to happen. Universities are supposed to be, you know, a safe space. Like, you know, there's been a lot of conversation around Sanctuary University going on with the UC chancellor and all that type of stuff. You know, university is supposed to be a safe space. And, you know, you guys here, as our elected representatives, have the opportunity to set the tone and to support us here in our resolution. And, you know, like I said, we're going to make it short and quick. You know, I have you know, we're just really supportive and really thank you for all your time and support the beginning so far. So let's bring Jose back. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. You're all you're all in fuel. A great program at Cal State Long Beach. So thank you for for that book.
Speaker 7: Next speaker when as much as me tomorrow sister will baby one in six to these three told me my name is Estuardo and I live in the sixth district. A.S. Bissaka took exception. I would like you to know it's better, I think, unpleasant. Beside your character, they say punk is so unique. Persona move into my community before starting. I would like you to know that I'm a person very involved in the community. So in a.
Speaker 1: Community or también.
Speaker 7: Community involved person but also so persona came to look at local community that about them. I am also a person who involves the community so that the community will vote illegal. So they'll say the case of Jose. Is in particular is particularly on Castle Calhoun. It must prove Lemus case that shows more problems than it was familiar to. Friend though we have families that are suffering the most, Ninos Castaneda handle the qualification. Children whose grades are going down.
Speaker 1: Mama Maria's studies were stellar.
Speaker 11: My friend.
Speaker 7: Maria Esther. Studies was stellar. Is devastated. But not until your considerable the they ponied up the insulin is the. For that reason I think that we should pay attention to this case. Jack, I realize you're not machismo and cheesy muscle free me into it as much as it has brought up on a lot a lot of suffering expressed curiously yesterday. Kiev, Orlando, Podesta, Castle equal say. For that reason, I am today showing my advocacy for Josie's case. But what about repeated? Because as I repeat see and I went to the committee all alone they lito if when he was young he committed a crime elope ago he paid for it. No, no, I must say. I mean just go say in Nazi that and it's not only Jose say there are many houses in the city it those a clear but so if he already paid up in case momentarily the opportunity that I think it's time to give him an opportunity. Berkeley, a c la comunidad immigrant at the Net Esperanza, because in that way the community of immigrants are going is going to be, I hope, the killer. Yes. Some posters. That the that laws are fair. Casey commit the only road that if I make a mistake kanaloa committed. Who has not made a mistake? Your Pensacola Maria de nosotros remains committed on a roll. And I think that the majority of us have made a mistake when we were young. But you can be familiar. But we change because our family can be almost put a lot more than seahorse. We changed because of the love we feel for our children. You know, school improvement demos. I'll sit on my horses, Theranos, and we promise to become better citizens. Corazon Aquino will be the power forward. For that reason, today I'm asking you to please keep voting vote but regressing so that Jose can come back. But I could. But I do that as a spouse so that he can help his wife. But I closed Suzy Joe's parents services qualification so that his children's grades can improve, but to impact the totals because this impacts everyone. The decision to my Mousawi The decision that we take today by impacting them is going to impact the future. Muchas gracias. Thank you very much. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Middle class US Senator next week.
Speaker 1: My name is Alex Bellinger from Cal State Long Beach. I'm just going to reiterate what Fuel said when this happened on campus. Our undocumented students were terrified. They felt unsafe. And they still do. Especially after last week two. And while I can't speak on behalf of Colby as a whole, I know that I and Hilda, as well as so many students, support this resolution. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Good evening. My name is Hilda. I'd like to just begin by saying that I personally know Victor and his younger sister. And when I heard this story, I was so heartbroken that I can only imagine how he felt and his little sister felt along with his whole family. It wasn't until a few months later when the ICAC came into my house and took my own brother. It wasn't until I felt the same pain. Sorry if I get a little teary, but it is an issue that has been occurring all over Long Beach and and it's something that should be taken into consideration.
Speaker 7: And I believe that it's time that you show your constituents that you do care.
Speaker 1: So. Sorry. And so I highly, highly encourage you all.
Speaker 7: To support this resolution.
Speaker 1: Because it's happening.
Speaker 7: Nationwide. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Hello. Good evening. Council. I thought I might say something in support of this resolution, but also. As that. You actually hear what's happening here. People are scared of the police, the the the people that are employed to protect us. People are scared of. And I brought this up before in this room to you guys here. And I feel it's been ignored and you guys shouldn't be ignoring it. It should be something that's on your agenda to fix every day. If people are saying that their family are being deported and you want to support it, well, make some changes within the government. I've talked to a lot of officers out here that said, well, we are only obligated to do what we want to do. I talked to sergeants. I talked to watch commanders, lieutenants, all of them say the same thing. They're not obligated to follow every law. They're only obligated to follow whatever the law they choose. And so with that in mind, why would it be so difficult for them to put aside a simple stop for a tail light being out or for something simple like that? Something my Newt. It just doesn't make sense. And for you guys to say, oh, yeah, well, we support what you guys are saying. Well, you have to go beyond that. You have to make some changes in your in your policies and procedures. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker. And just as a reminder, this was not the Long Beach Police Department, but it was the late Cal State Long Beach University police. It's not the same department. Go ahead. Next speaker.
Speaker 7: My name is Celia McGill. I have been nice living here in Long Beach and I am single mom with three children, 26 and a three citizen. Dad, this is 22 and 19. My life here in noisy ikea been working very hard to support my citizen in in I support this story because I feel in in that situation when I got my citizenship I spent a hard time trying to get it. I, I have to pay a lot of a lot of money for lawyers. I have to go to the court. I get to fight with with it. Many people with a lot of people. And until now, I don't understand how this country be new people from all the countries. And for us, the people living here for a long time and we are here working hard to support the system in any time we are in race to the station. They support us when we are they they they ask when we are all and seek when we give in everything, all or energy, when our children's grow up, we we don't get any friends in our country when or life we are living here now we are with this system in our family is here. We have not no normal life over there. That's why I support these gays. It is I was feeling in this case, my situation. They really can they make it this story that made me cry that that made me cry. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you so much. Next week.
Speaker 5: Thank you.
Speaker 0: My name's Andrew. Do you want to help him out with so we can lift the. You can lift it. There you go. Okay. I just want to make sure that you're right. I appreciate it. Thanks.
Speaker 5: Okay. Thanks. My name's Andrew Guy, and I actually live in Councilmember Pierce's district. In January, I'll begin classes at Cal State Long Beach during our teaching credential. And it really shames me to think that the university where I'll be earning that credential, was instrumental in tearing apart a family that's so, like so many other families, I'll be serving as an educator in our city. Long Beach prides itself on its diversity, like Councilmember Pearce said, and many families of many different ethnicities and economic backgrounds make the city their home. They were given its character and its vibrancy. And yet one of Long Beach's major institutions caused the Alvarez family to fall victim to a system of immigration and drug control laws that target and disproportionately punish our working class neighbors of color. Many of our friends and neighbors are looking uneasily at the prospect of the next four years under the leadership of a man who has made plain his contempt for them and his disregard for what they contribute to our community. Many of them are as vulnerable to the injustice visited upon the Alvarez family as Mr. Alvarez himself was. Many of these families, the same families at Cal State Long Beach is intended to serve, are afraid to send their children near that campus . It is our duty as a community to protect one another. And the people of Long Beach are looking to the council tonight to help us do so. I hope that the city will do the right thing and assist Mr. Alvarez in getting back to his family and to Long Beach where he belongs. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Good luck on that credential.
Speaker 1: Speaker Hello. My name is Alicia morales, lead organizer with the Long Beach Immigrant Rights Coalition, one of the groups on this case, also a resident of the Second District. And I just want to thank you for taking the time to listen to this story and to the community and to the organizations and most importantly, to the family . Through this heartbreaking and tumultuous time. You've heard their fears, you've heard the realities that a lot of our people are living in. And you've also heard their their spirit to keep fighting for justice. The family felt great devastation after the first appeal got denied. The first appeal got denied. And we hope that with your support by passing this resolution, that his second appeal will be heard once again. And hopefully this time the outcome will be different. I encourage you and I ask that you not just support this family, but with everything that's going on in this time with the president that has a president elect that has instilled so much fear in our community. I cannot explain how many tears I have to see and go through every day.
Speaker 7: People are scared and they need you during this time when fear is common for us.
Speaker 1: We need to know that you have our back. How you're going to defend us. That you're going to help us.
Speaker 7: Our livelihood and our safety depend on you.
Speaker 1: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And then, as it was, Mr. Goodyear, you're the final speaker. Okay. Yes, sir.
Speaker 3: Good evening. My name is James Davidson on the president of the Westminster Chamber of Commerce, a certified public accountant, a certified government financial manager, and a certified fraud examiner. The topic I'd like to speak on tonight is fraud. Is this the proper time to do that or are you entertaining? Only this topic.
Speaker 0: Only this.
Speaker 3: Topic. Okay. I beg your pardon. So when is the.
Speaker 0: So public comment section is actually over? However, there is at the end of the meeting there is a second public comment period that you're welcome to address. Okay. If if your issue is is not on the agenda tonight, you can address it at the end of the meeting.
Speaker 3: All right. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Speaker. Very good U cleric as he addressed a number of issues. First of all. No one in this city who's an immigrant here legally should have any concerns whatsoever. Period. I want to address actually the law, as I understand it. And it's rather ironic what took place here this evening that is taking place mirrors what took place in the L.A. County Board of Supervisors chambers about a year ago, where busloads.
Speaker 3: Busloads of.
Speaker 0: Busloads of immigrants illegal came in and addressing the need to divorce them, had the county divorced themselves from the federal policy, so forth. And it started out with everybody speaking in their 3 minutes. So many were there. They also had to cut it down after three and a half hours to 2 to 2 minutes and less than that. And.
Speaker 3: To an event, real.
Speaker 0: Victims, i.e. or there were three of them whose family is three families whose members whose family members were slaughtered. As a result of gang members illegal that were released from prison because they didn't turn them over to ICE's so it. Again the people in this city who are immigrants. If you're here legally, you should have no problem whatsoever. And I found it rather astounding that we have people from a university that don't understand what happens when a nation does not maintain effective immigration policies. Period. If the man was not stopped because he was of one color or another, he was stopped because he had a red light period. And then they followed the controlling existing law. If the law needs to be changed, you change it. Thank you. Time's up. Thank you. Okay. Public comment is closed. We'll go back to the city council. Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and thank you to everyone who came out to speak tonight. I want to start by thanking my colleague, Councilman Urunga. I had an opportunity to speak with him tonight before the council meeting started. And I can't express in words how appreciative I am for the compassion and the sentiment behind this item. And I did not know until tonight that he had actually traveled to the border. And I one of the things that I really value. There's many things I value about my colleagues. But one of the things I really value about him is that he is a man who works very hard and with a lot of passion. And certainly this is one such issue where he's exemplified that passion and the sentiment. And I want to applaud him for his efforts. I think he just has. Bringing this issue forward is a very, very important issue. And I cannot overstate the commitment and the sentiment that he brought and how valuable that is to our community. This council has more immigrants than most other cities in this country. And our commitment to immigrants and immigrant rights is very unique. I believe it was about a year ago that I had the opportunity to vote on an item that supported federal legislation in terms of immigration reform. And I was very proud to support that item and continue to believe it's something that we need to work on as a nation. And I agree with the sentiment of several of the speakers regarding the fear. The fear is real. The fear in light of the election for many people is real. Many people throughout the process of this election were demonized as a result of their religion, their background, because their parents may come from a country that is not one that is of much popularity with certain rhetoric. I understand that fear very personally, and I know that it's real. I do want to say, though, that my. Concern with this item, and I shared this with Councilman Yarrawonga. I've had the opportunity to research this issue since it was first on the agenda several weeks ago and. I reached out to the city attorney today and I reached out to Councilman Yarrawonga about whether there's any way that we could work together as a community and as a city to find a pathway for Josie that's realistic and feasible. Because if you research humanitarian parole, it is a very, very narrow, limited exception within the federal law and one that is extremely difficult to qualify under. That's the reality. I've had the opportunity to research this issue and speak with federal officials who are familiar with humanitarian parole. And one thing that folks on this, people who come to the meetings have realized about me is that you may not always agree with me or my analysis, but I do meet with everyone. I really research things and study hard. And what I don't like to do is give people a sense of false hope because it feels really great in the council chamber when we vote on something and we get the applause. But we know as council members or we might know or we might have a sense that what we're voting on is actually something that we have no power over. We recently voted on an issue like that, and I don't know how we turn around and speak with that community because they left here with a sense of hope. And so my concern with this item is I wonder if my colleagues and this item is going to pass. It's going to pass regardless of how I vote. And that's that's for sure. But I wonder if my colleagues would be interested in having a resolution that goes more towards not this particular case, because there are thousands of families in the same situation as Josie. Thousands. I deal with families like that in my day job and hearing from children who have been victims of crime, who have been separated from their family and trying to survive on their own here in the country, it is very, very tragic what happens to the families. So I wonder if it would be more appropriate for us as a council. To author a resolution that urges, through the help of our congressmen, some changes in the law to allow for situations like this, because humanitarian parole really doesn't apply to this situation. If you read the law, if you read the letter of the law, there's only one element in the elements of that particular law that might qualify for this situation. And it's the public interest element. And there's really nothing about this situation that the federal government, not me, but the federal government is going to consider separate and apart from the other families that are going through this situation to qualify as the public interest exception. So I wonder if there's an interest by my colleagues to author some sort of a resolution that that more urges a change in federal law in regards to this issue, then as to focus on a specific situation, knowing that we may not be as impactful as we'd like ultimately in the outcome. And again, if that's something my colleagues are interested in of this item, I would ask that we urge the city attorney to draft such a resolution. And again, I, I would like to hear from my colleagues if they're interested in that. The other issue I have with this item is I really think this is a federal issue. In this particular case, the federal authorities are given the task of evaluating each application on a case by case basis and making a determination on a case by case basis. We are in the situation now with Josie, and my my heart goes out so desperately to the family. But again, we might have a situation next week or a month from now or six months from now with the family going through the same thing. And how are we going to say no to that family? We can't either author case specific resolutions, but we can as a city, unite to author something that's more general and more broad and hopefully more impactful on the general policy as opposed to a specific situation that may not fall under the parameters. So I commend the authors of this item for bringing it forward. I thank Councilman Yarrawonga for giving me the time today to share with me honestly and allow me to share with him honestly and to respect our differences in regards to the issue at hand. And I thank everyone who came out genuinely from the bottom of my heart for coming out. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember Uranium.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Go to one person and thank you for your price, for your comments and for your recognition of my efforts that we're doing here tonight. There's some things that you said that obviously I can't agree with, and there are some things that, you know, we have to agree to disagree. And to further the discussion in regards to a comprehensive immigration law policy, I don't think is within the purview of this council. I also don't think that we can affect federal change, at least not quickly enough for this case that's taking place, obviously. So I can't support a change in the current language that we have as a draft to support the humanitarian parole. In our discussion that we had earlier, I mentioned about I mentioned four things. You know, there's the law, the spirit of the law. What's the political politically correct and what's right. And I finished my conversation with, I think that this is the right thing to do because of the devastation that has this has caused to a to a family that did not deserve this kind of treatment, a fix it ticket. To go and morph into a. Wider discussion, broad discussion about immigration and immigration rights was just incredible. And that's why we're here, because there was an unauthorized stop. There was a. Ay ay ay ay ay ay ay ay effort from a sole police officer to inject himself or herself into an issue that he had no business being in who was first of all outside his jurisdiction to even execute that stop. Just made a lot of things wrong in in this case and that's why I stepping forward in supporting the humanitarian parole. And in the end, this resolution will not change the law. It may not even change Mr. Alvarez's condition. What this resolution does is tell the Department of Homeland Security that he has a community behind him. That he has people who support his case, that he has a community that recognizes that there was a mistake made many years ago. That he paid. Four through service in in in jail. That he paid his his debt to society. And has changed his life around. Which to me raises the question when is it determinable for a person to be considered rehab? I mean, if that's a definition, then where an individual has. Raised a family, raised a son to serve his country, who has started a business paying taxes and sending his kids through school. If that is not if that is not rehabilitation, I don't know what is. And if that is not turning a life around to become a productive citizen of not only Long Beach, but of this country, I don't know what is. You talked about creating a false sense of hope about. What do we have, if not hope? At any time. For any reason. And that's what this resolution does. It provides him with hope. It might not be. The outcome is still up with the Department of Health of Homeland Security is still their decision. All we're doing is saying, please consider all the factors in Mr. Alvarez's background. Consider his family, consider the need that they have for him. I just learned tonight that his wife is hospitalized and going through surgeries. When else is the husband important? To his wife if not at a tire need of of Merkel need at that point. This case goes beyond immigration. This case now becomes truly, truly becomes a humanitarian case. And that's why I urge my fellow colleagues here tonight to please pass this resolution for humanitarian parole, because it is the humanitarian thing for us to do. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 6: Thank you. It's hard to follow. You can't remember hearing because I think you said it so well. But I want to be clear, we can do two things today. I want to recognize that the community and the family that's been working so hard to bring Jose back has done their research. They have found the best path that they feel that they can utilize to try to bring Jose back. And so I don't want to undermine any of the work, the tireless nights that you guys have have tried to figure out a way to get Jose home. And so I, of course, will be supporting this item, you know, to say it again, yes, we should do this tonight because it's the right thing to do on a multitude of levels. But too, I want to thank Councilmember Price for bringing up the idea and the concept that, yes, this is one person and one issue, but how are we as a city thinking outside of that? And so to have so many people living in fear every single day means that we have to act today, but that we can also act in a thoughtful manner in the long term. And so I would like to suggest that we do direct staff to figure out what is an overarching policy that we or an ordinance or some direction for our city to say that we have your back, that no resident, as Tonio said, should live in fear of their president, of their police, of their school. And what are we in Long Beach doing to make sure that we can go forward on that path? So when I went to urge a yes vote and to I would like to ask our city attorney if there a process that we can move forward on.
Speaker 10: Councilwoman Prysmian members. PIERSON Members of the City Council. Obviously, the item that pertains to Mr. Alvarez is on the agenda tonight. The other item that you're discussing really wasn't agenda is outside the scope of Mr. Alvarez's issue. So my suggestion would be if the council wants to entertain, that is another item that that we brought back with a suggestion that it be sent to possibly the federal legislation committee for consideration. That would be the best path to move that forward.
Speaker 6: Great. Thank you so much. So the the item that we would vote on today would be the same that's in front of everybody. And then we would ask for a second item to be directed to Fed Ledge. For some research on that that we could come back to.
Speaker 5: And also add that that federal led agenda will be in front of the council shortly. So it's currently going through the review process at Federal Committee and it will be coming shortly to you for you to.
Speaker 10: Add or delete anything to the agenda you'd like.
Speaker 1: Great. Thank you.
Speaker 0: I want to just get a clarification from Councilmember Pearce, because I know that as part of our federal agenda, we have a pretty robust kind of immigration reform agenda. And so that's there in place. So I'm I'm assuming, Councilman Pearce, that what you're discussing is essentially the the that this this would happen this resolution or this addition to the federal legislation that would have to do with this specific type of situation. Yes, right. That yes. Reference by Councilmember Pearce. I just want to clarify. We're not talking about price. Pearce. Price, yes. Sorry. So, yes, I just want to make sure to clarify that, because we do have a large immigration reform policy on the agenda that's going to come before the council in a couple of weeks, I think. And so this is in reference to the families, this specific issue, but broader than that. Okay. Good. Okay, so that's the. So, Councilmember Ranga, do you accept that as I'm assuming a friendly motion from Councilmember Pearce?
Speaker 3: Actually, I don't think it's a motion. I think it's something that we can bring back at a later date.
Speaker 0: Okay. You're going to bring it back. Okay. So we bring back another date. That's fine as well. Councilman super now.
Speaker 2: Thank you. I would also like to thank everyone for speaking tonight and speaking with passion. I, too, met with the councilmember this afternoon and thank you, Councilmember Turanga, for your passion and taking all your time and energy on this. I don't think anyone can deny the the each councilmember support for the immigrant communities. I think we've demonstrated that immensely. But I do want to echo Councilmember Price's concern that we don't want to do something that's misleading or are providing false hope. So I sit here tonight and you have to understand what a councilmember, to paraphrase Don Tanabe, I think he said something like, All I do every day is get up and help people. And that's what we try to do on a daily basis. So I'm thinking here tonight, how can I help this? Okay. As Councilmember Price said, this is going to pass tonight. But if I could add any value here, that's what I'd like to do. And it's very unique that an item like this, I don't receive any correspondence from anyone. And that was the case on this item. I didn't receive an email, a text, any letters, nothing in support of Jose. And what I would recommend moving forward is that that is put together that we have lots of testimonials here. And what's so unique for the fourth District is that this incident took place in my district. And we work very closely with Cal State, Long Beach and also the police force. The there are no northern border of Cal State, Long Beach. It's a fourth council district. And I heard nothing from them. And I just find that kind of fascinating that this with all the interest here tonight, that the agencies involved have not reached out to me. And I think that the point was made about the police force. Cal State Long Beach is a state agency, so you have a state agency somehow getting mixed up with a federal policy. And lo and behold, the irony is here we are at a local level trying to sort this out. Where are they? I would like to see them weigh in on this. I think we have a resolution. But maybe they'd like to speak up about this particular case. And I think that's the best way I can serve you tonight, is to suggest that you go after these entities and get them to come out and say, Hey , we made a mistake. Here's how we'd like to support your cause. So that's really what I have to say tonight. That's my advice. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. There's a motion and a second on the floor. Members, please go ahead and cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I do want to I just want to say one thing not related to this, but it was brought up earlier. So I think it's important to say I'm just going to reiterate something I said a few days ago when I was at Turtle Island. If you know, Charla, they're probably one of the best known groups that deals with immigrant rights really anywhere in the country. And Long Beach has and will continue to be, regardless of what happens at the federal level, supportive of immigrants, those that are undocumented, those are in the process of getting citizenship. Those that are still in students, whether they're part of fuel or they're part of there are maybe 540 students, all that entire community. And I, as an immigrant myself who wasn't born in this country, I always say the best day of my life was the day I was given the opportunity to become an American. And all of particularly the students that are undocumented and the community that's out there, they just want a chance to be able to contribute and be the best they can be for for this country and for their family. So I just want to say that Long Beach will always and this is not a partizan issue. Long Beach will always support its immigrant population, the undocumented community and everyone that calls this place home. We're always going to be supportive of. And so I just want to thank you all for coming out and for your advocacy tonight. Okay. Thank you. We're going to take up item nine, please. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Attorney to draft resolution in support of Humanitarian Parole for Jose Luis Alvarez Sandoval, Department of Homeland Security Case No. A 92 812 968. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11012016_16-0988 | Speaker 3: Motion carries the the vote go up. Okay. Item number 18. Mr. West.
Speaker 9: Mayor council members. Tonight is a real epic evening regarding the Queen Mary property. As we know, it was picked up by a company called Garrison, a financial company when Save the Queen went bankrupt. We've been working for the past several years to attract a new company, to take the lease from Garrison, where we would develop the 45 acres and also manage the Queen Mary. This is a property that I know previous director of economic development Mike Conway, has been working with for the past couple of years, and he's been briefing us so long that we're finally down to the end of the wire here. We're going to hear the rest of the presentation by Katherine McDermott, the interim director of economic development of Property Management. But this basically transitions the lease to.
Speaker 3: Urban commons, a group that we've been working with for the past.
Speaker 9: Year to facilitate.
Speaker 3: What.
Speaker 9: The task force for the Queen Mary has been putting together for guiding principles to the city council and the community. So with.
Speaker 3: That, Catherine, let me see. Thank you. I'm sorry about that, Mr.. Mr.. West, you turn it over to Catherine. Catherine McDermott.
Speaker 8: Good evening, Mayor. Council people, city staff and members of the public. We're pleased to bring this item to the council tonight for approval. As Mr. West said, this is the culmination of several years of negotiation and planning by city leaders and staff and the urban Commons team. On November 17, 2015, the City Council approved the assignment of the existing amended and restated lease for the Queen Mary from Garrison Investment to Urban Commons LLC. The lease includes the operations of the Queen Mary, Carnival Cruise Lines and Catalina Express in the 42 acres of land surrounding the ship. The Council also approved the terms and conditions of a new amended and restated lease with urban commons, which will call the new lease. The new lease was expected to be signed in the following six months or by May of 2016. The negotiations were extended past May due to several new issues. The lease terms are in that are in front of you tonight concerning the physical condition of the Queen Mary and the need for urgent repairs. Proposed terms to facilitate the construction of a replacement passenger facility for Carnival to allow urban commons to retake use of the Dome in the future for special events. And lastly, a card check neutrality agreement. First, I want to discuss the issues related to the physical condition of the Queen Mary. Garrison investments in it and its successor, Urban Commons, commissioned a marine survey of the Queen Mary. The survey concluded that there is over 200 million and repairs required to to be made to the ship. The terms of the new lease would include a pass through of revenue from Carnival to the city, which would be used for capital repairs and renovation on the ship. Based on the recommendations of the Marine survey, there are urgent repairs that require immediate attention that exceed the expected annual pass through amount. And I'm sure these slides show you some of the repairs that need to be done. Based on the recommendation of the Marine survey, Urban Commons asks the city to create a more robust fund at the onset of the new lease to address some of the urgent issues. The city and urgent in urban Commons have each agreed to divert future and current revenues from Carnival to create a fund of approximately $23 million. First, I want to make it really clear that there are no new funds being used to accomplish the ship repairs. The city's contribution will come from a combination of tidelands in Queen Mary, cash reserves and from future revenues from Carnival and Urban Commons in the form of base rent and passenger fees totaling approx. Totaling approximately. Over the first seven years the least. Sorry. Urban Commons is also contributing their share of passenger fees rosier received from Carnival in years five through ten of the new lease. The city intends to issue bonds for 17.2 million to be repaid by these revenues over the first ten years of the new lease. Secondly, the new lease also required urban commons to turn over the entire dome to Carnival for their expanded cruise operations to accommodate larger vessels expected to begin to call in Long Beach in the future. This has been accomplished, as you may have read in Carnival's recent press release, Urban Commons believes the use of the dome for an event facility is integral to its development plans. In order for urban commons to utilize the dome. They will be required to construct a passenger terminal facility for Carnival. This added cost to the development will reduce the capital for development of the vacant land and for visitor serving uses. The city and urban Commons have agreed to amend the revenue sharing provision in the new lease to increase the passenger fees paid to urban commons. The additional revenue to urban commons will help defray the cost of construction of the replacement passenger facility and preserve capital for the commercial development of the land. The reduction in resident revenue is estimated at approximately 5.375 million in the first ten years of the lease, which is the length of the bond issue. As was mentioned, the city intends to issue revenue bonds for $17.2 million. The bond issue is expected to be sized at $19 million to provide about 17.2 million in contract construction proceeds and is to be completed within six months after the effective date of the lease. The bond issue would be backed by a pledge of tidelands revenue. The actual source of the debt payment is anticipated to be passenger fees and base rent from urban commons. Lastly, the city and urban Commons have agreed to add language to the newly stating that if urban commons constructs a hotel on the property, a new hotel, they will require the hotel operator or management company to participate in a card check neutrality agreement within three months of receipt of the site plan review. The city believes that these changes to the new lease approved by the Council last November are consistent with the city's priorities associated with this project, which include ensuring that Carnival has a facility that will handle or handle future expected larger ships and additional passengers to the Long Beach cruise terminal. Commercial development of the land surrounding the Queen Mary, which is integral to the long term viability of the city's historic asset. I'm happy to answer any questions that you may have. At this time, I'd also like to introduce members of the Urban Commons team, including Taylor Woods, Howard Wu and Dan Roney , who are in the in the audience.
Speaker 3: Sistematica.
Speaker 9: That concludes stats presentation were available for questions if needed.
Speaker 3: Okay, thank you. I'm going to turn over to the maker of the motion. Councilwoman Pierce.
Speaker 7: Thank you very much, staff. I want to thank you guys for not only your presentation today, but the very intensive, long days that led up to this to get us where we are today. I know that you've worked hard and that we are doing our best to preserve what is a city asset, which is the Queen, and trying to activate an area that has been particularly challenging to activate. And so, as I said last time this item came up around the Queen is I'm very excited about what we can do there. And I want to thank Urban Commons for thinking outside the box, for being innovative and really pushing ourselves to think about how we can preserve the ship, how we can support Carnival, which is one of the largest companies that we have here in the city. That is something we've been able to depend on over the years to make sure that we have revenue coming in and that we are expanding that opportunity here in the city. Over the last several months, I have seen even the Queen with you guys taking over. It activated in ways that it wasn't before. And so tonight's vote really being around ensuring that the city is not spending any additional money, but that we are investing in a ship to make sure that we're protecting our asset and that I feel confident in the bond that the city is issuing, that we're going to pay that off in seven years. I feel confident in that the sharing of the passenger fees is an appropriate share. And so I'm really excited to hopefully ask for my council support in making sure that this goes through tonight. And thank you, staff again. Appreciate it.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Councilmember Andrews. Okay. Well, you're on this. You're the second. Yeah, go ahead.
Speaker 2: I can only say that, you know, it's been a long time coming. And I really want to commend the individuals who have taken this over, because I think you see the pride that we're looking for. And I think with your support and help that we're going to get this ship to where it should be. And that's the dream that everyone has. And all the things that you guys have in your mind. Put it in action. And I'm telling you, Long Beach is going to be the way to Always Strong Beach. Thank you guys again for the work you've done.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Councilwoman Pryce.
Speaker 10: Thank you. I like the comments that I'm hearing from my colleagues, but I really would like to focus on the agenda item, which isn't really how wonderful the change in ownership has been, which I think is great, and how much we should try to invest in the Queen Mary, which is also great. But the agenda item is actually it's it's involving a debt that we're going to be issuing as a city. Right. So that's the that's the I'm talking about that this has nothing to do with the lease, correct?
Speaker 8: Actually, the issuance of the bond and the repayment from the revenues coming from Carnival are a part of the lease. Yes. Okay.
Speaker 10: And that's. Can I just ask, why is it that the city is undergoing this these expenditures at this time?
Speaker 8: Well, the city had always intended in the lease that was approved last year by the council. The city had always intended that the passenger fees from Carnival would go to the city and then into a historic preservation fund, and that urban commons would use that to preserve the ship. The difference that is being made is that that that amount of about $2 million a year just isn't enough to take care of some of these urgent repairs. And so what we're doing is front funding the money with the bond. And for the first seven years, we will end four, five years of urban commons. We will both put our fees from the passenger fees. We will put that toward the repayment of the debt. So, again, we're not using money in a different way. We're just we're using money as it was intended, which was for the historic preservation of the ship.
Speaker 10: And I understand that I did read the staff memo. My question is, and I guess this is something I didn't know until this item appeared on the agenda, which was frankly a little bit surprising that we're going to be using a pledge of tidelands revenues.
Speaker 8: There are some tailwinds. The Tidelands revenues is the pledge, but those revenues are the passenger fees we intend for those revenues that are going to repay the bond to be these passenger fees. So there aren't the. The idea is we are using the fees that come in from Carnival, which are Tidelands revenues to pay off the bond
Speaker 9: . And Councilmember, if I can jump in and help explain as well. Anything in that area has to do with Tidelands. So all the money that comes in and out of the Queen Mary that is also reserved for Queen Mary purposes is actually tidelands funds. So I think Catherine explained it very well. We expect no additional money to be needed that we are putting in money that comes from Carnival that used to go to urban commons under the new agreement comes to the city. We would then use that as a debt issuance and also as part of this $23 million urban commons is putting their own private money into the deal that the city will go to the bond market. So part of the reason that you see in the in the agenda item that it talks about Tidelands, is for us to get a very good interest rate and to have a low cost of borrowing. We're going to be pledging that tidelands revenues will will make up for it. Well, will be the backstop. But we're very certain that the money coming from Carnival will cover that. And if that doesn't happen, we do have emergency reserves that would be available. We do not expect to need those that we have all the money that we need from Carnival Lease to be able to pay for this seven year city commitment, plus the other three for urban commons.
Speaker 10: And these emergency reserves. I'm assuming those are out of Tidelands as well.
Speaker 9: First, we have money from Queen Mary, so we have Queen Mary Reserves. That would be as part of that. And then we have operating reserves from Tidelands as well. Yes.
Speaker 10: Okay. So this plan would not use as its insurance any projects that we've already committed to. Our constituents will be paid out of Tidelands.
Speaker 9: So, no, that is not envisioned, although we always plan for every and any risk in eventuality. So if in the very unlikely event, Carnival, one of the largest cruise corporations, would go bankrupt in the next 7 to 10 years, that whatever remaining would be first pledged from any Queen Mary Reserves, we would look to our operating reserves . And between those pots of money, we're already looking at almost $19 million, which is the debt that we would go to go to the bond market on. If for some reason that weren't enough, we would look to other tidelands, but we are not pledging any additional projects or anything as collateral as part of this.
Speaker 10: I know it's not part of the staff report, but I know that the city auditor's here and I wonder if it's possible for her to give us her thoughts on this, because I know this has been a subject of study and consideration in the past, and I'm just want to make sure that we're proceeding because to me , this is a pretty significant action by the city to take. And so I would feel more comfortable hearing from the city auditor and even John GROSS if he's prepared to make any comments about and thoughts on this moving forward. I don't mean to put you guys on the spot, but if either of you guys have you just happened to be sitting in the front row.
Speaker 3: So why don't we have missed out? And then, Mr. GROSS, maybe after you can make some comments as well, please sit down.
Speaker 8: Thank you. I believe this is a significant item. My last discussions regarding the Queen Mary were with the former director, Mike Conway, several months ago. And at that time, the city was not liable for assuming any risk for the new lease. And so there is a significant change happening today. I've reviewed this item and called a meeting with the city manager this morning to discuss it with him. He provided the documents I requested this afternoon, but I haven't had time to review them adequately. And any time we're using public funds to invest in something, I would always prefer time to review the details of the financing plan for the the Queen Mary. And thank you, Kathy, for your presentation that you just gave. I think that help clarify some things and and it does bring up more questions that I that I have. One of her first comments was the fact that the Queen Mary has over $200 million worth of infrastructure needs. And I think that's extremely significant. And how this $23 million investment fits into the long term plan for the Queen Mary. And who's responsible for those $200 million worth of investment infrastructure needs the Queen Mary has? It's an important question I think we need to ask as a city. I. I feel like I would prefer to have more time to review the the projections, to feel more comfortable with the risk that the city is assuming at this time. From the documents I've reviewed, it appears the city is the only one assuming risk at this time, and so we would like more time to review it before the council would vote on an item like this. And that would be my recommendation to allow us some time to review the documentation that was just provided to us today.
Speaker 10: What would be a reasonable amount of time? Like 30 days? Would that be enough? Mm hmm. Is that a possibility, Mr. City Manager.
Speaker 9: We've been stretching this for quite some time as we learn for a couple of years. We've been negotiating with urban commons really for the past three months intensely. We came up to the final negotiations recently.
Speaker 2: They are stretched.
Speaker 9: If we go any further.
Speaker 3: With interest rate changes, that could affect the interest rate on what.
Speaker 9: They're going to do. Additionally, their extent, they.
Speaker 2: Are perhaps this remote.
Speaker 3: Could talk to this as well that at some point in time. I don't know how quickly that's going to be.
Speaker 9: They could reverse our position with Garrison and actually lose our position with the Queen Mary and it would revert back to Garrison and potentially put urban commons in bankruptcy.
Speaker 3: Can I do I just want to make sure that the one question that Ms.. Doughty did bring up about the liability question, so why don't we have that answered as well? But before I do that, Mr. Price, are you did you want to continue everything else?
Speaker 10: Yes. And I appreciate that for for Mr. West. I appreciate that this has been going on, as you said, for two years. But I think I've tried to be really diligent on this. And before Mr. Conway left, I spoke with him frequently about this lease and this contract and my concerns. And this may be going on for two years, but until this appeared on the agenda, I did not realize that we were going to be pledging tidelands funds for this type of debt. So perhaps that's my negligence. Or perhaps there could have been a better job at a briefing that went on, because I did not know that this was going on for two years. And I, I do have an issue when items come before us and we're told that there's this imminent urgency that we have to make a decision that night that that to me is puts us in a very difficult place.
Speaker 2: Council Member I let's when we're prepared when Mr. out is concluded, I think that I.
Speaker 9: Think the discussion here is the amount of risk regarding the tidelands, which we think is.
Speaker 2: Fairly.
Speaker 3: Brief. And that's something that Mr. GROSS can talk about when we're ready. Mr.. Can you guys please. Mr.. MODICA You were going to say something.
Speaker 9: Yes. I wanted to respond a little bit to the and just clarify the the liability in the 200 million. And, of course, the city attorney can jump in any time. And if I say something that that needs to be clarified. So the the Queen Mary is a city asset that actually belongs to the city. So the way that we have managed our risk in the past is, rather than as a city, take on everything that's responsible to the Queen Mary, we enter into a long term lease with somebody who can make revenue on that site and able to create some revenue to put it back into the Tidelands, to pay for the maintenance for a city asset. That, frankly, is very expensive. It's been here since the 1960s. Anything in a marine environment is going to require a tremendous amount of maintenance. And so from time to time, the owner of the or we're the owner, but the the lessee over there does Marine surveys. We've done this in the past, and they normally show that there is a lot of maintenance that needs to be done. So this was conducted by Garrison before it transitioned to urban commons and looking at over $200 million worth of infrastructure repair. That's not unlike what we see in any facility that we have anywhere in the city. So every facility is going to have maintenance issues. And so that is the summary of the major issues, what you've seen in front of you today, those are the structural issues, the ones that are the most urgent. And the way we've done this agreement is urban commons. Ultimately, at the end of the day, per the lease is responsible for all of those investments. However, if at some point the city puts the full burden on them, they have the option of basically walking away and the city would it would revert back to the city and we would have that $200 million worth of infrastructure repair without really any revenue source to be able to pay for it. So we think that this agreement makes a lot of sense. We're using Tidelands reserved money for the Queen Mary to put into the deal, money that we're receiving from Carnival. So no additional tidelands dollars that aren't already going into the ship and then also having urban commons put their money into the deal in order to do that, $23 million with very little risk. So and then, of course, urban commons is also putting in $15 million of their own funds to put into the parts of the ship that people see, the part that really makes them want to come spend money like the hotel rooms and the lobbies, which is really the revenue generator. So under this deal, the city helps finance kind of the the structural bones, the utility systems, the plumbing, the things that the city, you know, that need make the ship go. And there will be investing more money into what makes money.
Speaker 10: And I appreciate that explanation. It makes a lot of sense to me. My my I guess my confusion lies in the fact that prior to even the last day that Mr. Conway was here, my understanding was that we hadn't reached an agreement yet. We didn't have a legal document. So all these terms that you're talking about in terms of this, if this were to happen, this would happen to urban commons of this. Where is that coming from? What, where, how? We're counsel to be made aware of those those conditions. That's what I don't understand.
Speaker 9: So there's two documents. One is the lease that they're currently in that has been the lease that we had with Garrison Urban Commons is actually our lessee. We have transferred the existing lease over to urban commons. And so they are our lessee. What we brought to you back in November 15th was really the the majority of the of the things that we're talking about today and all those lease conditions, all the things that transfer risk and responsibility over to urban comments. That is what the council saw in in pretty great detail on November 15th. Since that time, we've had those discussions with Carnival and with Urban Commons and with the city about really the Dome. And then also now this component about how to fund some of the maintenance. And this was a request, as we did back in November, was create that that pot of money, that $2.15 million that we would be able to invest every year. What is a little different in this is they're asking us to just front that money and do it in a short time frame, about seven years of money that we were going to put in the ship already that the council approved back in November and just do it quicker. So we have a larger pot of money that frankly, you can get more repairs done efficiently because you're going to have larger sums that you can invest all at once.
Speaker 10: So I'd like to hear from my colleagues on this, but I think that and I'd also like to hear from Mr. GROSS. But I think that our auditor saying that the benefit of 30 days would be very valuable to her and in terms of her comfort is very reasonable. And I understand that this is probably something that should have happened yesterday, but the reality is that it's coming to us today and giving us 30 days to feel comfortable with a decision that's this big is is very reasonable there. I think 30 days is is not much time at all. In light of I understand the urgency on the part of the negotiating parties, however, we have not been subject to those negotiations in those discussions. So I think 30 days is reasonable to give us some more time. I also feel incredibly uncomfortable pledging revenues that could potentially have been already committed to constituents through our Tidelands budget. Those are real constituents advocating for real needs. And I don't I know that while I understand the risk is low. I do think that we need to have some thorough and comprehensive and meaningful, genuine discussions before we we pledge that kind of money, because we've worked really hard to prioritize items. And, you know, it's the fact that that something could be set in a meeting that could cause somebody to want to undo years of of of commitment to a project is one thing. But meaningfully voting as a council to pledge that money long term is problematic to me. And I think the the the first risk that I just mentioned, you know, I can't control somebody may want to just pull money that's been committed to a project to make a point. But I can control us making long term decisions about our finances, knowing that we've already committed some funds to particular constituent groups. And so that's that's a problem that I have is is pledging money that we've already committed elsewhere. That's a problem for me. So I'd ask my colleagues to consider putting this over 30 days as the city auditor has suggested, and allow us some time to have the financial numbers so that we can all feel comfortable moving forward. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Okay. Let me go ahead and move on. I know we have a couple more speakers. Just as a reminder, we have another critical item that we have to get to after this. And I know that Councilman Ringa also has to go. So just I know as I know as we move forward to consider that councilman mongo.
Speaker 7: Thank you i to appreciate and respect. City official and auditor Laura dowd and I think that within the context of the information you have available to you, I can understand why you might think that some more time would be valuable. I, like Councilman Price had have had several meetings not only with Mr. Conaway, but also with Councilmember Pierce, and before that, several meetings with Councilmember Lowenthal. I've made the efforts to have meetings with members of urban commons, and I'm familiar. I will say that during discussions with Vice Mayor Lowenthal at the time, I realized that I had not experienced anything with Carnival Cruise Lines and had any personal opinions on their value to the city of Long Beach. So my fiancee and I, with our own personal funds, decided to take a weekend and experience Carnival. I am very excited that they're bringing another ship. I think this will be huge for economic development. And I think that in in the industry of economic development, one of the things that I've learned in traveling and meeting with brokers and individuals is that a lot of things can change in 30 days, time can kill deals, and this deal is a good deal for Long Beach. I worry that should we not find another partner like this in the future? I think we're in a great situation and the assessment and knowledge of what risks urban commons is taking on is, in my opinion, greater than the risks we as the city is taking on. And for that, I will be supportive of this item and I hope my colleagues will as well. This was not put on the supplemental agenda. This was not jammed down our throats at the last minute. I believe that over the last seven days, I've had the time necessary to follow up on any conversations I've had since November . And I feel very confident that this is the right direction. And I appreciate the work in filling me in and briefing me throughout the process, as I know many of my colleagues have as well. And so. I too, want to be mindful and timely in ensuring that we think things over carefully. And in looking at the the little matrix that the city manager gives us, I've known this was on the agenda for several weeks. And so for that, I appreciate you. Have a great day and I hope you'll all support me.
Speaker 3: I got some of them.
Speaker 5: I'll be very, very brief if we can bring up slide eight. I just had any clarification on one item there. Is that easy to do?
Speaker 3: Slide eight, please.
Speaker 5: And I'm just talking about years one through five versus years six through ten. I want to make sure I'm really clear on that.
Speaker 8: Okay. As soon as they load that.
Speaker 1: It's right here.
Speaker 5: So we can move on to the next speaker, if you like.
Speaker 3: I'd coming up.
Speaker 8: I. We're trying. You've got to load it back there. There, loading it now.
Speaker 3: Okay.
Speaker 5: So if you can just go over your your version of that. Urban commons, can you can you tell us the years one through five versus six?
Speaker 8: Yeah. So in years one through five, the city receives up to 2.15 million from Carnival's passenger revenue fees, plus 300,000 for base red that would go toward. For five years that share of the city's passenger fees. We'd go, okay.
Speaker 5: I think we have a type. I spotted a typo when it was up there.
Speaker 3: I believe it says went through seven spots. We went through five. I believe that's.
Speaker 8: It. No, it actually is one through seven. Is it. So the year six and seven, the amount goes down to 1.5 million. So the city is pledging seven years of its revenue. It's just in year six and seven. It goes down. Urban Commons is pledging year six through ten and that's estimated at about 800,000 $815,000 a year.
Speaker 9: So and just out of that, to be fiscally responsible, the city didn't want to pledge long term this money. We wanted to do it on a short term. So we wanted to put about seven years of hours in. So that's one through seven. Carnival Urban Commons doesn't really see any of that passenger facility until year five. So in part of our negotiations, we asked them to put money in. So their money, once it starts in year five, under the current agreement on the lease, they're putting their money in from years 5 to 10. We put money in from years 1 to 7.
Speaker 5: Okay. I think that clarifies it for me. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Before I go back to Councilman Pearce, do might we go to public comment first and we'll come back any public comment on this issue? Please come forward. If there is, please quickly. Yes. Thank you.
Speaker 8: My name is Diane Roche. I reside in Los Alamitos, California, and I'm here tonight to ask mainly a couple of questions about this new lease. Mayor Garcia and members of the council in the 1990s, I chaired an organization called the Queen Mary Foundation, and that's the organization that is responsible for the ocean liners admittance to the to the National Register of Historic Places. And I had a couple of questions about the structural integrity. I know back in 1990 and again in 1992, Radio's International Marine Survey Organization did detailed surveys of the Queen Mary's Hall and superstructure. And there were some concerns at that time that were going to be addressed when Joseph still took over the lease of the ship in 1993 and the city engineer Edward Bionic drew up a base maintenance plan. That's Document HD 1605. And there were several concerns during the ship's conversion. There were some bulkheads removed, some load bearing members that have never been replaced since that time. And I noticed that when you flashed up on the screen, there were lists of the immediately needed maintenance and restoration concerns of the recent survey. I believe it's by Simpson, Gompertz and Hager. I'd like to request at this time, if I may, by Public Records Act, I would like to have a copy of that that Marine survey to compare it with the original reader's reports, because I know what to look for. I knew several of the ship's original designers and engineers. So I would really like to make that request. I also would like to share a little bit of the history on that document. 22697. That's the current lease that's being amended and restated. That was initially drawn up in 1993 and during Patel's lease it had been. Revised in order to accommodate his nonperformance and non conformance. So I was just wondering how robust that lease is. I really applaud you for holding off. Hopefully you'll hold off on making a decision because I think there are probably lots of things in the lease that have to be looked at in terms of the maintenance needs, in terms of the funding. I know that there was a thing called the Queen Mary Fund that was $6.5 million set aside. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Ma'am. Time's up.
Speaker 8: Okay. Could you look into that?
Speaker 3: We've made we made a note of that. We'll try to connect with you as well.
Speaker 8: Okay.
Speaker 3: Can you give the clerk your information, please? And we'll get that for you.
Speaker 8: Thank you very much.
Speaker 3: Next speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Oh. $53 million went to the Aquarium of the Pacific. $53 million that they didn't need, but they wanted. For. Beautification of a project that is beautiful. And now we're discussing $23 million. To go to the Queen Mary boat. It sits vacant at night. I don't I'm speaking because my other non-profits who work for the for the homeless are not here. The committee commission newly installed is not here. So someone should be here every time the city council begins to discuss, to use money, expeditiously, implementable funds. But you still have the humans sleeping in the streets. Still. If the marijuana dispensaries were to open tomorrow, I believe I remember hearing someone to my right saying that they would have immediate $1,000,000 to throw into that project to fund the marijuana dispensaries. Now. God is the angels and. The host of heaven. Has assembled again tonight and is listening to this conversation, this meeting. And I worked for him. And when I'm not telling people about the Holy Spirit and Jesus and God and the mission, he's told me to argue, to defend, as if I were a police officer. The rights of the homeless. How can you. With a clear conscience. Continue to do this. How can you? The rains.
Speaker 2: Are here. You're hoping for more rain.
Speaker 8: You have a proposal that has been put on your desk as of January 2016. And your piece mealing that thing out. I want to congratulate you for the for the work that you are doing. But you're going to discuss spending $23 million again. And it would just take 1 million to clear your streets of the homeless. Martin Luther King said, I have a dream and we're living his dream tonight. Well, that plan that is on your desk. He gave it to me and he said, this is implementable. And he would ask you again, how can you discuss spending that kind of money when it would just take 1 million to get the homeless off the street?
Speaker 3: Thank you. Next speaker, please. Then this is our last speaker. The last two speakers kept out offering it back to the council.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Well, good evening. Diane Roche was trying to ask you about the Queen Mary Fund. That was $6.5 million in the budget previously for repairs. And I, too, would like to know, has that 6 million ever been spent or is this part of the 5 million that you're including in this? Money that you're going to give to add to the 23 million. How in the world have we allowed this ship to require $200 million worth of repair? Somebody has not been overseeing. The funds that were supposed to be spent on this in the past. And I can see. No. Reason to believe that this new lessee is going to do any better. Last year. He said he was going to do all these wonderful things for the Queen Mary if we just give them him the land. Then he gets an idea. He has a survey after his. I guess we haven't signed the lease, but. Urban Commons is now looked at it and said, Wow, I can't come up with $23 million to repair this ship. I would think if. He is made. If this company has made the obligation to get this lease. They should be responsible for the repairs. That was part of the lease. Now we're changing the lease. So that the city is responsible for these repairs. Another thing I had a question about last year was the inclusion of the park. Which is known as Queen Mary Events Park, but it's really Harry Bridges Park, which was mitigation for the park land taken from shoreline to build. The aquarium. This park last year was being included in the lease. I heard no mention tonight whether it was or not, and the public has never seen this lease. We've seen parts of it in the staff report. Have you seen the lease? Are you willing to have this lease be signed when you haven't even read it? I hope that you will at least put this over. If not 30 days. 15 days. So that somebody can.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Miss Cantrell.
Speaker 0: Reading the lease.
Speaker 3: Thank you. And our last speaker, please. Thank you.
Speaker 2: My name is Ramon. I'll be brief. I know that we got Iran. Got. He's got a quick fuze here. Um, I know. I don't mean like you're angry or anything. I mean, you got to get out of here. That's what I mean to say. Okay. I've been involved with government contracts for a long time, and this type of situation seems to be pretty normal for the city of Long Beach. And I'm not trying to criticize. I'm I'm in I've been involved with ambiguous situations quite often in my my job. And I understand sometimes things get out of hand. And I'd like to thank Councilwoman Mongo for making a great sacrifice and testing out some of the some of the facilities there. Getting her firsthand information. I'd like to. Congratulate Miss Price in in her concerns. I think it's it's pretty clear. One of the things that I'm worried about is that these people were evidently involved with the negotiations and they didn't involve the auditor. While they're doing that, there's something called concurrent, you know, working with people. And I get suspicious when people aren't working. They know the process. They're obviously there, but they're not getting all the people involved. And, um, we do know that we have a situation where we're going to be taking some of the revenue that we think that we're going to be making. And we're going to use it for the interest payments for the bonds that we're taking out. So you're actually I mean, all this stuff that you're doing, it costs money for it. So we're now losing more money to kind of front them. The, uh, the bonds that we're trying to do. And, you know, I understand this is a situation where here, but we also need to do some due diligence with $23 million, we can't just move forward. And the arguments that that my councilwoman in her great wisdom has made doesn't really hit you the root of the cause of why we can't do it. I don't know if if the subcontractor has actually given a date. Hey, look, we're going to suffer. We're going to die by if we don't do 30 days or if the auditor can actually work within a shorter timeframe. But something like that needs to be hopefully worked out. And I'm giving you 40 seconds there, Mr. York. That's it.
Speaker 3: Thank you. We're going to go to the last few speakers. We're going to get to get to a vote, please. Councilmember Pearce and Councilman Price.
Speaker 7: Yeah. I want to just one more time. Thank everybody for all your work on this and all the community comments. And I want to urge my council to go ahead and take a vote so we can move on.
Speaker 3: Councilman Price.
Speaker 10: Thank you. We do want to hear from Mr. GROSS because he took a seat over there and never got to be heard. So I would like to hear from him, but I also want to highlight that my comments have nothing to do with urban commons. I think we're headed in a great direction. I'm very much looking forward to the future. I am a little bit confused as to how we're there in this predicament where we're talking about the city having to be responsible for these repairs like tonight. Look at the vote has to happen tonight. It's just a discussion we've never had and certainly not something I was aware of. I think that any time your auditor expresses concerns, those with the fiduciary duty have to stop and ask themselves, you know, what, what they feel comfortable doing. And that's going to change with it. It's going to depend on each individual council member. So I appreciate that. But I would like to hear from Mr. GROSS on these financial plans that have been put before us.
Speaker 3: Mr. GROSS.
Speaker 2: Thank you. I think it is a I think it Councilwoman Price has raised a good issue that should always be raised when you issue bonds, what is what is the risk? And I'll try to try to address that. From our viewpoint, financial management's viewpoint. What we have is a situation where the lease provides for investment in a city asset, the Queen Mary, and repairs to the Queen Mary. Money flowing into that historic preservation fund. And the concept that we looked at was, okay, we have these urgent repairs and that money flowing over a number of years is not going to do those urgent repairs. Can we make a change? And what financial management did is it came up with using that stream of money. We can convert it to upfront cash of about $17 million. You add 5.8 million from the Queen Mary Reserves and you're at the $23 million to do those urgent repairs. And what is the risk and how did we do that? As as was said by both Mrs. McDermott and Mr. Modica, we are using a bond issue structure that pledges all tidelands funds. That's the typical way we do money to support land area projects. The aquarium is another example where we have pledged all tidelands monies, but we don't expect to use all Tidelands monies because there's rent being paid by the aquarium. In this case, we're moving the money from the H, from the historic preservation account to pay debt service. And that risk has been evaluated through the Economic Development Department and seems logical to be a very low risk that money will not be coming in. We, in addition, looked at the risk of, gee, what happens? We pledged $23 million, 17 of which comes from a bond issue. That's a $19 million bond issue. It yields about 17 million in cash. What's the risk of us having to pay urban commons and something goes wrong with the bond market temporarily? We would have to come up with cash at that time. We consider that risk to be so low as to not be a significant consideration. But we do have to say, if something goes wrong in that second type of risk, yes, we'd have to temporarily use reserves. And we believe that's not going to be an imposition, significant imposition on titans, because eventually, within whatever timeframe of the market stabilizes, six months, even a year, we would return the money to the fund and we don't think there'll be any significant damage overall. Yes, there is risk. We think the risk is either minute in the case of not being able to issue bonds timely or has been evaluated by economic development, financial management thinks that a valuation is reasonable. Evaluated by the department is a very low risk.
Speaker 10: I thank you for those comments, Mr. Ross. I wonder if that has any impact on the auditor or if there's anything further that the auditor would like to say. It would be nice if we were all on the same page moving forward, and if not, it would be nice if we took a pause to get on the same page.
Speaker 8: Yes. Thank you for all of the comments tonight. I think, you know, as the elected leader, I feel like I have a duty to express my concerns. My over arching concern is the to the over $200 million of infrastructure needs in the Queen Mary. And I don't think we should ignore the inevitable. It's a significant problem. I. I've been here with the city for over ten years. And these these are serious problems. The queen of this, Queen Mary, has a history with problems. And I feel like we need more than seven days to look at the documents that have been presented, to look at the analysis, to look at the risks, to look at the financing. To look and see how this $23 million investment fits into. A long term plan for the Queen Mary, its infrastructure needs and how it's going to be financed long term. I don't think we should ignore. Uh, the significance of the issues surrounding the ship. So. If the council would feel more comfortable with 14 days rather than 30, it would at least give us a little time, a little more time to to look at this. And we would work as quickly as possible and do as much due diligence as we could. But I really do think that in big picture long term strategy, we need to. Reconsider.
Speaker 10: Well, thank you for that. I do want to make a couple of comments in regards to Councilwoman Mangos. And, you know, anytime anyone raises an issue about something on the agenda, there's always someone who, you know, chimes in with this has been on the agenda. I don't know why anyone didn't prepare for it. You know, I read every staff report in my agenda and I read all ten pages of the staff report. And until I asked a few questions, I did not realize that committed Tidelands projects could be at risk. And that's where my concerns came. The ten pages here don't say anything about Tidelands projects that have already been committed being the source of a potential risk. So I did read the ten pages. I'm very mindful of when items come out on the agenda. I think I do a very good job of reading and preparing for my council meetings and I meet regularly with department heads. We have regular tidelands meetings. We have a briefing. We had a briefing that I wasn't able to be on today, but I meet with the city manager every week. I did not realize, and perhaps it's written in here and I missed it, although that's doubtful that Tidelands projects that are committed could be at risk. So I have a problem with that because like I mentioned a moment ago, unfortunately there is even though we work really hard to build collaborations and consensus, unfortunately there's an unnecessary. An inappropriate level of risk that already exists that I don't have control over in terms of projects that I've already committed to the constituents of the city. I can't I don't feel comfortable moving forward without and I understand the risk is low. But when the auditor is saying, you know, I need two weeks or a month to look at the numbers so that I can feel comfortable with it, I think that's very reasonable. And, you know, I'm asking my colleagues, I realize that this the tidelands revenue doesn't impact every district, but the the districts that it does impact involve people who work really hard on projects, just like projects in every other district. And just because we need to to have some sort of an insurance policy for a debt doesn't mean we start to put, you know, their projects that we've committed at risk of potentially if something were to happen that those projects are if we can guarantee right now that none of the projects that are impacted and I'm sure Councilwoman Pierce feels the same way, she doesn't want any of the projects that she's committed to her constituents to be attacked. And I would never, ever in a million years disrespect the people that have worked hard on those projects. So I think if we can have some sort of a commitment that those projects won't get impacted as part of this, and I'd feel a lot more comfortable with it. But either I completely missed it or we never discussed this being a potential risk when we approved all of the negotiations and the discussions that we as a council were privy to. So that's my concern is, yes, I do know when the agenda comes out and yes, I'm aware of the index. And yes, I did read the ten page report. It doesn't answer the questions.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Councilmember Turanga.
Speaker 2: Covered question.
Speaker 3: Okay. Questions been called. There is a motion on the floor by Councilmember Pearce and Councilmember Andrews. Please go and cast your vote.
Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 3: Okay. Thank you. Next item we're going to hear is item number. I think it was 18. No, I'm sorry. We just heard 18. 27. Thank you. As we're getting up to the urban common guys, we're back there. I just want to thank you all for your commitment to this project. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute any and all documents, including additional lease and capital funding provisions, necessary for an Amended and Restated Lease and Operations Agreement No. 22697 with Urban Commons, LLC, for the Queen Mary and adjacent properties; and
Authorize City Manager to proceed with funding up to $23 million in infrastructure repairs to the Queen Mary by using up to $5.8 million in total reserves designated for the Queen Mary and borrowing approximately $17.2 million to be repaid from Queen Mary related revenues. (District 2) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11012016_16-0998 | Speaker 3: Okay. Thank you. Next item we're going to hear is item number. I think it was 18. No, I'm sorry. We just heard 18. 27. Thank you. As we're getting up to the urban common guys, we're back there. I just want to thank you all for your commitment to this project. We look forward to being really strong partners over the next few years and many years ahead. And we'll look forward to the economic driver, which is going to be that development, but also that Carnival Cruise Line terminal, which we know is going to bring hundreds of thousands of passengers to the city to invest back into the city . So thank you guys very much.
Speaker 0: Communication from Councilman Austin, Councilmember Super Now Council member Urunga recommendation to request the city manager to have the Long Beach Airport director work with the Airport Advisory Commission. Community members and airport stakeholders develop a long range masterplan for the Long Beach Airport.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Councilmember Austin.
Speaker 6: So thank you, Mr. Mayor. I want to thank my colleagues, Council Supernormal and Urunga, for signing on. There's been some misinformation and speculation in some of the press as to why this agenda item is before us here tonight. This is actually something that we have we first considered back in February of this year. So this is not a last minute tactic or or this this wasn't a short sighted agenda item. However, I've been concerned that it seems to when it comes to the Long Beach Airport, the city has been in a very reactive mode, responding to external pressures to pursue certain development objectives. There is not a clear, articulated vision of the direction where the city wants to see the airport going in the long term. And that has eroded confidence of many residents in impacted neighborhoods throughout the city that are truly looking at the interests of all the stakeholders when it comes to decisions affecting the airport. Most airports, whether they are large commercial airports or small general aviation airports, have airport master plans. The FAA described the goal of a master plan is providing guidelines for future development. Hurry back. So the FAA describes the goal of a master plan as providing guidelines for future airport development, which will satisfy aviation demand in a financially feasible manner, while at the same time resolving the aviation, environmental and social economic issues, the existing existing in the community. The FAA guidelines also state that each master plan study must focus on specific needs of the airport for which a plan is being prepared, and the scope of the study must be tailored to the individual airport. Therefore, in a given study, certain master planning elements may be emphasized, while others may not be considered at all. Clearly, with the Long Beach Airport, the driving factor in any plan must be protecting our airport noise ordinance. And with the long range plan that involves, it incorporates the views of the stakeholders to the airport, which not only involves airport users and businesses, but residents and communities in several council districts. We can articulate a vision that inspires confidence and provides an appropriate balance between the community, passengers, environmental and economic interests. However, I do recognize that not everyone has had the opportunity to fully invest the gate and the concept of a master plan. And so I'd like to ask my colleagues to support a revised motion to to the agenda item, which is to request the city manager report back to the City Council within 30 days on the process involved. Potential scope and the pros and cons of developing a long range master plan for the Long Beach Airport. And I would ask for my my colleagues support on that.
Speaker 3: Sorry, I Brosnan just wrapped up. And is it now controversy? Controversial product. You want to comment on the second or.
Speaker 5: I'm fine. I think the motion and I don't want to speak for my colleague because he's right here. But the intention is this all came at us very quickly and we had very quick briefings on this. So if the intention is to get an official response from city staff, I support that.
Speaker 3: Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 10: Thank you. So just to clarify, this isn't going to delay at all the process that we're going through with the FISA. My understanding is based on this motion.
Speaker 6: Well, doesn't mention anything about FISA.
Speaker 10: Okay. So that that process is unrelated to this and this issue. This request is just for a report that will outline what the process is, what a master plan is, what it could include, and the pros and cons. So it'd be a comprehensive look at what it would look like to enter that process.
Speaker 8: Basically. Is that your.
Speaker 10: Understanding, your your intent? Okay. Great. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Councilwoman Pierce.
Speaker 7: Yes. I had one question about Alps and how they might relate to master plans.
Speaker 2: I mentioned that over to our airport director, Jess Romo. Yes, Councilwoman. Just remove from Long Beach Airport. An Al Port Airport layout plan is a document that the airport, each airport has to maintain and update based on changes that occur from time to time at an airport. As an example, Long Beach Airport has a submission in with the regional FAA office, currently as part of the decommissioning of the two North-South runways. In essence, an Al Pea is a very abbreviated version of a master plan. It is not a full blown or a comprehensive master plan, but it is it is considered an alternative to a master plan.
Speaker 7: And can you also elaborate on how land use elements might complement that?
Speaker 2: Yeah. Well, as relates to land use, two elements are contained in an LP. Those are considerations. Long Beach Airport as part of the city's general plan. My understanding is that because it's within the city limits, general land uses specifically with zoning have been considered as part of the city's general plan. A companion piece, separate but parallel, is the county's Airport Land Use Commission, which looks specifically at land uses and around airports. And that is also something that has been done over the years for Long Beach Airport, specifically as it relates to zoning, as it relates to the terminal concourse improvements that were recently done, as well as the two business parks that are adjacent, that are that are actually part of the airport property.
Speaker 7: Great. Thank you so much.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 7: I'm going to ask my colleagues to support a received file of this item tonight. If I could get the button to make a new motion, a substitute motion. Over my term with several different airport directors in several meetings with business associations and aviation community and the new community at Douglas Park. I think that what I have learned, especially in discussions with neighborhood associations, is that our number one priority is protecting the noise ordinance. Airport director, would you state for us a little bit of your background and information related to master plans at airports that you've experienced? I know we've discussed when that started in I think it was 1996 and another one that started after that and the amount they cost and how long they take and that truly that would actually be a greater threat to our noise ordinance than anything else.
Speaker 2: Well, I can speak to, you know, first and foremost, my experience. I'm approaching my 19th year as an airport professional. You know, before coming here to Long Beach, I spent that time with L.A. World airports in a various number of positions, including airport manager for both Ontario and Van Nuys airports. Van Nuys Airport did complete a master plan that started in 1992 and was completed in 2006. I chose essentially a 14 year endeavor. The focus was land use, but it was called a master plan. The bulk of the work was done internal. So was both city planning staff as well as airport staff. So I don't have a specific number, but I can tell you that it was with a lot of resource support that went into producing and finalizing that document. More recently, even though it's still been a while, Ontario Airport initiated a master plan in 2001 over a four year period. The city of Los Angeles, L.A. World Airport, spent $2 million on that effort. That that effort stopped after 2005, with the new director coming on board in 2007. She made the decision that it was not the time to complete the master plan. So it has been shelved, practically speaking. But knowing that the airport is under a new authority as of today, actually, they may reinitiated. But to your to your question, in both cases, one, it was a 14 year effort. In the second case, it was something that lasted four years and cost $2 million.
Speaker 7: And would you speak to whether or not you personally believe we would be at greater risk should we pursue a master plan?
Speaker 2: With my understanding of master plans and what they are and what they're intended to achieve in primarily master plans, corporate comprehensive master plans. By definition, are either when you are planning to develop an airport or if you've got an airport where you are contemplating adding capacity. Those would be the primary times that you would want to do a full blown master plan. So in that regard, if you're going to explore the ten elements that make up a master plan, including airport capacity, in my opinion that does elevate the level of risk. I'd probably defer to the city attorney on what that amount might be, but I think that it is fair to say that you you would be elevating the risk.
Speaker 7: And I know that I stand with some of my colleagues in that the number one priority is not to expand aviation at the airport, but to maintain the balance that we have today and the quality of life that we have for our neighbors, that that is a high priority. I know that while there have been discussions of distribution of those flights across other runways, that's not something that I'm interested in exploring. I think that we have done a lot of research related to the pavement and the investments that have been put in, both by the federal government and others that have put the airport in a position where we're able to protect the noise ordinance and that we're able to monitor and protect those buckets. And so at this time, in an effort to protect our neighbors and ensure that we do not increase the risk to the noise ordinance, I would like to receive and file I have shared with my colleagues, including Councilmember Austin , my intent for a more broad East Side plan that could consider transportation and all the other components that allow for economic development without expansion of flights. But I feel that at this time this has not been on The Matrix for eight weeks. This was added on the supplemental agenda. I know that at previous meetings Councilmember Austin specifically stated that he was not favorable of Councilmember Pearce's addition of items on the supplemental agenda. And I, I think that this is a significantly similar and if there are differences, I apologize that I don't know them. But I wished that a partnership could have been formed to move forward on this from a more holistic approach as it is in the fifth District. And I've worked with the Douglas Park planners, I know what's coming down the pipeline, I've worked with the Spring Street Business Association, I've worked with South of Kona and Art Craft Manor and Lakewood Village and a lot of the neighborhoods on the side. And I would look forward to the opportunity to partner and work with the other neighborhood associations as well. But I am not ready to take this on at this time because of the additional risk and until we have some clear scoping on what we would want the city to bring back to us, then I think that that's not enough direction. So I'm open to what Councilmember Austin proposed, if it had a scope that I think maybe we could discuss or. Get some feedback from the Airport Advisory Commission on what that scope would look like. But I think that that the city needs proper scoping. And and this is not to be disrespectful to the city staff, but we have far too many report backs that have not come back timely. And I'm not looking to add any more that would delay the ones that we've already committed to. I really would like to see those return as there are certain components of some of those, including the Internet and the infrastructure and others of economic development that I think are a factor in this. And I've been waiting for those and I know that I'm working with Brian Stokes of it, but I think that some of those are really crucial in scoping what we want to do at the airport. So I hope my colleagues will support a received file and that it doesn't need to come back in 30 days. But we could revive a new a completely new and different item that has all of the proper elements when the time is right. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Councilmember Austin.
Speaker 6: Thank you very much. And I just want to address she said a lot, a whole lot there. And I don't think it was all accurate or nor did it accurately reflect my my intentions here. And so, Ms.. McGill, I'm going to restate the motion. It was the request of the city manager report back to the city council within 30 days on a process involved. Potential scope in the pros and cons of developing a long range masterplan for Long Beach Airport. That in no way puts our airport noise ordinance in jeopardy. And that is absolutely the last thing that is on my agenda or that I would want to do as I live under the flight path that represent thousands of residents who also live under the flight path of Long Beach Airport. I would also also just just just like everyone to to understand that I certainly would have included Councilmember Mongo in the this item. However, you were you were absent for three weeks in a row. And so there was not a lot of opportunity to have conversation with you during that period of time and that the airport is a citywide resource. When we were talking about redoing the Civic Center, we're talking about doing anything major here. It requires nine votes in every one of these council members are engaged and and respected and brought to the table and engaged in the process. This is not a fifth District asset, and I want to be very clear on that. And so. We this is something that and again, the the intent here is to help us articulate a vision, but more importantly, bringing all of the stakeholders to the table, including the community. Right. We represent and we are elected by residents of the city. And I've heard on many occasions from individuals who say, well, you know, there are people who bought their homes next to the airport or underneath the flight path. And what is. Well, nobody knows what to expect because we don't have a long way to play it. We don't have a long range visit. We do have an ordinance which is very, very important. And I think that is the Holy Grail. And if we were to pursue a master plan, I think that should be on the first page of the master plan in terms of our intention, the city. Mr. Romo, you talked about master plans that that seek to expand capacity. I can tell you that I would not be in favor of any sort of master plan that would seek to expand flight capacity at Long Beach Airport, because that, too, would be counter to our airport noise ordinance. And so I'm looking at a document right here that says that. And I got to reference this document, but it's pretty voluminous. It's. But but it says that there's a great deal of flexibility for for airports that go into scoping their their master plans. And I would imagine that any master plan moving forward, should we go down that route, because what we're asking for and what's only before us this evening doesn't even go there. But should we do go that route? I can imagine that that, this, this. And since everybody here says that they support our noise ordinance, I wouldn't imagine that anybody would do anything to to to suggest we should expand our capacity or jeopardize the noise ordinance. And so, members, I would ask that you reject the receiving file motion and support the original motion, because it is a common sense approach. It's a responsible approach to to looking forward and including all stakeholders in the airport process, planning process.
Speaker 3: A controversial panel.
Speaker 5: Yeah. And thank you for that clarification. I think we know where council member Austin wants to go with this. It's it's not going to a master plan. It's asking for a report back from city staff. I think Councilmember Mongo kind of made the point in that this was rushed. We had. And kudos to our airport director. He's new yet he was able to get an opinion back to us over a weekend, basically. So I think all we're saying is, let's give him a little more time. Let's get a more thorough report back to see the merits of this. And maybe we're hung up on the terminology of a master plan. Maybe that's something some type of a hybrid that we need moving forward just to let it go. I think some of this was triggered by the fact that we sat here in these council chambers a week ago and we heard the consultant deliver back and economic feasibility report that did not isolate the city of Long Beach. What we have here is a failure to communicate. So I'm thinking that that kind of triggers the fact that we need to get our act together on the city side here a little bit before spending $350,000 on a consultant's report. I can't speak if that was the motivation for Councilmember Austin, but it sure made me think about how exactly are we directing this consultant before we spend money on this? So what I'd like to do is just respectfully ask Councilmember Mongeau to withdraw her motion and move forward on the 30 day plan. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Councilmember Austin, would you be open to 60 days?
Speaker 6: Why? 60 days?
Speaker 7: Well. E The specific question that was asked was whether or not. It would create a greater risk. And our airport director has already stated that it has. And so if we're going to do something bigger and greater than that, there's a lot on our plate on the east side and a lot of other report backs that are coming within the next 30 days that I think are crucial. Specifically, I'm to two of the items that Councilmember Gonzalez and I brought forward that I think can create an impact on the overall plan of Eastside. And I understand that part of the question is whether or not it hurts the noise ordinance, but I think that he's clearly stated that. And so for a more comprehensive report, I would like to have those two other reports back. And if that was possible that they could be considered, then I think that that would give another to get us up to either 45 or 60 days and just mindful that many of the reports we've asked back in either 30 or 60 or 90 days have not come back timely. So maybe we would just pick a date certain that we would get an I'm asking we're doing a two from four from the city staff or you're asking for it to come back to council?
Speaker 6: Well, I was asking for a report back and a report back can come in either way. Okay. Secondly, I think you're making up facts because I didn't hear him say that this is going to create a significant risk. He said that if we move forward with expanding capacity, air capacity at our in our airport, it would create a significant risk and so on. That point would building. I'll just ask a question to the airport director since we're on the question of risk, does this building infrastructure at our our airport infrastructure capacity to airport expose us to risk as well?
Speaker 2: Well, the general term infrastructure, whether you're talking about something on the airfield.
Speaker 6: Versus terminal.
Speaker 2: Terminals, you know, I think any time you are looking at changes, there's always going to be some risk that that will come up again. As I said, with with a master plan, I'm not going to speculate in terms of the amount of risk. But I think that any time there's a change, you know, as a city, you have to manage that and acknowledge that that, you know, there is risk there. There's risk there if we do nothing.
Speaker 6: I appreciate. And and so the request is what I would accept a friendly amendment to to do 60 days. I would the question is to the airport director, can you get this back to us within 30 days?
Speaker 2: Well, my preference would be to have more time so that it's a thoughtful document and I'm not trying to fish for a longer period. But I think something, you know, in between maybe 45 days would make sure that we get the council back, something that's thoughtful and thought out.
Speaker 6: I could accept 45 days.
Speaker 7: I can accept 45 days. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Okay. That's good. Look, before we move on to the rest of the council, do you want to continue to go to the public first? Okay. Can we please go to the public for public comment?
Speaker 11: Good evening, Mayor and Council Members Ray Garbage District eight. When this first came to my attention, I over the weekend I connected with two area airport managers. And it was interesting because both of them were on opposite sides of their position on this. And one of them said that your noise ordinance is your master plan. It controls what's going on at the airport. He also said that if you do do a master plan, you're going to have regional, state and federal attention looking at you. And the very first thing that you do in a master plan is determine capacity. Our airport can build a very large terminal on both the east side and on the north side. We have lots of property. Would that be a demand? I am not sure the FAA would be watching as well. The other points that he made were, after all the years of the litigation that you went through to discover environmental capacity, the footprints that we have equate to our noise limits. He also said that while while this would be ongoing, there are other issues that we should be concerned about. And one of them is there is a environmental justice lawsuit at L.A.X. in the poorer communities. And in that litigation they're talking about, why isn't John Wayne in Long Beach taking more of their share? And then you look at the Scaggs travel documents and they are forecasting and they recognize in their document that we could handle we have a noise ordinance, but we should be able to handle 5 million passengers. That's a 50% increase of what we do today. So there's that side and then there's the other side of, oh, no, you know, the more study, the better. But but the other person said to me that an office facility would have to be part of the master plan. And there I think there's going to be other people here, I think, to talk about the next gen situation that's going to begin, I believe, in the middle of November and it's going to the third phase of it is going to come in in March. And there are cities on both sides of us that are suing. There are cities on the East Coast, the state of Phenix, Los Angeles, Culver City, that are suing because the noise has been expanded. And if you read what our former airport manager says when he wrote about next gen, his concern was that the flight patterns are going to impact larger areas of the seventh and the eighth District, but they're also going to impact the east side and the southeast side. So I think there's a lot to be considered. And if the master plan is something that you're going to go forward with, the office absolutely has to be a part of that. I know that's what you asked, Suzy. And and I think that maybe that was the wrong answer that you received. And, Daryl, what you said about they didn't really give anything specific to Long Beach. That was one of the tasks that they were assigned at 3.4.1, they were to give you quantify the economic impact to the city and the local regional economy related to an FAA facility. So they didn't complete their job. They didn't do what they were asked to do. So I'd like to see that go back to them before you make any further decisions. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: My name is run in fifth District. I support Al Austin and Darryl Soup Supernova and Iran guy who's not here, but he's got a short fuze somewhere down the line. Just joking. I understand Stacy's concerns about the airport. As a District five resident, I've tried and tried and tried to ask a number of questions through my own district office. And I've had a lot of difficulty getting many of the same information that she says that she has to us to give it out to the residents. I can't get it. We've demanded meetings. We've tried everything we can do regarding the airport and we haven't gotten anything. If the only way we can get information out to the residents is to get a report or something like that, I think it's fine. I come out of the aerospace industry and I understand what people are saying, Oh, it's so difficult. But there's never been a project that I've ever been on and I've been on projects that are larger than than the budget in the city that were. I can't figure out how to solve and get a report back to me in a fashion that I want that will be in a way that will be risk, which will remove the risk that we have our concerns. We can do it. I know Romo is an intelligent guy. He can do it. I know he can. It's not hard, but all we're doing is asking for a report from our city manager. You know, it's just can we do it? Why do we need to have done. It's not a it's not rocket science. You know, what do we need? What are the elements? That's it. You know, we got a report from Jacobs. I used to work for Jacobs, and I'm telling you, it was insufficient that this is for Long Beach. We're spending $300,000 of taxpayer money for this thing. And that was garbage. And I'm not I'm not saying that that's bad. But we got a guy who comes from JetBlue. He goes to two different meetings and he's giving false information to both people, to both meetings. I got his name up already reported in to the executives in the company. He's going to be gone. I mean, these are things that are happening. We're seeing all this stuff. People running around. Residents don't have confidence in the way that this is being handled. We're trying to get information and we're not getting it. And no matter what we do, there's a lot of misinformation, people connecting the noise ordinance to the to the this report. Yes. And I understand it's not there. You know, there's no connection right now. So but we need to get information to us. And this is a minimal standard that we have to ask for. You know, I'm looking through all of the numbers that Jacobs has. I'm an expert in this type of stuff. And I'm telling you, there's no backup information for the hard figures that we got. And I'm trying to figure out where they got him. And all I got is a computer program that they're relying on that we have no idea how it works. And this is a problem that I have. I'm sorry. I got a little emotional. I didn't mean to do that.
Speaker 3: It's okay. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 7: Just to follow up on what Ramon had mentioned, we're so fortunate in the fifth district to have an expert in pavement management and aviation and soccer living in our own district. So Mr. Ramon has received every report that we have available and there just aren't some reports because they have not been requested or commissioned by the city . And so while I appreciate that he wants more information, we've provided everything that we are available to provide.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Continuing public comment. Yes.
Speaker 8: Hi, how are you? Laurie Smith.
Speaker 7: Uh, district.
Speaker 8: Three. I've talked to you guys about this before, but I just want to talk about what you guys had mentioned about elevating the risk to our noise ordinance and also what airport director Romo had mentioned that, um, the risk is that we, that we do nothing as well, is there. So I do want to mention again, as I read to you last year.
Speaker 7: Former airport director Bryant Francis had sent a letter to the FAA regarding his concerns about how it's going to adversely.
Speaker 8: Affect our noise ordinance. And these these new procedures are going.
Speaker 7: To be affecting us beginning November 10th is.
Speaker 8: Phase one.
Speaker 7: March 2nd is phase two and April 27th is phase three. And last week the Culver City and Newport Beach City Councils were so concerned that they filed lawsuits to block the FAA metroplex.
Speaker 8: And so, you know, I'm just.
Speaker 7: Looking for you as our elected officials.
Speaker 8: To support us, your constituents in our quality of life. So here's here's some things that Bryant.
Speaker 7: Francis had sent.
Speaker 8: In his letter to the FAA regarding the.
Speaker 7: Metroplex Metroplex, which is going to be affecting everything in the Southern California area, that he believes that the FAA has.
Speaker 8: Not given appropriate consideration.
Speaker 7: To the reduction of environmental impacts, particularly noise and developing the airspace proposals presented, and that as a result, the proposals do not meet the goals.
Speaker 8: That Congress had defined for it.
Speaker 7: He further goes on to say that he has some concerns with regards to how these changes could impact.
Speaker 8: Citizens and communities near airport. He further goes on to say that it will neither. That it could jeopardize or preclude the ability of the air carriers and general aviation community from utilizing procedures and complying with the city's noise limits. So airport director Romo had mentioned that there is a risk that we do nothing. And that's what I'm sorry to say that the city council has done with regards to taking into account the FAA metroplex that's going to be affecting us. It's not just this airport, it's the other airports. So in that time, the city government which manages the airport, has allowed us to move forward with nine supplemental slots and now a feasibility study. And it seems to be that the sole wants to be done before the FAA metroplex comes down on the residents. And it's a little concerning that that that seems to be what city.
Speaker 7: Government has been looking to do is push this through before we all get affected by.
Speaker 8: By heavy noise impacts. So I just like to also know if.
Speaker 3: You take your time I'm sorry, time is up.
Speaker 8: If airport rama if we've gotten a response back from the FAA, from the airport director, I just would like to know if we have a response back and if this is something that is is able to be given to your constituents. Thank you so much.
Speaker 3: Thank you very much for coming. Time is up. And Mr. West, maybe we can follow up on that last question. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Soto.
Speaker 2: Joe. So, Mr. Mayor and city council members Joe Soto, Mr. Airport Manager, there's a.
Speaker 9: Meeting tomorrow in Orange County.
Speaker 2: It's a NexGen meeting.
Speaker 9: In Orange County, one of our local high schools. So we were wondering if you were going to attend that meeting.
Speaker 2: Or if you knew about it. I guess you don't answer back, but that's I want to put that out of. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Carney I see no other public comment. Public comments closed back to the council. Councilman Pearce.
Speaker 7: Thank you. I just wanted to say, you know, I think giving this 45 days something I support and wanted to see if we can make sure we include in that report things that are already tied to similar things as a master plan, as we discussed earlier, and what the timeline of a master plan would be, what the cost of a master plan would be.
Speaker 0: And that would be it.
Speaker 7: So I support, you know, Councilmember Mungo's substitute motion. So.
Speaker 3: Councilman. Councilman Austin.
Speaker 6: So I don't believe that was a substitute motion. It was a friendly amendment. Is that correct?
Speaker 7: Yes. I requested to remove my substitute motion and and Fred instead made a friendly that Councilmember Austin accepted. Yes. Sorry, but it's still on the board under the previous.
Speaker 3: So we'll fix that on the board. The motion is Councilmember Austin's 45 day motion.
Speaker 6: Thank you.
Speaker 3: Councilman Roston. Anything else? Nope. Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 7: No further questions.
Speaker 3: Okay. There is a there is a motion in a second on the floor. It's not yet up on the board. If I. Right now, there's. No it was. It was. It was. It was. Yeah. Okay. It's recorded. Okay. Members was going to cast your votes.
Speaker 0: Ocean carries.
Speaker 3: Okay. Thank you. Now we're going back to a presentation that we had earlier that we didn't get to, and that is going to be the presentation, I believe, from gas and oil. And I think Mr. West was going to start off by saying something. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Manager to have the Long Beach Airport Director work with the Airport Advisory Commission, community members and airport stakeholders to develop a long-range master plan for the Long Beach Airport. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11012016_16-0978 | Speaker 3: Very much. Thank you all again. Next item, we're going to go back on the consent calendar. We pulled one of the items, one of the numbers off consent we believe was number eight. So and just as a reminder, also, item number six was taken off the consent calendar, which I mentioned. So now this is item eight, which we pull off the consent, if we can read that item.
Speaker 0: Communication from police recommendation to determine the application serves the public convenience and necessity and receive and file the application of American Petroleum Corporation for an original application of an Alcoholic Beverage Control License. District one.
Speaker 3: Okay. And I'm going to turn this over to Councilman Pearce, who's going to speak on behalf of Constable Gonzales.
Speaker 7: Thank you.
Speaker 0: On behalf of Councilwoman Gonzales, who couldn't be here tonight, I'd like to make the following motion. I move that we find the original application of an ABC license by American Petroleum Corp. DBA Pacific.
Speaker 7: Union 76.
Speaker 0: Located at 1410. West Pacific Coast Highway does not meet the public convenience and necessity.
Speaker 7: And protest the issuance of the ABC license on the basis of overconcentration.
Speaker 8: So yes.
Speaker 0: That's it. As for your support.
Speaker 3: If I may have an opportunity to speak, I'm representative.
Speaker 2: Public comment.
Speaker 1: Now. Okay, you can go. Come on up.
Speaker 3: Thank you very much, Councilwoman Andrews. I'm the applicant's representative. My name is Michael Pauls. I understand that the speaker card is not appropriate in my business. Stressed to 6475 East Pacific Coast Highway. I number 135 in the city of Long Beach. We've have been going forward with this process for over a year. We had contacted the counsel office. We had an opportunity. We'd worked with planning with Jorge Ramirez.
Speaker 2: Officer Barajas.
Speaker 3: This is a long time business owner in the city of Long Beach who is being forced to make this change. He has operated a minor automotive service repair garage, which was so common with these types of gas stations over the years. But because of the sophistication of business of vehicles these days, he's being forced to close that enterprise and open up a convenience market. He wishes to move forward with a a national brand franchise, which was the wish of the Planning Commission. A national brand franchise is contributing money toward his business. This is an over $750,000 development, and without the national franchise, it becomes very difficult to secure the necessary financing. We're in plan check at this point in time, we spend a substantial amount of money on the project. The beer and wine sales is significantly restricted at this site, and we were in agreement. It's 8:00 in the morning until 10:00 in the evening with no single sales, two cooler doors. It is simply just a placeholder with which to be able to secure a franchise which will be able to keep the business open. He needs this to remain competitive. Other businesses in the area also have beer and wine sales, which are unregulated with respect to the types of product and that they sell. And what I would simply ask this this census tract, by the way, has no residents. So any any any business who wants to establish alcohol in the census tract would have to come before this body for a letter of necessity and can being its or caldara. Finding the census tract in the daytime has a huge population regarding all the people that work there from 8:00 in the morning until 5:00 in the afternoon or the various hours in which they do work. So Alcoholic Beverage Control does recognize that, and they recognize the issue that we're having. What we would like to do is and we would like to ask and I realize the Councilmember, Lena Gonzalez, had asked you to speak on her behalf because she's not here this evening. And we reached out to her office. But we would like to ask if this item could be continued so that we may have an opportunity to speak to Ms.. Gonzalez, Councilwoman Gonzalez, and to be able to dialog with her regarding the importance and the restrictions and responsibilities that this business owner, who again, has been a business owner in this community for over ten years, would would would like to share with the councilwoman. So if at all possible, and we ask you to please assist this business man to simply provide us an additional 30 days, an additional two weeks, whatever the council deems fit, so that we might be able to reach out to the councilwoman , her staff, and let her understand that that we are not trying to impact this community in a negative fashion at all. So we thank you very much.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Much to the man. So I have a few notes I just want to share.
Speaker 7: I know that the councilwoman met with the business roughly around a year ago and her concerns are that there's overconcentration that there are four approved ABC licenses in the area which should have none. That there's future development. The gas station sits next to a lot that's undergoing review by Counsel Office for Future Activation. And the reason why this item cannot be delayed is that all responses for the application must be received by.
Speaker 0: November 10th, and our next.
Speaker 7: Council meeting is not until the 15th. Also, in reference to the census track, I understand there's about 100 residents in that census tract, but there are several that are 300 feet away. There are no schools or residences within a reportable 600 feet. However, Cabrillo High School is half a mile and there are residents less than 300 feet. And so being that this is Councilmember Gonzalez is item and she's request council to deny it. I'm going to support her in that. And I ask.
Speaker 0: That.
Speaker 7: Other council members do the same.
Speaker 3: Thank you. May I have the opportunity to respond to some of that?
Speaker 2: No.
Speaker 3: You know, you can't. No. There was no information that was provided.
Speaker 2: So we'll just have to wait until you like to see. We have to go into any more public comment. But you've had your 3 minutes to.
Speaker 3: Mr. Andrews. Thank you, sir. Appreciate that very.
Speaker 2: Much. Yes, thank you. Any more public comments on this item? You don't. You. Don't you speak. Don't you not? Okay, fine. We'll kick off the motion, please.
Speaker 0: Councilman.
Speaker 2: Oh, yes.
Speaker 1: I mean. Yes.
Speaker 0: Okay. Bush and Kerry's. | ABC License | Recommendation to determine the application serves the public convenience and necessity, and receive and file the application of American Petroleum Corporation, dba Pacific Union 76, for an original application of an Alcoholic Beverage Control License, at 1410 West Pacific Coast Highway. (District 1) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11012016_16-0992 | Speaker 0: Motion carries. Next Item 22 Report from Long Beach Airport Recommendation to adopt resolution to execute a contract with Berlin Care EMS for the maintenance upgrade and support of the Long Beach Noise and Operations Monitoring System for total amount not to exceed $880,000 for the proposed three year term District five.
Speaker 3: I think you want to take your motion off. Okay. Okay. I will get in your motion in a second on that. Okay. Can I get a second on that, please? Give us a motion or take any public comment saying none, please. We do. Yes, actually. So let me go to Councilman Superhot and then we're going to go to our public comment.
Speaker 5: Councilmember Thank you. This is kind of a housekeeping item. I'd like to address just the language in this item. It's listed as a District five item. And generally speaking, this kind of perpetuates perpetuates the philosophy that the airport is a District five entity when it affects our entire city. This specifically involves noise monitors, which are located in districts three, five, four, seven and eight. So I just like the language of this item to be changed to reflect all five council districts.
Speaker 3: Mr. WEST Yes, we certainly will do that. Okay. Thank you. Councilmember Austin.
Speaker 6: I think I second that motion.
Speaker 3: Okay. Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 7: I would not only like it to be reflected in this, but in future noise related items.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Thank you. Any public comment on this? I think there was one. Yes, please.
Speaker 8: Hi again. Laurie Smith, Third District. This I just want to be clear, this also is regarding the web track. Okay. As a Ron Reeves. The noise or the noise?
Speaker 1: Guru.
Speaker 8: Guru. Buddha. The Buddha that that deals with her constituents concerns and issues and keeps us updated on things. He gets a lot of emails from those of us who use web track. We're not exactly.
Speaker 7: Pleased with their service. So I was just talking to.
Speaker 8: To one of the staffers of the councilman. I just want it to be built in that there is a way that the community who uses this service could.
Speaker 7: Be able to interact with them rather than it be Ron Reeves and take up his.
Speaker 8: Time. We've asked for contact information from them and be able to speak to them because there's wide.
Speaker 7: Swaths of sways swathes of.
Speaker 8: Information that are missing. And when you look at a Web track website, they also provide the information for Alex Torrance. You can go to any of them. It's very easy to do on their website. And it's funny because our airport, our Long Beach Airport Web track system misses all the information. But if you go to the other airports, you could see it there. So it's it's been something that's going on for a year that we've been talking to them about. Unfortunately, the person that we were speaking to before is no longer there. So I don't have a new contact person. It's just a little frustrating when it's the constituents or people that that are that they're providing the service for so that we could be able to get to get the information if there's people that are not flying correctly or flying too low or dangerously over the neighborhood. So I would just ask that we be able to to put that in to.
Speaker 7: The contract that they provide.
Speaker 8: That or have a community outreach person or have bi monthly or quarterly meetings that they meet with with community members to look into.
Speaker 7: Issues that we're having with their system.
Speaker 8: Considering that they provide the service to all the other airports. And that information is on there. But it's not an airport. It's something that you would think, you know, you would want to do as a business, that you're providing the service for, you know, 8 to 10 other airports. And yet the one that you then there's this one airport that doesn't have that information. So please include in there. I appreciate you allowing me to talk and. And complain about this. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Mr. West or Mr. Marker. Can you make sure that our system is if we have a system, it's got to be, like the best, obviously, as far as the data. So if ours isn't up to up to speed or I've heard this complaint multiple times. So, Mr. Romo, can we just look into it and we're spending money to do this thing? It should be working.
Speaker 9: We'll certainly have that conversation with the vendor and see what other departments are doing and make sure that we're doing better, if not exactly what they're doing.
Speaker 3: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Austin.
Speaker 6: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just had a couple of quick clarifying questions for the airport director regarding this. Obviously, I support this agenda item. As we spoke about earlier, the noise ordinance is very, very important to us. And so monitoring noise accurately is is extremely important for our city. And so this this this contract is something that I will support. But I wanted to clarify the noise monitors. Are they specific to the main runway when we 30.
Speaker 2: Councilmember Austin of the 18 monitors that are deployed. I. 12 are dedicated to runway 1230 or main runway. The other six are dedicated to the shorter two five runways.
Speaker 6: So we actually have noise monitoring capabilities for the other two runways.
Speaker 2: We do that. And the purpose for those is not part of the noise budget, if you will, that's tied to runway 11230, the the noise monitors for the short runways or for single event violations. So we monitor that. If somebody exceeds the allowable single event, that's that's used for that purpose.
Speaker 6: And do you know, I guess the question, if we have 18 monitors and you said 12 were dedicated to one, two, three zero. That's correct. And so would that mean that three are dedicated to the other two.
Speaker 2: Three, three.
Speaker 6: Each? And you know what the the scope of that noise actually is or geographics in terms of where they they're located.
Speaker 2: Well, I can I'll give you some general information on it and our noise, officer, if you want to get more pinpoint information. But each of the short runways has a one monitor on the approach side and two monitors on the departure side. Specific locations. I'd have to have Mr. Reeves come up here if you want that information.
Speaker 6: Which I can get with him. Outside of that, I'm just trying to get some orientation as to. Okay. Our noise monitoring capabilities on the other runways.
Speaker 1: Yes. Thanks.
Speaker 3: Thank you. I we have a I'm sorry, Councilman. You know.
Speaker 5: Just one last point of clarification. This item is primarily software, as I understand it now with the noise monitoring system. There's a physical component. I think web track calls them emus. Ron Reis refers to them Raptis, I believe. But it's the pickup device, the microphone that that measures the sound. Does this item. Well, I mean, a better question would be, is there a single point of responsibility if a noise monitor goes down? I know our airport staff does a great job, but Web track is not responsible for their not being sound monitored. They're they're responsible for a component of that. Would that be correct?
Speaker 2: That's correct.
Speaker 5: Okay. So what we really need to do as as the mayor said, if we want a top notch system, it's got to be both the physical component and the software component. So I just like to add that that. If that makes sense. Yes. All right. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Excellent. Thank you. We have a motion in a second. We had public comment. Please cast your votes. | Resolution | Recommendation to adopt resolution authorizing City Manager, or designee, to execute a contract with Brüel & Kjaer EMS, Inc., a Delaware corporation, including any necessary amendments thereto, for the maintenance, upgrade and support of the Long Beach Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System (ANOMS), in the amount of $232,873, for a period of one year, with the option to renew for two additional one-year periods; authorize an annual contingency in the amount of $50,000 for additional services, plus a 3.5 percent annual CPI increase, for a total amount not to exceed $873,356 for the proposed three-year term. (Districts 3,4,5,7,8) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11012016_16-0993 | Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 3: 23.
Speaker 0: Report from Parks, Recreation and Marine. Recommendation to execute the 20th Amendment to historical site lease with Rancho Los Alamitos Foundation to provide for the annual management fee for lease year 2016 through 2017. District three.
Speaker 3: Get to get a motion in a second, please. Councilwoman Price. Okay. Any public comment on the item? Seeing Nancy's casserole.
Speaker 10: She wanted to make a couple of comments on that, please. Thank you. So I just wanted to thank city staff for bringing this item forward. I want to thank our partners with Rancho Los Alamitos Foundation. They do a tremendous job managing the property and creating a space that is accessible to the public and the children of the Long Beach Unified School District. They help, through their partnership with the city, maintain this site as a as an asset that provides education, not just on the history of Long Beach, but the history of the region as a whole and our development in this region. And they it has the partnership has proven to be extremely successful. And I'm grateful that as a result of measure funds, we're going to be able to assist in our part of the partnership in making sure that the building, the buildings that they help maintain and take care of and preserve are seismically sound and such that we can invite the public to continue visiting for many years to come. So thank you. And I'd ask everyone to support this item.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Counsel Braxton.
Speaker 6: Yes. I'd like to just lay my support and voice to in support of this item as well. I think this is something I know that the foundation at Rancho Elizabeth Alamitos has been working on for some time. And, yes, it's good to see this this this project moving forward. I just wanted to just also we talked about citywide resources a little bit earlier. This Rancho as well as Rancho Cerritos, are also citywide resources that serve our entire city. Anybody who's interested in history, the history of Long Beach. But more specifically to, you know, every child in Levy's unified school district actually has an opportunity to to learn and visit these ranchos at some point during their matriculation through the time. I believe it's the third for the third grade. Fourth grade. But anyway, just one of those comment things.
Speaker 3: Thank you. There's a motion and a second. Any public comment on this? Okay. Please cast your votes. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute the Twentieth Amendment to Historical Site Lease No. 24291 with Rancho Los Alamitos Foundation to provide for the annual management fee for lease year 2016-2017. (District 3) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11012016_16-0994 | Speaker 0: Okay.
Speaker 3: Motion carries item 24 and Mr. West, I know this is I don't 24 is a pretty big deal. And we're very thankful to Supervisor Tanabe for his work on this. Did you want to do a short staff report?
Speaker 9: Yes, I think we should. This is huge, $2.6.
Speaker 2: Million at the end of the term here. I'm going to turn this over to our director, Marie Knight.
Speaker 7: But scrutiny married members of the council. In June 2016, the Competitive Access Funds became available from the fourth supervisor Supervisor of the District Access Funds Program. This program is provided under Los Angeles County Proposition eight and allocates excess grant funds equally to each supervisor or district, which distributes available funding to eligible recipients through the Office of Supervisor Duncan Harvey. The City of Long Beach was notified that it would be receiving $2.6 million in competitive excess funds. Funding may be used for park projects that consist of acquisition, development, improvement and or rehabilitation of real property in the fourth Supervisor District. County staff indicated that funds must be prioritized for shovel ready projects that can be implemented in a short amount of time. The Department of Parks, Recreation, Marine and the Department of Public Works to prioritize park projects for this funding based on a set of established criteria designed to leverage existing funding and maximize grant funding. These park projects would include shovel ready projects that can be completed in a short amount of time, and specifically those that require gap funding for completion are related to park safety and accessibility projects and priority projects, not funded by Measure A. So here are the projects that we have chosen 14th Street Park expansion project that is underway. There's $200,000 being dedicated to that citywide park, irrigation and landscape improvements. As you know, we are in desperate need of upgrading many of our irrigation systems throughout the city. And once we do some of those upgrades, which will in some cases require us to re landscaped those areas after we have done the irrigation improvements. That money will be used in those areas. El Dorado, Duck Pond. El Dorado, West Duck Pond Restoration. This will be added to some existing grant funding that we have already. El Dorado Regional Park Restroom Rehabilitation. This will help us rehabilitate two of our restrooms in our regional park. The next one is ADA improvements and some relocation of some park amenities at the heart. Hutton Park Stearns Park Community Center improvements. This is to go towards some existing emergency funds that were set aside from our general fund for some repair of the roof there. And we're having some major issues there with some structural issues and some leaking of the roof. The Wrigley Greenbelt Trail. This will help us provide the final piece of gap funding that's needed so that project can move forward. And the red car greenway, this extends that Greenway project into the next segment in the next phase. So again, we are very, very grateful to Supervisor Tanabe for this funding that allows these projects that some of them were in sort of a holding pattern until we had this money to move forward.
Speaker 3: Think. And I just want to add also my thanks to Supervisor Tanabe. I know that he was very supportive of his projects and it's his last, I guess, last ability to give to the projects. And as a note, I know he's giving these to Long Beach, but he's doing some projects across the county. And so I think all cities are benefiting from the projects added in this pool. So thank you for that. And Councilmember actually, I'm sorry, Councilman Andres, you didn't have any comments on the motion, right? Okay. Let me go to Councilman Austin. Did you know Councilmember Pearce?
Speaker 0: I yes. I also want to thank.
Speaker 7: Supervisor Tanabe for prioritizing our parks. And I just had a question for the citywide park.
Speaker 0: Irrigation and landscaping improvements.
Speaker 7: I'm not sure if Bixby Park is included in that, if it is included in that when we return to redo the landscaping there from doing new irrigation. I wanted to comment that I would really love to see a dog park there and to get some dollars for us to explore what that would cost and how quickly we could turn that around, particularly with trying to activate the entire park right now. So at this point, the irrigation projects won't include landscaping in addition to what is needed just to repair the landscaping that has been torn up because of the irrigation projects. So that landscaping that's included in this is not additional or landscaping in other park areas, but it is to replace what is being torn up from the construction. And do we know, is a Bixby Park included in at this point? I do not have the final list. We're combining this money and projects with some of the major aid money that we have. We are prioritizing those park areas where we are either manually turning on irrigation, which is very inefficient. So for example, there are some areas in Hartwell Park that will be looking we'll be looking at parks that are not using reclaimed water so that we can be more efficient with that. So I don't have the final list at this point in time, but I will let you know because the park makes that list. Thank you so much. You're welcome.
Speaker 3: Thank you. There's a motion and a second and a public comment saying now please cast your votes. | Resolution | Recommendation to adopt resolution authorizing City Manager, or designee, to submit grant applications to the Los Angeles County Regional Park and Open Space District (District) for the Fourth Supervisorial District Excess Funds Program (Program), upon receipt of a grant award; accept a total of $2,600,000 in Competitive Excess Funds from the District for the Program to be utilized for the development of park projects in the City of Long Beach; and, upon acceptance of the grant award,
Increase appropriations in the Capital Projects Fund (CP) in the Public Works Department (PW) by $2,600,000, offset by revenue from the grant. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_10182016_16-0965 | Speaker 2: Great. Thank you. And let's give our commissioners a round of applause for the work that they do on these very important issues. And so we're going to move on to item 17, which is related. And so, Madam Clerk.
Speaker 3: Communication from Councilwoman Gonzalez, Councilmember Muranga, Vice Mayor Richardson, recommendation to receive and file a report from the Disabled Resource Center on what services they provide to their clients through Employment Services Program.
Speaker 2: Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 5: Yes. So in recognition of the month that we're in the National Disability and Employment Awareness Month and for all the amazing work that everyone does both in the city and also our Disabled Resource Center and all of our advocates here, commissioners as well, I wanted to also thank them for their work, but also find out more information about this amazing resource and organization. I think you should be applauded for everything you do for so many individuals who happen to have disabilities. And I think it's the time is now to talk about these things and give us a better understanding of everything. So I'd like to welcome Delores Nathan, the executive director of formerly of the Disabled Resource Center, to sort.
Speaker 2: Of. Would you mind taking a seat? I actually not not during this item, sir, but thank you, Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 5: Yes, thank you. I'd like to welcome you up, Delores. I know you have a presentation, and we'd love to hear your words and a little bit more about the Disabled Resource Center. Thank you for being here.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Here I am again. It's such an honor. I am the executive director at Disabled Resource Center in Long Beach. And it's an honor to to represent my board of directors, my wonderful staff, our volunteers and interns. And some of you might not know all of the work we do, but since 1976, we have supported and empowered the most vulnerable groups, including veterans at risk youth, senior citizens, men and women returning from prison, homeless individuals and families, people with disabilities of all ages, and those recovering from addictions. We are just one of 28 independent living centers in the state of California. We are the only agency, I believe, in the Greater Long Beach area that works with all disabilities, all ages, all incomes. And we don't charge for our services because it is the National Disability Employment Month. Mr. Gonzalez, Councilwoman, thank you so much for this. I'd like to spotlight on our employment services program, but first I want to. Quote My friend Al Buck, he's a former Laker, a Laker scout and a wheelchair user. And he says independence is having a job. Well, what does that mean when, according to the United States Department of Labor, the unemployment. Persons with disabilities is 42.5% higher among people with disabilities than those that don't have a disability. And to further elaborate. 70% of working age people with disabilities are not working. Even though most of them want jobs in the independence. The the the thing that we're doing at my center, we have 16 programs and they include housing assisting the government with government benefits for other job placement. And we work with over 2000 people per year throughout Los Angeles County and parts of Orange County. All of our staff of 16 have a disability and more than a majority of my board does. Darcy's employment services include. We have the Ticket to Work program. We also have an IMO you with the Department of Rehabilitation where they refer all of the people that are looking for employment to go through our employment services program and work with our job developers. DRC has another program that we have that really help people that are looking for employment, and that is an eight week training course that leads to a certificate of completion. After completing this class and getting their certificate, graduates have an opportunity to volunteer at DRC and to receive real work experience. You know, I used to tell my get my kids. The best way to get a job is to get your foot in the door by volunteering. And we practice what we preach because seven of our staff of 16 started off as volunteers. So I know there is a time to talk about all the other 16 programs that we have that help get people jobs. But thank you so much for inviting us here and recognizing us this evening. It is such an honor. Thank you again.
Speaker 2: Thank you so much. Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 5: Oh, I still wanted to just think.
Speaker 2: Councilman Gonzalez.
Speaker 5: Quick. Thank you, Mayor. So, Dolores, thank you so very much for being here again. I really appreciate your time and just letting us know a little bit more about the DRC and a huge thank you to you and your entire team for the continuous efforts and providing services that promote independence and employment in the disability community of Long Beach and surrounding cities. And we're really grateful to have you in our city. The presentation that was just done by our mayor and the celebration, of course, particularly with is important to the First District. And I say that because I have right behind me Jennifer Kumi AMA, who I praise every single day because she's just an incredible employee of mine, someone who embodies an impeccable person inside and out. She's the owner of Miss Wheelchair California and the vice president of Miss Wheelchair USA. And so we've made adjustments up on the 14th floor for her, and I'm very happy that we're able to do that so that she can she can work very openly and freely at the in the office. I also think her personally for ensuring that this valuable organization like the DRC remains on our our city radar. And a big thank you again for coming out tonight. And I also want to thank our amazing city staff as well. Appreciate you being here.
Speaker 2: Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 8: Sure. Just want to take a moment and thank Councilwoman Gonzalez and all the speakers and applause. I'm continually astounded by all of the resources that I continue to learn that are available here in our city. And the more we can highlight them and find these opportunities just to get the word out to the public, the better, the better we do as a city at being more inclusive and respecting human dignity, which is something that is a core value of mine and a core value of our city. So I just want to say thank you and keep up the great work.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Councilwoman Mango County Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 5: I, too, want to thank you for being here tonight. I had the pleasure of getting a tour of the center about a year ago maybe. And it was fascinating. I have to tell you, I walked away just so inspired by the dynamic of the environment. It seems to me that everybody who works there has a passion for what you do, and that's why so many of you have been working together for so long. It's unusual to see that kind of longevity in a workplace that was very that that was moving to me. And every time I drive by the center, whether on the freeway or if I'm going to Westerly and happen to drive nearby, I, I think about that. I think about the dynamic through your leadership, Dolores, that you've created there. But just sometimes when you try to put people in a workplace that they don't have passion for who they're working for or what they're doing, it's just not a good fit. And you guys have created such a great fit, which speaks so much to the service that you provide, the folks that seek you out. It's just everyone there cares from the heart. So thank you for everything that you do day in and day out. And thank you also for educating us on the wide number of services that you provide to folks who are disabled and others who are maybe going through addiction issues or economic issues. I think that was eye opening for me. I did not know the breadth of the services that you provide and all of the different folks that you touch through your work. So thank you very much for everything that you do. We're very lucky to have you in Long Beach and I think, Councilwoman Gonzales, for bringing this item forward.
Speaker 2: All right. Thank you, Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 0: Yes. I also am just so thankful to have the work.
Speaker 3: Of both the Resource Center.
Speaker 0: And all the individuals. So many of your employees are active in the community and out there informing the leaders of the different opportunities to improve our connectivity. And so I appreciate our commissioners and all the employees that work so hard in our community. And I think that being available and being accessible is a big part of that. And taking leadership roles is also a big part of that. So thank you for all doing that and thank you for what you do.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Councilmember Ringo.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Mayor. I also want to thank Councilwoman Gonzales for allowing me. Inviting me to participate in this and this event. I also had the opportunity to visit the Civil Resource Center a few months back, and I was just simply amazed at all the wonderful work you do there, the state of the art technology that you have and the state of the art resources that you provide for all your clients. I go out there and it's really amazing. I can remember way back in 1990 when the Disabilities Act first came into into effect, and there were very little resources available at that time. Nobody knew what to do. And but you've hung in there. You've been in there throughout the whole course of it, and it has actually grown to get to where you're at with the state of the art. I want to thank you for your service and thank you for staying in Long Beach and doing the work that you do.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Thank you again. Thank you to everyone and those who brought the item forward. There's a motion and a second is for public comment on this item. See none. Actually, Shirley Broussard, please come forward so we can. And they were going to take a vote and move on to the agenda.
Speaker 1: Thank you. I'm speaking for a singing impaired person, Andrea. She's not here, and I haven't had an opportunity to meet her a couple of weeks ago. And she explained to me how it is for the visually impaired to cross the street. And they are going to she they are rallying to get the people who are seeing impaired to come in and introduce themselves. But before they arrive, I would like to assist the DRC in asking its counsel and manager and mayor. How difficult would it be to add voice boxes to the crosswalks so that those who are seeing impaired could go across the street? How how difficult would that be? What grants are available nationally to see that these people are able to cross the street by themselves without someone assisting them? This particular young lady I met her seeing eye dog died. And so she was having to get a new one. And and we sat and discussed for quite a few minutes that just to have voice boxes at the crosswalks for those who cannot see would be a great service to those who are seeing impaired. I would ask you personally on behalf of her, who she's not here and the numerous people who are not sighted in the city somewhat just to take that up for them so that they many major cities have it. Voice boxes you walk up and because they are blind, the Braille has the reading on the box and they press that box and it tells them how many minutes or seconds they have before they can cross the street. I, I believe it would do a major service to those who are seeing impaired if that were added to our list of important things. Thank you.
Speaker 2: Thank you so much. With that members, please go to cast your vote.
Speaker 3: Motion passed. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to receive and file a report from the Disabled Resource Center on what services they provide to their clients through Employment Services program and how many people with disabilities have gained employment through their services in recognition of National Disability Employment Awareness Month. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_10182016_16-0940 | Speaker 2: Great. And so as the order of these things go, we have our hearings first, then we go on to public comment and then the agenda on the council. So we'll begin we have two hearings tonight and will begin with the I guess we're doing hearing to first, from what I understand. So we'll go ahead and Madam Clerk.
Speaker 3: Report from financial management recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the hearing and approve the hearing officer's recommendation to deny the business license application submitted by Alsace-Lorraine Fine Pastries located at 4334 Atlantic Avenue District eight Oath is required.
Speaker 2: Thank you. I think we're doing the oath.
Speaker 3: Okay. Everyone is going to testify. Please raise your right hand. 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 2: Okay with that, I'm gonna introduce. I'm sorry, sir. I'll call up speakers in just a minute.
Speaker 4: That's fine.
Speaker 2: Thank you, sir.
Speaker 4: I'm here on behalf.
Speaker 2: Of all Sis Lorraine. Okay, we'll have. We'll have you up and just. Just a seat right here in the front, sir. We'll call you right up. So first up is going to be our presentation from city staff. So with that, I'm going introduce Mr. tomorrow.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The staff report for city staff will be given by Brett Jaquez, our business services officer, for this item.
Speaker 4: Good evening, honorable mayor and members of the city council. Tonight you have before you a recommendation to uphold the hearing officer's decision to deny the business license application for all Lorain Fine Pastries Inc doing business as all six Lorain Fine Pastries located at 433 four Atlantic Avenue. Applying as a bakery in Council District eight on August 9th, 2016, the City Council referred the appeal of the business license application denial to a hearing officer. The appeal hearing was held on September seven, 2016, and the hearing officer submitted their written recommendation to the City Clerk's office on September 9th, 2016. The basis for the denial is due to the property owner not having the required commercial industrial rental license to lease any of the addresses on their parcel. The answer address is contained on the property owners. Pass parcel of land included. 433224336 Atlantic Avenue. The property owner previously had their license revoked on April 19, 2012, due to the operation of an illegal marijuana dispensary at 4332 Atlantic Avenue. To this point, the city is unable to reinstate the commercial industrial rental license to the property owner due to the substantial amount of outstanding fines, penalties and liens attached to the property and owed to the city of Long Beach resulting from the operation of the illegal dispensary. Nonetheless, all city slurring Fine Pastries Inc has been operating on the parcel for approximately two years without a business license. Therefore, staff request the City Council uphold the recommendation by the hearing officer and deny the business license application for all. Six Loraine Fine Pastries Inc. I as well as the City Attorney's Office, stand ready to answer any questions council may have. And that concludes staff's report.
Speaker 2: Thank you. With that, we're going to allow the attorney who's here to represent I'll see Lorraine make comments. There's I know there's a reasonable amount of time, period. So if it's 10 minutes okay for you, sir. Okay.
Speaker 4: Thank you. And I appreciate the council's time and in permitting me to speak to this issue. I think it's interesting that I follow a proclamation that the city of Long Beach is in the running for being the most business friendly city in the state of California. I think this situation and the what it presents to the city council gives the opportunity to put its money where its mouth is and demonstrate that it is, in fact a business friendly city. I represent all six Lorraine's Fine Pastries Inc. They run a bakery that they have. They purchased that bakery, and they have run it lawfully ever since. They have a current health permit from the city of Long Beach that has been renewed. They have never had it suspended for any reason whatsoever. The very thing that one would be concerned about with regard to a bakery, namely that it provides products that are safe to consume, has never been in question, as was indicated by in the testimony of the a person on behalf of the city. The only reason why Alsace-Lorraine Spine Pastries Inc has not been granted a a license to operate, and it wants to have a license to operate. It wants to pay taxes. It wants to be the corporate citizen it's already behaving as. And it's being prevented because of something involving its landlord. A historical problem that its landlord has, and I understand continues to have with the city of Long Beach over some unpaid fines from a period of time 2 to 3 years ago, plus on a different piece of property. Not all cease Lorraine's pastry, but the adjacent property, a dispensary that used to run that was in violation of 5.89 of the Long Beach Municipal Code. That dispensary has since been closed for approaching two years now. Yet for some reason, this denial of this license for all sales continues to be a vestige of a left over issue that doesn't even involve all case, but rather involves the landlord for the building that all six rents. All the owners of all six fine pastries were unaware of this issue. They are not they did not even come to own the business, nor come to rent the property until long after the dispensary was removed. Yet here they find themselves being unable to get a piece of paper from the from the city council that says you're allowed to operate and and participate as a member of the of the corporate community. The business itself, though the current owners have only owned the property, have only been owners for a couple of years. But excuse me, I believe about a year and a half now that all says bakery has been at that location for decades. I would venture to say that probably many people in this in this room have been to that pastry store. It's right on. It's right on Atlantic Avenue, a major thoroughfare. And I believe that it falls within District eight, Mr. Alston's district, and has had no issues whatsoever with this operation. It's never been cited for anything. It's never been shut down. It's never been closed. It's never had anything other than a exemplary grade for its for the quality of its products and the fact that there is an existing dispute between the landlord of the building and the city where the landlord is, as we understand it, unable to legally rent or at least doesn't have a license to rent because he's certainly renting and he's certainly receiving rents from the city, from the from all, say, Lorraine's fine pastries ultimately. You have a business that's there. It's running. It's running pursuant to a health health license that the county's given it. And all it wants is it is its license to operate its business. We have had to file litigation, in fact, on the on the city council's agenda meeting for a closed and closed session item number four on that agenda all says Lorain Fine Pastries Inc versus City of Long Beach. Is that lawsuit. That lawsuit goes away. If this body grants all say, salary and find pastries, it's license to operate its bakery. You get rid of one of those lawsuits just by doing that and will and will waive attorney's fees and will waive everything else. If you just give them back their it just give them their license and let them operate. As it stands right now, unless the city council does that, my client has no choice but to continue that litigation and continue to keep the city of Long Beach involved. I am asking the City Council to use common sense here and not allow a dispute that exists between its land, the landlord of this building and the city to affect the ability of one of its tenants to be able to do business, pay taxes and be a good corporate citizen in the city of Long Beach, as that business has been for well over 50 years. I'm open. Any questions? If the city council has any?
Speaker 2: Okay. Thank you, sir. We're going to turn this over to the council and then if there are questions, I'll let you know, sir. So certainly. Thank you. Okay. With that, I'm to turn this over to Councilmember Austin.
Speaker 9: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I want to thank our city staff for their diligence and hard work on this matter over the years. This is a very. Unfortunate situation that we find ourselves in. I do have a couple of clarifying questions before I make my motion and recommendation, and that is to staff regarding the what has been represented by the business in question, their attorney representing them. What? Was there a nexus between the property owner and the business in question? Is there a nexus?
Speaker 4: The property owner was the former owner of the bakery, also offering pastries or not clearing features, but of also exploring the property. And his name was Mr. Know. He was also the owner of the bakery at one point in time before it was sold.
Speaker 9: Okay. So when was the transaction to sell the property?
Speaker 4: We received the application or the first notice that we were aware, and a new operator was looking to operate that bakery on July six, 2016.
Speaker 9: Okay. And the the fines on the property permits win. And up until what point?
Speaker 4: The fines on the property. Sorry. The fines on the property started on March 13, 2012 and ended on August 9th, 2014.
Speaker 9: And so the the property owner missed their no, I believe his name is was the owner of I'll say Lorraine during that period of time.
Speaker 4: That's correct.
Speaker 9: And then the property turn switched ownership.
Speaker 4: The property owner is still the same person, but the bakery business. A new application was received for the bakery.
Speaker 9: Okay, so the what's before us is a recommendation to deny the business license and application submitted by the the the business all, says Lorraine Fine pastries.
Speaker 4: That's correct.
Speaker 9: Okay. Has there been any has missed? Has the property owner reached out to the city in any way during this period of time to discuss any sort of settlement agreement?
Speaker 7: No, he is not.
Speaker 4: That's a mistake.
Speaker 2: Well, hold on. Actually, sir, that that's not the way it works.
Speaker 7: So I think there has been outreaches by the city to the property owner to resolve the the leans. As of January 5th, June 15th, there are eight liens against the property of $604,000 with penalties and interest is currently over $1.1 million and there's been no substantial offer or issued to resolve those.
Speaker 9: I think. Did you say that the city has made offers?
Speaker 7: No. The city has indicated a willingness to discuss it, but we have not received any kind of offer to resolve those lines.
Speaker 9: Okay. Well, I'm a little bit challenged by that. I will just say that I am I'm aware of this this property, this location. It is definitely created a great deal of consternation in my district for during a period of time in question here, where the property owner was fined. On several occasions, I've had no opportunity to to meet the property owner or to be in any conversation whatsoever with him about this matter. I'm concerned that there, um, there hasn't been a willingness of the property owner, at least what has been represented to us here today to enter into some sort of settlement negotiations. But, you know, I think in in good faith, in spirit, because this is this is a very, very serious decision before the city council. I would recommend and I'd like to make a motion that we continue this item for 30 days and allow such a conversation to be had, or at least open the door for that and come back and see where we are on this. So that's my emotion.
Speaker 2: Okay. There's there's a motion any second on the floor with that. Let me go ahead and add any public comment on the hearing separate of those that did the oath. Okay. So close public comments on the hearing. And let me go back to the council for any other comments or discussions. Sir, this is not that.
Speaker 4: I used to counsel.
Speaker 2: No, I also. I'm sorry. You're not city council. I guess I. No problem. No problem. Yes, different one. So is there any other. No other city council comments? Mr. Gringa, on your second year of anything?
Speaker 7: No. I think that Councilmember also has it correct that we should offer an opportunity for a last chance opportunity, if you will, to settle this.
Speaker 2: Okay. There's a motion in a second to I believe it was 30 days. Is that right, Mr. Austin? Okay. Members, please go and cast your vote.
Speaker 3: Moshe Karis.
Speaker 2: Okay, thank you. Moving on to hearing number one, please. No. Actually, we're going to wait for hearing, number one for some folks to get here for that idea. We're going to be on the public comment. So I'm going to have the once I call your name, please line up in this order. | Public Hearing | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the hearing and approve the hearing officer’s recommendation to deny the business license application submitted by Alsace Lorraine Fine Pastries, Inc., dba Alsace Lorraine Fine Pastries, located at 4334 Atlantic Avenue. (District 8) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_10112016_16-0921 | Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you for those presentations. So let's go ahead and begin with our first hearing. This is item number three. Can you please go ahead and read the item.
Speaker 1: Report from Economic and Property Development Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record. Conclude the hearing and adopt resolution continuing. The Long Beach Tourism Business Improvement Area Assessment for the period of October 1st, 2016 through September 30th, 2017, and authorize the city manager to extend the agreement with the Long Beach Area Convention Visitors Bureau for one year term districts one, two, four and five.
Speaker 0: Thank you. So this is a pretty big presentation combined with an item. So we're going to start by just hand it over to our city manager who's going to introduce a number of people to speak and some presentations. Then we'll hear, you know, the maker of the motions, comments and move forward from there. So. City Manager West.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Mr. Vice Mayor. We will hear a staff report from Jim Fisk and then we will turn it over to our convention and Visitors Bureau. Honorable Vice Mayor and City Council Members. This item is the annual.
Speaker 2: Approval of the Lambie's Tourism Business Improvement Area Annual Report and Ongoing Assessment. On September 28, 2016, City Council approved a resolution granting approval to set today's date for a 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 significant changes.
Speaker 3: In proposed activity. Therefore, staff requests.
Speaker 2: That City Council received a supporting documentation of.
Speaker 3: Record, approve the resolution.
Speaker 2: Continue the levy of assessment and authorize.
Speaker 3: City manager to extend.
Speaker 2: The agreement for another additional year. That concludes my.
Speaker 3: Report. And Mr. Vice Mayor, at this time, I'd like to ask Steve Goodling to come up and give us a presentation. This is a time we always look forward to, to hear of the tremendous success that the CBD has had over the past year. Thank the board and everyone who participates in making Long Beach such an amazing tourist destination, keeping our hotels full and generating tremendous amount of economic activity for our city. So thank you, Steve, for all you do. And let's hear from Steve. Thanks. Thanks, Tom. Also, Vice Mayor. Thank you. Council members. Thank you. And also Mr. West. Thank you. As you all know, the economic impact of tourism and overnight visitors in the city of Long Beach is a substantial one. It generates over $300 million a year into our greater Long Beach area and especially into our downtown area this year. It's exciting to report that there's a $26 million estimated collection in total for this fiscal year. That's the $6.14 for every dollar invested. And for eight years, Dan, I have figured out how we could invest our money into the same profit sharing program. I But it really, when you think about it, for every dollar we receive, there's a $6 return and it's quite a phenomenal return. The growth over the last five years has been. $8 million. Or 46%. And so as we've come out of the recession and as our hotel partners have renovated their hotels and offered new, new product, and as the economies continue to gain strength and as our conventions have picked up over their anticipated room blocks in our city, the cities continue to benefit not only in the economic activity, but in the direct bottom line of just real hard green dollars into the city coffers. In addition, our strengths as a city hospitable customer service. And I know that we all are aware of that downtown development that continue to build out continues to be noticed by our convention planners. Long Beach Airport and its awards. And it's been getting one of the top ten airports by Fodor's. ET cetera. And then the other activities of creating special turnkey spaces at our convention center. Here's a shot of a typical experience in Long Beach as you attend a convention, as we all know, and we hear it often, we hear it from our convention attendees or hear from our convention planners. There is no attitude in Long Beach. When people come here, they feel hospitable. They feel welcomed. They actually feel embraced. And we see this all the time. In addition, they're commenting about our buildout, in addition to the city hall project. All the other condominiums going up this bridge connecting the Terrace Theater Plaza to the promenade is a major point of excitement for our convention planners. They are so thrilled to be able now to not have to walk down the ocean, take a right, and then are right back into the terror Cedar Plaza to go into the rest of the building. So, once again, thank you to council. Thank you to city management. This is a huge project and it's going to make a great impact. In addition, Long Beach Airport and the sociality of it, the planners and our attendees keep talking about how exciting this airport is. And so we're thrilled with our partners at the airport, both management and the airlines. And JetBlue has been a wonderful partner with us throughout the community and doing a lot of different things. Ted was a major inspiration for us as we hosted the TED conference for five years. We looked at how they use this space and we modeled after them. We noticed that where there was open space, they would put seating pods and they would put cool lights and they would create a cool atmosphere. And so we thought, okay, wonder if we can take their strategy and adapt it to the public spaces at the Convention Center. And we did it with the arena. The arena was a $10 million project. We've already booked over $180 million in three years into that space. There is rarely a weekend that you can find now. In addition, the Terrace Theater Plaza is being activated as we speak with, again, more trusses and lighting. It's there permanently on a turnkey basis, which means we don't have to rent them, pay people to construct them. And we'd like to share with you what we're sharing with our customers about these turnkey spaces, because this is another competitive asset or perspective for Long Beach. Our people loved it.
Speaker 5: We couldn't stop taking pictures. Feels new. It feels fresh.
Speaker 6: It's so configurable. I can have it one way, one minute.
Speaker 3: And one way or another minute.
Speaker 1: The Long Beach.
Speaker 4: Convention Center really has it all. But what does that really mean? Simply that we've created the best place for you to have any event, indoor or outdoor.
Speaker 5: Anything that you want with that rigging, lighting.
Speaker 4: And decor all in one place. Just like one planner told us, it usually takes 23 production.
Speaker 1: Trucks to create an event.
Speaker 4: With them. But here at Long Beach Convention Center, we have everything you can possibly need, which saves you hundreds of.
Speaker 1: Thousands of dollars.
Speaker 4: There's really no other place in the country like this.
Speaker 1: So let me start.
Speaker 4: By showing you some of the.
Speaker 5: Spaces at the Long Beach Convention Center. Starting with.
Speaker 4: The Pacific.
Speaker 1: Lobby and Plaza. Cool, right?
Speaker 4: But you haven't seen anything yet. The Pacific Rim is truly spectacular. Think of a venue that can go from having a horse competition.
Speaker 1: To a.
Speaker 5: Classically themed Italian party. The possibilities here are.
Speaker 1: Endless, and.
Speaker 4: It's all included. Where else do you get that? This room is a complete turnkey. Just take a look. Amazing is all I can say. But there's still more. Consider the Terrace Theater Plaza, which has beautiful LED lights, city views and fountains that are included in the decor. The possibilities for this venue are unlimited. As I said earlier, Long Beach is way up front ahead of the competition. And to make matters better, they're building a new, unique venue called The Cove, which will be out next year.
Speaker 6: To have a place like this that is so flexible and so beautiful. At the same time, I think that the.
Speaker 3: Event planning.
Speaker 0: World.
Speaker 7: Is going to love it and keep coming back.
Speaker 6: For more.
Speaker 3: So we'd like to thank each of you for your support and Pat and Tom and the city management team because your support has enabled us to remain competitive. When we were back in DC for our sales mission this year, one of the clients who has a convention coming in August said to us he can't wait to come out and play with these different spaces and decide how to maximize his special events. And that's what separating us from a lot of new large hotels that are 1000 1200 rooms, with over 300 to 400000 square feet of space that we're now beginning to compete with. So this is keeping us at the forefront. And in addition, we also have they've cut us off back to the agreement here for a second. So let me continue on the. We also have the Beverly O'Neill Theater. And the Beverly O'Neill Theater was a space that I said has occupied and done a wonderful job in showing and showcasing theater for many years. But there were also other organizations that wanted to be in that theater. And so we also had Long Beach Opera that expressed to be in there, and we had musical Theater West that had talked about being in there, and we had Camerata singers that wanted to be in there. And so this year, SMG and the Convention Center staff were able to incorporate and bring all these wonderful arts organizations into the newly named Beverly O'Neill Theater. We now have five organizations, again, like the Arena. This theater is busy almost all the time now. You can't find a weekend date in it. And so with that, this is, of course, what it looks like at nighttime. It's absolutely gorgeous. And we'd like to share what we've done.
Speaker 7: From opera to Broadway showtunes, the Beverly O'Neill Theater is now home to five of long beaches, premier professional performing arts groups, Long Beach, Camerata Singers, Musica Angelika, International City Theater, Musical Theater, West and Long Beach Opera.
Speaker 3: We are very excited about it.
Speaker 7: I think it's wonderful to have so many performers in Long Beach.
Speaker 1: This theater has been used, but not to its full capacity.
Speaker 4: I think it's just fabulous and it's.
Speaker 5: Great for the city.
Speaker 8: And I'm seeing.
Speaker 6: Like a lot of young audience, which is great. You know, I mean, Long Beach, to get on the map and to be an international city, you have to have all the arts. And this is an important step in getting in that recognition that we deserve.
Speaker 7: Recently renamed the Beverly O'Neill Theater. This intimate performing space up until this year was home to only one company, International City Theater. Then last year, for their 20 1516 season, world renowned Musica Angelica moved from Santa monica to Long Beach. Now, for this diverse and exciting inaugural season, three more companies are joining the growing list.
Speaker 4: It's so nice that we have a venue now.
Speaker 1: Where all the major performing groups in Long Beach are together under one roof. And what it means is that the citizens of Long Beach can see the Beverly O'Neill Theater as a destination for culture.
Speaker 7: Together with the Terrace Theater, where the Long Beach Symphony will be presenting their 82nd season. Long Beach now offers two venues in one space and for their inaugural 20 1617 season. Over 30 shows will be presented.
Speaker 6: So the full spectrum of.
Speaker 7: Performing arts can be celebrated. I travel a lot, go to Europe and I consider this as.
Speaker 0: Good as anywhere I've seen.
Speaker 1: I think that's great because we live in lounges in a community. So instead of going up north to downtown or to Hollywood, it's very convenient for us to have like all these performers in Long Beach. So looking forward to it.
Speaker 7: Join us for this amazing inaugural season.
Speaker 3: And so I'd like to recognize all the partners who worked with us this year to make all this happen. Gerald with Long Beach Opera. Also Paul Gorman, who is here. Kelly from the symphony. Karen Dhesi who's here. David Wilcock and David Bunker. Could you all stand up? These folks bring us such great talent and such great productions, and it's really thrilling. We now have our own. One could call it Music Art Center, just like Los Angeles and Orange County does, and it's totally activated. The Convention Center and the CVB partnered together to send out a direct mailing of 125,000 pieces, which is exactly what Cerritos and the other cities do. This is the first time ever and we've had really great results with it. I This is the piece that won out. Davis Gaines with Musical Theater West, a new concept, Broadway and beyond. Davis had had over 500 people in attendance for his performance just a few weeks ago. In addition, Camerata Singers performed the other weekend. They had over 300 people in attendance for their production and music. Music Angelic also performed this past weekend with close to 400 people. So the theater is being used, it's being activated, and the community is getting a great enjoyment out of it. In addition, we've also worked closely with Powell, with Julia Wang and Ron Nelson, and we brought Powell back for a second year. They've done wonderful work. Of course, the music at the Aquarium of the Pacific with that great manta ray painting on the front. And of course, those of you who have taken any of the Catalina Express, you're seeing that wonderful painting on the side of the bridge. And Powell has continued to elevate us. And we had a lady here in town just last fall, and she walked around the city and she fell in love with the vibe of the city . She also fell in love with the art murals and with powwows returning. She came back, looked at it, posted a story. The San Francisco Chronicle picked it up, and over 250,000 readers were exposed along beach. And that article was before you. But I think it succinctly captures the essence of where the city city's going. And it's the collaboration with Powell and all the other arts communities and the downtown. And we're we're now being recognized. In addition, our team worked very closely with the convention center staff to bring the Longines Master Equestrian Competition, which was two weekends ago. And it's Paris, it's Hong Kong, and it's Long Beach, actually, L.A. But we say Long Beach and and with that, it's kind of like the Grand Slam of tennis, where if you win all three, you collect a purse of $5 million. And we had horses that were flown in from Belgium, and they had to have 48 hour quarantines and people and space outfits because they couldn't touch them. And actually, when they left, they left two horses behind for us. So yeah. So but it's it's it was a wonderful, wonderful event. And their ticket sales were up substantially over last year. And as a community, we're looking forward to growing it with them. But they too had a huge BuzzFeed, both on social media and print media, and we were also on television for an hour on a major sports network. In addition, we had a six year old volleyball this summer, same thing, great BuzzFeed, great social media and typical Southern California beach scene. And of course, our other events, the JetBlue, Long Beach Marathon, Grand Prix, and also Pride. All of these events are continuing to build our social media. Our social media team has done a really wonderful job this year in growing our connections. And in Facebook we had 15.1 million additional over last year on Instagram, 18 million more. And Twitter we had 96 million more. Instagram, we have 11,000 followers. Facebook, we have 40,000 followers. And Twitter we have 17, almost 18,000. So from a social media perspective, our social media team has been highly engaged in these areas. Also, we've collaborated with the Queen Mary and the aquarium. We came out with a wonderful joint ad, which they paid into and we paid into, and they went into Sunset West Ways and Heroes Magazine, over 11 million in circulation. So the readers of these publications got to see Long Beach as a summer destination, which ran through April through July. But our bread and butter still as a community is our convention business. And it's a continued investment into the convention center that continues to reap the dividends that we've been enjoying as a city. And with our turnkey facility. You'll see what our customers have to say is right there and it's all walkable. You can walk to everything entertainment, shopping, amazing food. It's just one big ball of energy and a lot of fun.
Speaker 1: I love Long Beach Love, which is a terrific place to be.
Speaker 5: It has a great young vibe.
Speaker 4: Felt like. It was in a resort town, but also in a meeting location, all in one.
Speaker 5: It just had a perfect dynamic.
Speaker 1: As a foodie.
Speaker 5: In the city of Long Beach, you have so many options. You have steaks, you have American cuisine.
Speaker 4: Seafood. Of course, being by the water, you can sit outside.
Speaker 5: It's not just.
Speaker 4: The options of the.
Speaker 1: Food, but.
Speaker 5: The ambiance that surrounds you.
Speaker 6: Long Beach is ever evolving. I think the great thing about this city is always thinking to have.
Speaker 3: Chef ahead of thinking about innovation step ahead and thinking about what type of venue is the venue of the future. So unlike other convention centers, Long Beach does have a lot to offer.
Speaker 8: Leaving your meeting, you have great lobby space lighting and you go outside and they've got this trendy furniture. And once you go into the night, I mean, it's a whole nother party.
Speaker 3: The Pacific Rim, one of the most user friendly, gorgeous.
Speaker 6: Flexible, innovative.
Speaker 3: Dynamic places. No place exists.
Speaker 7: Like this in North America right now.
Speaker 3: I mean, the fact that the ceiling can come down and create different atmospheres and that the lighting and the rigging is involved, I mean, this is truly, truly amazing. Having amenities like ping pong tables, the lounge seating and the palm trees and the environment that has been created there is phenomenal because it allows for great networking and it really sets them.
Speaker 6: Apart from the competition because when you go to another city, you have to pay.
Speaker 3: Somebody to put all those things in place for you. Yeah, the cost of using a destination that has a convention center sometimes can be quite alarming. But in Long Beach with the center, it's all inclusive, it's turnkey. There are no surprises. You know what you're paying for and.
Speaker 7: You know what you're going to get.
Speaker 5: I think that Long Beach.
Speaker 4: Is special because.
Speaker 5: Of the people that are.
Speaker 1: There. It's all about.
Speaker 4: Creating community and relationships.
Speaker 5: And Long Beach always is a welcoming city.
Speaker 3: They all know each other, they're a community. And what they express and what you see when you go there.
Speaker 6: Is they want the business to come to Long Beach. I think Long Beach sets itself apart nationally. The Long Beach Convention and Visitors Bureau is.
Speaker 0: Second to none in.
Speaker 3: Terms of.
Speaker 6: Customer service.
Speaker 1: They work very closely also with the city. And so you feel that the city supports your event when you're working with them. They're not just looking for your business, actually looking at the relationship and it makes people keep coming back.
Speaker 5: The people of Long Beach really make you and your client feel special. They are always bringing new ideas to your event.
Speaker 4: They're looking to reinvigorate the event.
Speaker 5: They're always present, really makes them and their partnership unique to other locations.
Speaker 1: The convention center makes it so much easier for us to hold our events. You like it so much that we're going to hold our event there for the next couple of years.
Speaker 5: Our attendees loved every.
Speaker 4: Single bit of it and it was so great. We're even coming back again next year.
Speaker 6: Long Beach. There's nothing like it.
Speaker 3: And that is what our customers are saying about Long Beach. Again, thanks to each of you this year, we've worked with all of you closely. We appreciate your support. We appreciate all that you do to help us sell Long Beach. And in addition, there's a few people I'd like to recognize and have you also know who they are. Robert Schmidt was our chair on and off for the last two years and always jumped in and was wonderful. Robert Smith is a vice president for his Marriott Hotel Management Company, which also owns and operates the Holiday Inn at the airport area. So we appreciate Robert's leadership. The past two years, he's been wonderful. And in addition, Bill Collier is our new incoming chair. And many of you know, Bill and we look forward to having Bill guide us into the next two years. And, of course, many of our other chairs are sitting in the front as well with Jane and Bill and and and so forth. So we we're very blessed with leadership. In addition, our board is just wonderful. If our board could stand to be recognized, that would be appreciated. The. And if the board could stay standing. CVB staff if they could stand to. This team also helps to perform a lot of magic, and we really appreciate and love them all. And in addition, convention center staff, we couldn't do it without them. Charlie Byrne and Veronica Quintero if they could stand as well. He. And and as you heard on on the video, it takes a whole community and we have 400 business members. Part of the convention visitors bureau. Our hotel partners are absolutely phenomenal. Are boards phenomenal? Are other business members, whether it's florists, whether it's restaurants? Terry Antonellis here tonight with opera. And so we have really just great members. If everyone could stand, these are the folks that help us sell Long Beach and deliver every day in. Lastly, there is a lady who has been behind the scenes for 30 years. I as a single mother, she raised two sons and at the same time sold Long Beach for over 30 years. She's our executive vice president, the number two in our organization. She helped us bring Ted. She helped us bring lawn jeans along with Heather Gonzales. She's been a stalwart. She knows how to how to squeeze nickels into the convention center. She knows how to make the space work. And we're so fortunate to have had her. And if we put it in economic terms, literally, if you look at 300 million a year over 30 years, yours is clearly generate over $1,000,000,000 for the city. I'd like to recognize Iris Heimer or Executive Vice President years. As I mentioned, she also raised two two sons and her one son, Eric, is here. He's an officer in Huntington Beach. Eric, where are you? Here we go.
Speaker 1: That made me cry.
Speaker 3: There you go. We really have been fortunate to have Iris with us for 30 years. Anyway, again, thank you so much for all your support and Pat Tom as well. Charlie. Everyone's been wonderful. It's an awesome team. We love doing what we do. We love selling the city. We love bringing business the city. And we appreciate that you support our efforts. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. So, Steve, I'll just I'll just mention, you know, every year this presentation gets more and more exciting. I think that I love that you demonstrate to the public the economic impact. You can take as much time as you want up here speaking as long as you start with the economic impact. I was at the League of Cities event this this past week and the excitement and the things people were saying about being here in our city, learning how it's the transformation has been fantastic and folks exploring our venues, it's really palpable. So I really want to just say great work to you, your entire your board, your entire team. You guys are experts and you're doing a fantastic job. So thank you so much. I want to there's there's a number of council comments here. I'm going to start with a statement that Mayor Garcia sent for me to read on his behalf, says, I want to thank the council for supporting this item in continuing our relationship with the Convention and Visitors Bureau. There isn't an organization or city that does more to promote, promote and support Long Beach than the CVB. And we really want to thank the one and only Steve Goodling for his amazing leadership, his knowledge of the tourism industry, and his devotion to Long Beach and his tireless, tireless work on behalf of our city. I regret I couldn't be with you tonight, but I want to make sure we recognize and thank Steve and his and his outstanding team, because they're working 365 days a year to ensure our convention center, hotels and local economy contribute, continue to thrive and grow. They do an incredible job and we greatly appreciate it. So next, we're going to hear from Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 4: Thank you. The one and only, Steve. Fantastic presentation as always. And I really want to thank the CVB board. I spoke, I guess, last month at your board meeting and really appreciated the opportunity to have some face time with you all to talk about our vision for tourism in Long Beach, some of the opportunities we have to work together, some of the challenges we have and really just I mean, 46% growth, that's fantastic. And I know that that's due to the hard work of all of you every single day promoting everything, thinking outside the box from the turnkey to the horse races, which were phenomenal. And really, I'm excited to support this item. I'm excited to continue to support our tourism industry growing. I'm also excited to continue to thank and support those over 3000 employees that work at our hotels, our convention center, everybody else that is serving everybody every day. And so I know that one of the things that makes Long Beach great is the fact that we get together and we sit down at the table and we dream big together. And so I'm really looking forward to continuing to be a partner with everybody on Dreaming Big, and I'm excited to say that I'm going this Friday to A.C.T., so really looking forward to continue to support our arts as well. And I hope that you guys will continue to meet with me and with everybody in the city that we're visioning big and dreaming together and making sure that we all move in the same direction. So thank you, guys. Appreciate it.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember Supernova. Okay. Councilwoman Pryce.
Speaker 5: Thank you. I echo what my colleagues have already said. I, too, want to thank the board and all the folks that are involved in this operation. It's huge. The work that you do is amazing. The team that you've built is really impressive. I think for me the most impressive aspect of the operations is the diversity of the space. Having gone there for the Longines tournament and seeing how that space was completely transformed was incredible. And also just walking around the area and seeing a different group of folks there enjoying the property and enjoying the event was impressive to me . I mean, there were certainly a lot of people there who I could tell my husband said there's a lot of blazers and nice, you know, straight cut pants here. It was just a very hip kind of audience there. And it was impressive because they fit they fit right in. And I think we did a really nice job of rising to the occasion, rising to the occasion for the level of customer that that competition is used to having. And I was very impressed with that. I think that the bridge is going to be a great addition, and I'm very happy to support that city project. As a council member and as a as a member of the. Two Council districts that actually get to implement Tidelands projects throughout the city, because I think that's an excellent asset for the city and I'm very happy that that's happening. And finally, you know, I think customer service is such an important part of the experience that people get. I think we do a really nice job of it. I notice now when I go to events outside of the city with my family, how much of an impact customer service has? It's probably something I really never noticed before. But recently we went to the forum for a concert and there's something that they do with their training of their staff there. I don't know how many people have been there recently. The staff really seems to enjoy working there and it makes you excited to be there at the event, and I've really only seen that here in Long Beach. I think there's just something about the people who work our events that really conveys a welcome ness that people take away with them. And so whoever is working on that on your end, I think that's a really important part of the events that we bring. And I love this. This this mailer that you passed out. I'm looking at it right now and putting, you know, checkmarks onto the events that I want to go to. I think it's really a really great document. I think it would be good to have something that's expanded so that we have the schedules for all the different art groups beyond just at the Terrace Theater, because there may be some performances that are at your home venue, I'm sorry, at the Beverly O'Neill Theater, because there may be some events or programs at your home theater that people may want to go to that aren't on here. So maybe for next year we could list somehow figure out how to put all of that into one mailer. I think that would be really great. But congratulations to all of you for everything that you do and for the team that makes it happen. You really do make Long Beach look great. You're definitely a bright spot on everything that we do. And thank you for giving all of us the opportunity to participate in the many events that you host. I think it's a great education for all of us to be involved in things like Musica Angelica, which I was involved in a lot last year, and and the many other programs that you invite us to participate in. It allows us to educate our communities about what you have to offer. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 1: Yes.
Speaker 5: I, too, want to say thank you very much to you, Steve, and your whole team. I not only live in downtown, I represent part of downtown. And it's exciting. I know that there's so much going on. I get to walk with my family to various destinations and it's just really exciting. And I fall in love with the city a lot more, especially learning about the presentation and all the five organizations I am very familiar with. I love Karen and all of her work and all of the organizations that are there, and I just hope to continue to hear more. I really also appreciate, Steve, that you also email us and let us know ongoing what is happening, even if it's something as small as a chandelier that is just beautiful. I love hearing about it because then the next week and I'm probably at the Convention Center seeing this glorious thing. So thank you so much for your wonderful communication and your amazing team. I see all of them patronizing the downtown and local businesses and I really, really appreciate that because that's really wonderful that they go to the local restaurants, the pie bar, the restaurant, you know, everything that's going on in downtown, they're there. So thanks a lot to all of you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Steve. I want to congratulate you again. This was a great presentation. Made me I know the entire council and anybody paying attention at home feel really good about living in Long Beach, let alone visiting Long Beach. And so I want to thank you and your staff turn out each every and every year that you are able to to bring to this presentation. Each year speaks volumes about your leadership, but also the commitment of your board, your your partners, your employees at the CVB. And so, you know, there's a good energy happening obviously there. And we heard from that the testimony from so many people that it makes us all feel welcome and it takes a village, it takes a team to make that happen. And so congratulations. Obviously, our guests are welcome. You guys do a great job of doing that. You do a great job of helping us celebrate arts and culture, which makes our city so special. But more importantly, you're helping us generate good revenue for the city. And so we very much appreciate that as well. And so, again, I wanted to thank you and just my continued support.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember Durango.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Mayor. Nothing says. Success more than what was up here in terms of the testimonies that we heard as was as was described earlier. We had our Legal Cities conference last week here in Long Beach, and all I kept hearing was testimony about what a great city we have, what a great set of people you have , what a great convention center you have. And it was it was all so positive. I felt embarrassed that I felt so shy to go watch it. All these accolades. And it's not me, it's our visitors bureau who's done all the work and continues to do a lot of work. And I'm so proud of the work that you do. That there were some individuals, council members, because it was a convention of council members and mayors from up and down the state. There were a couple of council members that mentioned to me that they want to hold their council meetings from here in Long Beach because they didn't want to leave. They didn't want to go back home. So I congratulate you for a great convention that we had last week. But for all the work in the great conventions that you bring to Long Beach and the great and wonderful experience that you give each and every one of them, because that's what makes people come back . So I appreciate that very much. Congratulations.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilman Andrews.
Speaker 6: Yes, thank you. Well, Steve, you've done it again. And I really thought it was all, you know, until I. Yeah, I really didn't. Huh. How blind him my, you know, really is to all of the individuals there but I just wanted to let you know, see, this is something that being here as long as I have and knowing Long Beach the way I do, you know, I used to run track inside of the feel conviction tune of the long way back when Muhammad Ali and all of this was around. But I let you know the things that you guys have done in the way you approve the city of Long Beach. This is something that when I walked in here tonight, I thought it was about my pool, you know, I said, Oh, no, but this is why this is why I can see why you guys get a yearly contract, because we would not be able to get this if you didn't come out and show it to us because we gave you any more time. We'd have billions of dollars. Steve You guys and your crew is just fantastic, and I wouldn't miss it. I mean, I dressed up for this tonight and thank you guys again. Congratulations. Keep making those nickels turn into dollars. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Say thank you, Councilman Andrews, Councilmember Suber now.
Speaker 9: Thank you. And that's a tough act to follow, I'll tell you. But and I agree with Councilwoman Price on the Blazers and the straight leg pants, and that was just on the horses. But seriously, congratulations to the board and the entire team. And you know that customer service. I think it absolutely starts from the top. I think I've been in office about one week when I got a text on my cell phone and it was from Steve and he referenced my wife by her first name and inviting us to something. So I was very impressed by that level of customer service. So keep up the good work.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Council Member Super nice. So we will at this point accept any public comment on this hearing. Seeing none. We're going to go ahead and close the hearing and let's. Members, please cast your vote, your ballot. | Resolution | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the hearing and adopt resolution continuing the Long Beach Tourism Business Improvement Area assessment for the period of October 1, 2016 through September 30, 2017; and authorize City Manager to extend the agreement with the Long Beach Area Convention and Visitors Bureau for a one-year term. (Districts 1,2,4,5) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_10112016_16-0839 | Speaker 0: Great. Thank you very much. Okay. So let's go ahead and continue on to item number one, our continued hearing.
Speaker 1: Report firm financial management recommendation to receive supporting documentation and to the record conclude the hearing and grant an entertainment permit with conditions on the application of El South Family Restaurant located at 1616 East Anaheim Street for Entertainment with Dancing District six. This hearing requires an oath.
Speaker 0: Great. So. So this hearing requires an oath. Miss City. City? Madam Clerk, do you want to go ahead and handle that?
Speaker 1: Please raise your right hand. 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 0: Thank you, Mr. City Manager.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Vice Mayor. The staff report on this item will be given.
Speaker 7: By Bret Jacobs, our business services officer.
Speaker 3: Good evening, Vice Mayor Richardson and members of the city council. Tonight you have before you an application for entertainment with dancing for Elsa's family restaurant Inc doing business as El Salis Family Restaurant located at 1616 East.
Speaker 6: Anaheim operating as a restaurant with alcohol in Council District six. All of the necessary departments have reviewed.
Speaker 3: The application and have provided.
Speaker 6: Their recommended conditions.
Speaker 3: As contained in the hearing packet. I, as well as the police department, stand ready to answer any questions Council may have, and that will conclude staff's report.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Is there a motion?
Speaker 6: Yes.
Speaker 0: So you want to go ahead and make a motion?
Speaker 6: Okay.
Speaker 0: Great. Councilman Andrews?
Speaker 6: Yes? I've had a chance to visit the establishment, and I feel very, very, you know, honored to be able to have them come into my district. And I know they've been here for many, many years and they're going to do a great job. So I hope that I can get approval for my, you know, colleagues from this.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Price.
Speaker 5: I support Councilman Andrews.
Speaker 0: Awesome as any public comment on this hearing.
Speaker 6: Okay. Is the owners here?
Speaker 0: I don't okay. Seeing. No. Is it. Are you. Are you folks lined up for public comment?
Speaker 6: No, the owners. Okay.
Speaker 0: So seeing no public comment, I'm going to go ahead and close the hearing. And let's go ahead and. Members, please cast your vote. | Public Hearing | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the hearing and grant an Entertainment Permit with conditions on the application of El Sauz Family Restaurant, Inc., dba El Sauz Family Restaurant, 1616 East Anaheim Street, for Entertainment With Dancing. (District 6) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_10112016_16-0931 | Speaker 0: Thank you. Let's have item number 14.
Speaker 1: Please report from City Manager Recommendation to receive and file a report on the development and launch of Biz Port, the city's new online application to reduce the cost, confusion and time to start and grow a business in Long Beach Citywide.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Mr. West.
Speaker 8: Vice mayor. Council members were very, very happy to have a quick report on our new technological innovation. Our online ombudsman for starting a new business. Our technology. Innovation. Itim director John Keisler is going to walk us through this with the help of his team. John.
Speaker 1: Good evening, Mayor and City Council. I'm here with Heidi Wares mother, project manager for Biz Port and we have a short presentation to give you some visuals of what this new tool can do and why it's valuable to the city of Long Beach and our entrepreneurs. And so we usually start with the innovation delivery approach with a user and the user's journey. And the process for an entrepreneur can be very, very difficult and challenging to find the resources that they need to open their doors. And so what this port tries to do, it's focused on entrepreneurs that we interviewed here in the city of Long Beach. We mapped their journey and we developed the tool around their experience so that it can help them get through the process a lot faster. Currently in the city of Long Beach, and this data is as recent as yesterday, it takes approximately 27 days median for all business license types. From the time that an entrepreneur will register for a business license to the day that it gets approved. And that could involve many, many different agencies. That could be the city agencies, you know, fired planning, building financial management, but also could be county, state and even federal agencies that.
Speaker 6: That have to participate.
Speaker 1: In that process.
Speaker 3: So what we want.
Speaker 1: To do is we want to reduce confusion, reduce cost, make our entrepreneurs more competitive and improve access to these resources. 24 seven And as I mentioned before, the process is designed around the user's journey. So even if it involves 12 different agencies, we want to give them the tools and the resources they need when they need them and designed around the process that they'll experience. So this is what it looks like. This port is built mobile first by our development group Code for America, a civic tech nonprofit from the Bay Area. As you remember, the council approved the Code for America Fellowship in August of 2015. And throughout this process, our Code for America developers arrived in February. And believe it or not, we were ready to launch by October 5th. That's one of the fastest processes technology implementations built from scratch that I've ever experienced. It's built in open source architecture, which means that it's highly flexible and entrepreneurs will be able to build on this code. In fact, it's reported that eight other cities in a county have already approached Code for America to access this open source code and make it a part of.
Speaker 6: Their.
Speaker 1: Organization. Strategy to help entrepreneurs. This port also brings a number of new solutions with regard to communication of information, including new what we call Internet clips or I clips that come in multiple languages. They present information about what could be complex rules and regulations in very simple and easy to understand format. They use icons that are familiar and universal, and they utilize subtitles in multiple languages so that people who may not use the volume or may need information in different languages can access that information quickly and easily. And this port is really built around three important stages of planning a business, launching a business and growing a business. Most of the business portals that are out there right now in the country really focus on what we would call the launch process. How do you register your business in the regulatory process of that city or county? We really have a philosophy that entrepreneurs will be able to get faster to approval, open those doors, faster saving time and money if they spend a little bit more time on the planning process. And so there's resources in that first column about business planning, financial planning and accessing services that are outside City Hall. So the Small Business Development Center, small business consultants, even mentors from regional agencies like Score. By the time you get to the launch process, we hope that our entrepreneurs will be more competitive and move faster through the regulatory process of licensing, permitting and perhaps applying for special permits in special uses, and then on the growth process once they've opened their doors.
Speaker 3: What kind of resources.
Speaker 6: Do they have for.
Speaker 1: Workforce hiring, obtaining funding to expand their business and developing their marketing plans so that they can increase the amount of customers? Something else that's very, very cool about this port is the fact that we've now established my profile and we call this the digital wallet. Many entrepreneurs explain to us and even city staff that sometimes business license numbers, you know, permits the state sellers I.D. This information can oftentimes get lost over the course of a entrepreneur's process. So this is the first time that the city is offering a digital wallet where they can keep this information and they can walk into any city department, bring this up on their phone. We have almost a hundred users already. We launched October 5th and already have 100, almost 100 profiles in the system today. You can see some of the information that you might keep. It can get confusing. And instead of having to keep lots of pieces of paper, you can start to load this information into your digital wallet. The other thing that's really unique about this point is the help chat function. All of our our information that's that's trans transmitted ideas to improve the site. Maybe questions about the licensing or permitting process can be communicated by clicking on that little bubble, the chat bubble in the bottom right corner. You're welcome to log on to your phone right now and chat with our developers. Lisa and Mark from Code for America are sitting right here in the audience and likely Lisa will respond to you if you send her an idea to improve the application. What else is unique here is that we receive hundreds of calls and questions across the city each day about different issues related to licensing and permitting. But if you chat a question about business licensing, for instance, our Code for America team has has written rules that will automatically send that question to the business license staff member who's responsible for that item. So we've found a more efficient way to refer and triage questions and send them to the people so that there's no wrong door. Another set of tools that we were told as we explored the process of starting a business was about site selection and about finding a building or a space. There's a really neat tool that.
Speaker 6: The Council.
Speaker 1: Of Governments in the Gateway area had built called Zoom Prospector. And so we've integrated applications like this into this port so that you now can find what's called a ring study. So if you see that that little ring up there, this was a search I did this afternoon looking for a building that was of a certain square footage for a certain purpose or type. And then I dropped a ring around it and said, what is consumer spending look like across different categories of goods and services? These tools, oftentimes to do a market analysis, we were told, can cost 15 to $30000. Now, an entrepreneur has these these resources at their fingertips, and they can use this for their business and financial planning. Something else that is extremely unique about this process, actually. You see, I mentioned there were 100, approximately 100 users that had already established a profile. It was 99 as of this afternoon because Heidi downloaded this this screenshot for us. But something that is really unique about the process for ongoing development and evolving this tool is what we call our shared dashboard in our analytics club. This is a group of approximately 25 people from cross-sectoral organizations. So our business improvement districts are Long Beach City College, our Small Business Development Center, as well as city staff from multiple departments meet on a monthly basis to review the behavior and usage of this sport. We use these numbers to drive strategy not only to develop new aspects of the system, but also to test where our users are coming from. Right now, a thousand of our 2500 sessions in the last 30 days have come from the business licensing websites. So we know that a lot of people come to us looking for information about their business license. We also know what kind of devices they're using and how they're accessing this information. That big spike in usage, of course, was October 5th when this report was announced and unveiled. We saw the highest usage in one single day, and we've seen usage reach the 2500 sessions mark, which is an incredible statistic when you consider that it's just recently been unveiled to the public. And finally, as we finish this up, ongoing development is going to be driven.
Speaker 6: Through an.
Speaker 1: Online survey. So we're able to capture in real time information about how we're doing rating the services rating against those those challenges that we mentioned at the beginning of this presentation cost, confusion, competitiveness. How are we doing and how can we improve? And then finally we're trying something new in that we have put our marketing and promotion tools out on an open source platform called GitHub, and that code is available to other organizations, partners that will help to embed that code on these digital banners in their websites and really try to institutionalize this point throughout the community so that the entire ecosystem, including all of our business support services, our business improvement districts, our local universities and colleges, can embed this point in their practicing curriculum. So with that, I'll finish my report and be happy to answer any questions about this part.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And just I just have a couple comments. I would say I think this is great, fantastic. And I'm really interested in seeing what the next step is. If someone, you know is savvy enough to get an app in or go through a website to go through this process, then they probably could navigate City Hall on their own. But for those who aren't savvy aren't that savvy, I think this could be a good tool if it sort of helped keep that, hold them accountable to sort of the next steps and things like when they need to get, you know, signatures for a facade of a sign program, they just want to get their sign up. You know, another thing is it would be good if we looked into DocuSign. You know, we're still collecting wet signatures to get a rebate on like facade project or a web signatures from property owners. And sometimes you have more more than one property owner, and it isn't worth it for a $2,000 rebate to go to people across the country. And it would be good if we somehow streamlined it to have DocuSign in there to where they can. The next step, after you get your business open, get your grants, get your rebates and all that stuff process. So, so John, that's just a recommendation. I'd love to see that. And that's what I've heard from a lot of the small businesses, you know, to get them to take time to download the app and go through it or come down to City Hall is a lot. When you get them there, you want to if you get them to download that, you want them to be able to do everything they can while you have them. That's my comments. Councilman Andrew's Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 5: Thank you. This is fantastic. So congratulations to everyone on your team and the the folks who have helped us with from Code for America. So this is fantastic. Thank you. This is up until this point, our district office has had a human biz part. Her name is Lisa West and she's been helping businesses through this process. So this is going to be much more efficient and we're already starting to talk about it at our community meetings. So thank you. I do want to say, while the code for America people are are here that, you know, about two or three years ago I saw the TED talk on Adopt a Hydrant and I would love to see some quality of life apps be developed for the city of Long Beach through Code for America. I've talked about it a lot. I've talked about it with John. I've talked to I know my former chief of staff, Julie Maliki, spoke with some of the Code for America folks in San Francisco. And I recently talked with our the chair of our innovation commission. I think there are a lot of opportunities for us to incorporate technology into our quality of life issues. We don't have the need for an adopt a hydrant here because our hydrants don't get snowed in in California. But we do have medians and trees and homeless issues and bike theft issues and bike tracking issues. There's a lot of opportunities for us to incorporate innovation into quality of life issues. So community watch groups, anything like that. So I'm so excited for Biz Port not to take away from how exciting this port is, but I would love for our residents to have more of a finger on the pulse of what's happening in the city around them and have a sense of empowerment and engagement, much like our business owners do. But this is this is a fantastic, tremendous new addition. And Heidi, congrats for taking the lead on this. So thank you very much for the presentation. It was excellent.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 5: Yes, thank you. This is wonderful. I actually sent a little message to Lisa while I was here thanking her.
Speaker 4: So I have a couple questions are just actually just a couple of thoughts I had.
Speaker 5: This is fantastic. As my colleagues have stated, I love all this because I think that this does give businesses and entrepreneurs that are budding another opportunity to do things through tech, which is really great. What type of I know we have analytics on the back end, so I mean, are we looking maybe at a year out or what where are we looking at as kind of our deadline to see how this is functioning well or not?
Speaker 1: Councilmember Gonzales. So so the cool thing about the way that this architecture is built is that it's entirely iterative. So it'll continue to be shaped by the usage and behavior of the users and the feedback that we get. It's also a collaborative project, meaning that our business support agencies who really drive the good work to attract and retain and grow our businesses out in the community, we're able to use this tool as a shared platform to leverage and better empower them with the tools that they might need to really expand that effort and grow business . And so so something I think in terms of analytics and what we call business analytics is that there will be a round of initiatives coming that relate to leveraging or making open more city information through what's called our Argo hub. And a few weeks ago, really the council considered an item and approved the contract with Ezri to expand the GEO Hub and to leverage city owned data and make that available to the public to start developing even more applications that can help for them to self-serve and solve problems. And so we really think that in terms of analytics, that the launch of the Geo Hub and the new Geo apps and we just recently featured that at the Civic Innovation Summit last Thursday and then we rolled it out in terms of the applications at at Cal State Long Beach on Saturday with our first Geo Apps challenge . We believe that that is going to be a huge driver of opening up that data and providing more analytics about how people are using this portal to ultimately expand the number of business licenses in the city.
Speaker 5: Great. That's wonderful. And one more thought that I'll add. I think that's fantastic. I'm wondering if there's a way and I think I've talked about it with you before, to identify these entrepreneurs or existing businesses that currently have patents, because I think that that's what makes the city very inventive and unique, is learning how many patents they have in the city. And so that would just be really interesting. Maybe if there's a way to embed that in the software, I think that'd be great. You know, maybe clicking on something. I have a patent and maybe a short snippet. I think LinkedIn is starting to do that as well. Like, do you have a patent? And that information may be very valuable to us. Thank you and great work.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 4: Yes. I just wanted to thank the team for all their work. I know that you guys have been plugging along on this and looks really great. I also want to thank Code for America for all of your work. I know you guys are also working with some other groups on a couple of other things that we're working on in the city. So really excited about that is, I think is the same question that the vice mayor had around. What's next? Are there ways on here for us to if they're expanding their hours to collect their signatures on here to do things that will allow us to kind of fast track that growth part in a new, exciting way. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 2: Well, I just want to salute the I-Team, I think. Job well done. This is exactly what you guys were put in place to do, is be innovative, be creative and create tools to help us grow business and make us more business friendly. I think this app, I think it serves as a good baseline to start from. I'm hearing comments that they'd like to see more, but darn well to to to start with. Very well. Thank you.
Speaker 0: I guess you're a victim of your own success. You do a good thing. People want to see more. But thank you. Thank you. Let's give another round of applause to the Innovation Team and Code for America for doing what they what they did. Is there any public comment on this item? Seeing none. Members, please cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Councilmember Soprano motion carries. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to receive and file a report on the development and launch of BizPort, the City’s new online application to reduce the cost, confusion, and time to start and grow a business in the City of Long Beach. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_10112016_16-0938 | Speaker 0: Thank you. And item number 18, please.
Speaker 1: Communication from Councilmember Pierce, Councilwoman Price, Councilman Andrews and Councilmember Otunga. Recommendation to request the city manager to draft report on the feasibility of implementing a safe parking program.
Speaker 0: Thank you. We'll go to Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Yes. I just you know, we have here to review best practices from other cities with potential locations that could volunteer to have their parking spaces available to people who find themselves without shelter, that we can connect them with services. So making sure that this is a pathway to housing and to getting back on their feet, i. So I want to just put it out there as having staff come back with some best practices. This is something that's been done in several cities, and I think it's the right thing to do. And think Long Beach. After last week's council meeting is primed for, you know, stepping forward and doing this. So thank you. Sorry, guys. I feel terrible.
Speaker 0: Tonight. Thank you, Councilman Andrews.
Speaker 6: That's okay. Thank you, Vice Mayor. You know, and as you and I think, councilwoman, you know, cheers for doing this because this is an item. It's really been something that I think is on most of our minds. And I think it's time for us now to really act. And year fiscal year 17 will allocate it $840,000 for general fund to the homeless service and $2.6 million to Animal Care Service. I love our cats and dogs and we have to remind these homeless people that we have families and we need to have a compassion for this and we have to do something to help them and we need to do it more. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilwoman Price Pryce.
Speaker 5: Thank you. I want to thank my colleague for bringing this forward. I'm always looking for opportunities to collaborate with my colleagues. And this is one of those projects that really allows us to think outside the box. Having said that, I think it's implied in the report, but I.
Speaker 1: Hope that the report.
Speaker 5: That comes back also shares with the Council any detrimental impacts that such a program has had in other cities, so that we can be mindful of that as we move forward as well as identifying opportunities. So I think several of the cities that have that were mentioned, I know just by speaking with folks in Santa Barbara last week who work for the city there, they they've had their challenges, to say the least, with this issue. And there are opportunities that come as a result of this. But I'm hoping that we can explore all of it, because I think this is a really great.
Speaker 1: Way.
Speaker 5: For us to think outside the box. And I commend Councilwoman Pearce for for doing that, because that's that that's the kind of thinking that's going to get us to some long term solutions to deal with this with the issues that we're seeing. So with that, I urge my colleagues to support this item and request that a report come back so that we can all be further educated on this. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember Superman.
Speaker 9: Thank you. I just want to follow up on what was was just said on the report. We have items for the report to include colon and then five bullet points and Mr. city attorney that that would infer to include but not limited to.
Speaker 3: We're here to take direction. But I believe. Yes, that's correct.
Speaker 8: If there's an additional thing.
Speaker 3: Like that would.
Speaker 9: See. Thank you. Well, I think that Councilmember Price did not add friendly amendments. But I would just like to add and as she did, that the report would include unintended consequences. You know, those types of things would be part of it. That is, if if we created this service, would there be an attraction for those outside the city to come utilize it, those types of things, if that's what's implied in in her comments. That's great. The other thing is, last week, we just kind of set course on a citywide ordinance involving RVs. And it seems like this might be a carrot without the stick as it is written here. So I would like to see the report on the RV ordinance come back and be part of this. So if that constitutes a friendly amendment and then I'd like to add that at this time.
Speaker 0: Council member?
Speaker 4: PEARCE Yeah, I mean, the reason why I put this on so quickly was so that it could be along the same timeline as the RV item. And so knowing that they are not, you know, separate from each other, but that if we do if we come back with this RV report, we should also have a report about what opportunities people who are sleeping in their cars have in the city. And, you know, I don't think it requires a friendly amendment for us to continue to give direction about what we want the staff to come back with. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Sure thing. Is any public comment on this item?
Speaker 1: Good evening, counsel. My name is Angela Kimball and I testified last week in respect to the RV warrant ordinance. We kind of feel like the ordinance got hijacked a little bit and went off track dealing with just homelessness and what. We started with? Well, I started with Jockey Cal in the fifth District. Jerry shipped ski and now this mongo trying to look at a city wide approach to put an RV ordinance in place. Other cities have done it. Other coastal cities have done it. Redondo Beach. Manhattan Beach. Huntington Beach. SEAL Beach. It's reasonable for our viewers to be able to bring their RV's home, load them up and go out and enjoy their families and have a great time and a great vacation. But it's unreasonable to expect the neighbors that live around them and on the streets around them to have to navigate around these large vehicles that are littering the community. And we're asking you once again to take a city wide approach. We're concerned with the issue tonight that we're talking about with homelessness, that the city look at the possibility of if we if you move forward with safe parking, are you inviting more homeless people to come to Long Beach that you're struggling with now to provide services and support? When we go to community meetings, we hear that 90% of the contacts made with homeless people are rejected, which is staggering. I think Councilmember Durango mentioned that only one in 50 of the people in his park area near his district accepted help. And that's that's really tragic with the amount of money and the efforts, because I know Long Beach is really working hard to try to solve homeless problems. But we're asking you to also think about the residents in these communities who get up and go to work every day. And, you know, we're trying to raise our families and we want safe streets that are not littered with RV's all over their neighborhoods. I mean, it's the long term storage that we're concerned about. And we appreciate Councilwoman Price bringing this issue forward. I wish she would really get some more support from the council and the mayor on this because it's a district wide problem if you solve both of these. If you look at these both of these issues together, if you have a reasonable plan in place for parking, you can also have a reasonable plan for addressing the homeless issues and people living in those cars and in those RVs in the community. Thank you. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Next speaker, please.
Speaker 7: Stefan Lawson Solo, a second District resident with the issue of RV specifically and with the safe parking we have to take into account the resistance is coming to these folks is mainly it is coming to it their appearance and in their apparent poverty in which they're bringing. Making an ordinance in which they would be limiting their ability to park inside of the city is discriminatory on its face. And its impact would be that it would be in line with others, with other cities that have chosen to do this as a way of punishing their poor residents, the homeless, our residents. We need to start making that distinction. They have less means that they're available or they're available than other people. But the folks who are specifically who are specifically having to live in their cars represent a certain degree of homelessness. That is more that is more in line with what we would experts would call working poor. These are folks who, like the residents inside of their homes in Long Beach, wake up every day and mostly go to jobs. They're raising their families inside of their cars. If you go inside Bixby Park and take a lap around there any time around 1130 at night or so, you're going to be seeing parents tucking their children in the back seats, providing them with a safe access without the fear of police. Retribution is going to be the way the way to be able to increase the people who are going to be accepting help in accepting services. When you are facing criminal repercussions for perhaps parking in a place where where you've been, where you've been told that you had or defecating in a place where there isn't an open restroom for four or five miles. And that's our conference. You don't really want to accept help for you don't really trust the government when they when they're coming in to telling you that they're going to be providing new housing. The last time that you maybe had a contact with them, the housing that you received was a criminal citation and a trip overnight in jail. So I'm sorry. So if you really are looking at that at a the creation of an ordinance and especially one that will not create a discriminatory impact, I say take a look, a strong look at the ones in Monterey and Santa Barbara. Look at the ways in which they they designed an ordinance that was not specifically trying to move away the homeless so that they were less apparent to tourists, but instead was a way to actually promote both public health and a redistribution of necessary resources to those who need it. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Good evening, Honorable Council.
Speaker 1: Members.
Speaker 3: And Mr. Vice.
Speaker 1: Mayor.
Speaker 3: Andy Kirk, excuse me, Vice Chair of the Homeless Services Commission representing the eighth District. I was the person that spoke on this issue at the homeless, the study session actually it was it was after the study session, but at last week's meeting. And I just want to bring up a couple of points. First of all, I want to thank the council for bringing up this issue again this evening, because I think it is an important thing to bring up in coordination with the possible creating new policies around the parking of Arby's and just the the living within vehicles in general issue. And so that's why I had I had originally brought up the safe parking measures that have been used in other communities. But just one point or a couple of points I want to bring up. First of all, I think there's a fine line policy wise between the issue of encouraging homeless to come to Long Beach versus exploiting the homeless issue that already exists from Long Beach to other communities. And I think that's why we need to to look at this truly as a regional issue. And that was the strong point that was made during the study session as the city of Long Beach isn't an island of itself. We are a part of a very large county. We're right next to another very large county in the county of Orange. We're part of a very large state that is grappling with this issue. So I think it's really important to keep in mind that we need to address this issue as a regional issue. And I think we should also possibly look at what the Los Angeles Homeless Services is also losses of so doing with regards to this issue, because I know they're also grappling with this issue on a city, city of Los Angeles level and the county, which are our neighbors in which we're a part of. So I think maybe there's some coordination that could happen along those lines that hasn't hasn't been talked about yet. Also, I also wanted to make sure in my bringing this up that we're not looking to maybe settle this on the Multi-Service Center. I did discuss this a little bit since last week's council meeting, and I don't think the Multi-Service Center in speaking with Theresa Chandler that that's the ideal setting for this type of program because of the location, because of what is already being done at that location and how that location is set up and providing the services they already provide. And then finally, just one last point. I think it's important also when we talk to the city governments that are doing similar things like Santa Barbara and Monterey and Las, I think we should also talk to some of the nonprofits that are also administering these types of programs to get feedback from them, because I see them as an important partner. If the city were to move forward on something like this, because they're the ones that would provide a lot of the services and would have the hands on knowledge of how these programs work. And so that's it for me. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you and we'll take it back behind the rail. Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 4: Thank you and thank you, Commissioner Kerr, for your comments as well. I want to speak to two things. One is the out-of-towners I think that we can look at when we look at other cities, making sure that we have Long Beach residents that have a Long Beach driver's license, that those are the first ones that are welcomed into a program like this. I also want to talk about the fact that there are only a limited number of parking spaces that are probably out there and that we wanted to ensure that we're doing this partnership with churches. So I've reached out to Pastor Sanders and I've also reached out to several other clergy folks in my district that will welcome having a community process as we look forward. So it's not just with city staff coming back with a report, but that we in the community and in the districts are also coordinating with nonprofits and churches that might be ones that are volunteering to open up these services. And so I think that we can definitely ensure that we're not opening this up to everybody. And even though we've had the health department say that people aren't driving here by the busloads but so one I think that and to I also had a comment around parking and how this impacts parking. I think that if anything, this is something that helps with parking. And when we look at the cost to cities, it looks like HUD has estimated that taxpayers pay about $40,000 a year for every unsheltered homeless person. And this includes expenses like emergency room fees and parking ticket enforcement. And so this is one other area that we can alleviate some of the costs that occurred with having a homeless population. So again, look forward to a study coming back. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Councilman Austin.
Speaker 2: Thank you. And thank you, Councilmember Pierson, the rest of the council members who brought this forward. I will be supporting this because I think it merits our attention. I'm especially appreciative of the public comments. I think there's a lot of value in public comment and hearing from our residents. And so and I don't want you to get me wrong, I think this is an important issue that needs to be before the council. But in the future I'd like to see it on a normal schedule so that we have the time to, to air it to, to for public disclosure and to give the public the heads up to be able to come in and weigh in on an important issue like this. And so to the best extent possible, if we can avoid the supplemental agenda for or for items like this that isn't that doesn't necessitate an urgency. I would appreciate that. But I will be supporting this. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Councilmember Austin. I'll just put it on the supplemental just so we can try to get along with the RV. If that's a 30 day or 60 day, I'm okay with having this come back in 60 days so that we can have more community input. I just would say that. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And I will just say I want to thank Councilmember Pearce and those who signed on with this proposal. Sometimes public policy development is a process. One item may lead to another item, one thing that you think might be an unintended, unintended consequence. You come out and give, you know, do a good, try it out at fixing it or make an attempt to fix it. And so sometimes it comes together organically. So I like this approach that allows staff to study it. It engages stakeholders like clergy in the process. So so I'm you know I'll be supporting this tonight councilmember been.
Speaker 9: 20 seconds.
Speaker 0: Already past the 730 go. I got to go for it.
Speaker 9: Because the FISA study was on the agenda tonight. I'd just like to remind you, this is we're voting for a study. All right.
Speaker 0: That's all over the place tonight. Councilman Andrews, anything else? Anybody else want to say? Anything. All right. Thank you. Members, please cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: This concludes our regular business. We have one more opportunity for public comment and anyone wishing to comment on an agenda items. Please come forward and state your name. You have 3 minutes. Is there any public comment? | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Manager to draft a report on the feasibility of implementing a "Safe Parking" program such as those found in the cities of Santa Barbara and Monterey Bay that would (1) move people who reside in their cars off the street and into safe spaces (2) that those locations would provide basic essential services (3) connect these individuals with programs that will work to move them into permanent housing.
Items for the report to include:
· Review of best practices from other cities,
· Potential locations that have both parking spaces and services
(Multi-service center, Churches, etc),
· Identify the basic essential services that would need to be
provided at locations,
· Number of potential parking spots, and
· Provide 1-3 program options including their time to implement
and their costs. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_10042016_16-0913 | Speaker 1: Councilwoman Gonzalez. Councilmember Pierce. Councilwoman Price. Councilmember Superman here. Councilwoman Mongo. Councilman Andrews. Councilmember Muranga. Councilman Austin. Vice Mayor Richardson. Mayor Garcia.
Speaker 0: I'm here to thank you. The first item for the council meeting we're going to take up is item 19.
Speaker 1: Report from Human Resources Recommendation to adopt resolution approving the successor memorandum of Understanding with the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers Citywide.
Speaker 0: Mr. WEST.
Speaker 6: Mr. Mayor, council members, we have a very great staff report to present right.
Speaker 7: Now on the status of IAM in city negotiations.
Speaker 6: It's going to be presented by our human resources director, Alex Vasquez, and her assistant, Ken Walker.
Speaker 1: Good evening, honorable mayor and mayors of the city and members of the city council. You have before you proposed Memorandum of Understanding with the applicable resolution between the city and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. I am I am represents approximately 2700 employees and seven different bargaining units. The city and IAM have had over 18 negotiation sessions since October 2015, including a mediation which resulted in a tentative agreement which is before you in the M.O. you. I am agreed to no raises during fiscal year 15. And the term of this contract is through September 30th, 2019. The following are the major provisions of this proposed MRU, a 2% salary increase in October of 2016, a 2% increase in October of 2017. A 2% increase in October 2018. The elimination of a floor award and skilled pay. We also were able to reach agreement to work together to mitigate the increasing costs of employee health care for plan year 2018. We also agreed to additional meet and confer sessions regarding changes to the overtime policies, and we also agreed to establish a Labor and management committee to discuss an avenue for non carriers to secure seniority points towards classified employment. The proposed animal. You also has a meta provision that links these bargaining units to the other miscellaneous bargaining units in the event that those in bargaining unions receive a greater wage increase. It's requested that the City Council approve the attach resolution and approve the IAM. And will you? I'm happy to answer any questions that you may have.
Speaker 0: Thank you. There's a motion and a second. Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 4: I just want to say I'm glad we were able to come to this point. I know it was really tough. And I think I am for, you know, of course, coming to the table every single time. And I know our city staff did an amazing job as well in coming together. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Price.
Speaker 9: Thank you. I completely agree with Councilwoman Gonzales. And I want to thank our city staff for working on this. I think it was a great resolution. And I know I want to thank Mr. Suarez for coming to the table and working with city staff to get to this point. I think it's a good resolution. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Okay. Any public comment? Seeing no public comment to close it out. Go back to the council, councilman Austin.
Speaker 2: Yes. Thank you. I just wanted to remark and say this was a long, arduous process. The collective bargaining process actually prevailed this time. I think it's a fair agreement, one that I'm happy to support. I want to congratulate, first and foremost, the employees who are the face and worked very, very hard on behalf of the residents to make Long Beach what it is. And so I want to salute them and congratulate them on getting a contract. And I also want to congratulate our city staff, thank them for their hard work and efforts to hammer this agreement out. Like I said, it was long overdue. It was an arduous process, but I'm glad we're at the finish line. Good. Good job, everybody.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And Councilmember Gringa.
Speaker 3: One word, an L.A. kaanapali.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And then I'm just going to add, before we go to the vote, I want to begin by thanking the members of the IAM and all the hardworking rank and file employees that are members of the union up and down our entire organization. Special thank you to Mr. Suarez or we've had many conversations since you came on board. I think at the end of the day, it's important that we remember that all of our employees deserve fair compensation and that they're treated with respect as well as for treated for the hard work that they do every single day. As a reminder or IAM employees are the women and men that are working in our libraries, that are cleaning our parks, that are fixing our sewer lines, that are ensuring that ah, trees and maintenance are being done, that are making sure that this community is a safe place. They're all and they're involved every single day to making Long Beach a better place. And so I just want to thank them all for their hard work and again, for reaching an agreement with the city. And so with that council members, please take your vote.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you and congratulations. And thank the AM as well. And. With that will go to item. I'm sorry. There's a there's a hearing and then item 14. | Resolution | Recommendation to adopt resolution approving the successor Memorandum of Understanding with the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_10042016_16-0898 | Speaker 0: Thank you and congratulations. And thank the AM as well. And. With that will go to item. I'm sorry. There's a there's a hearing and then item 14.
Speaker 1: Report firm financial management recommendation to receive supporting documentation and to the record conclude the hearing and grant an entertainment permit with conditions on the application of Blackmore, located at 6527 East Pacific Coast Highway for Entertainment Without Dancing. District three This hearing requires no.
Speaker 0: Let's go and take the oath, please.
Speaker 1: Please raise your right hand. You do solemnly state that this testimony you may give in the cause now pending before this body shall be truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So help you God.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. With that, I'm introduce Mr. Modica.
Speaker 11: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Members of the Council. The staff.
Speaker 6: Report would be given by Brett Jacobs, our business services.
Speaker 11: Officer. Good evening, Mayor. Members of the City Council tonight have before you an application for Entertainment Without Dancing for Park Hospitality LLC during business hours. Playa Amore located at 6527 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. I, as well as the police department, stand ready to answer any questions Council may have, and that concludes staff's report.
Speaker 0: Thank you. With that, I'm going to first are any public comments. So, you know, public comment and they closed the comments and go back to the hearing.
Speaker 9: Councilwoman Price is the is the owner operator of. Do you guys want to say anything?
Speaker 11: Hello. My name is Thomas Ortega. This is my partner, Todd Fujioka. I'm the chef and owner as well as my partner Playa More. We also have two other restaurants, one Cerritos called Amore Tacos and one in Redondo Beach called Ortega 120. First and foremost, we are a modern Mexican restaurant, farm to table. We are food driven. We do 70% food sales. That's. That's what we're about. During our.
Speaker 10: Temporary license, we've.
Speaker 11: Had a solo guitarist come in and play. People love it. We have it on Sunday, Sundays from 6 to 9. Excuse me. And he's done a very good job. Everybody loves it. You know, that's pretty much what we have on our grand opening. We had some.
Speaker 10: Mariachis.
Speaker 11: Typical stuff. That's all we're really looking into doing it here at Playa More in Long Beach. I can answer any questions if you have any. Thank you.
Speaker 9: Well, I want to welcome you. I've heard nothing but really great things. I haven't made it over there yet. But everybody raves about you and. And the restaurant and the service and the quality. It's a great addition to that shopping center. So welcome. I fully support this application.
Speaker 11: Thank you so much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And hey, I'll show you guys. I've been to your place a couple of times. Awesome food. I love Mexican food. I think. I love the twist you guys put on it, which is a kind of very different twist on Mexican cuisine. Thank you. You've got a great, you know, bar and got a great server the first time I went in the second time as well. And so you guys are doing a nice job there.
Speaker 11: Thank you so much. And our chef actually has worked for me for five, six years. He's sitting up here behind us, Mikey Gonzales, he's actually lived and grown up in Long Beach, went to Wilson High School. Just wanted to put that out there.
Speaker 0: Great. Well, good, good, good job. A nice addition. Thank you, guys. Councilman Gonzales, with you on the second.
Speaker 4: Just want to say congratulations. You know, welcome to Long Beach again. And it's really great to have more Mexican amazing food here.
Speaker 11: Thank you so much.
Speaker 0: Councilman Pierce.
Speaker 5: I had no idea that the owners of Ortega 120 had a place in Long Beach is one of my favorite places. My staff and I just did a four day retreat and ended it at Ortega 120. Thank you so much and so welcome to Long Beach and I can't wait to get over there.
Speaker 11: Thank you. Yeah. Or Ortega is going to be this next coming up. We're almost at ten years, so. Yeah, pretty crazy.
Speaker 5: It's so good.
Speaker 11: Thank you so much, Councilmember Ringo.
Speaker 3: How's your Chile? Ready. Is it hot?
Speaker 11: Nas, it's perfect. You need to come try it. Yeah. Yeah.
Speaker 3: I will hold you today. Thank you.
Speaker 11: Congratulate you so much.
Speaker 0: Great. Thanks again, guys. Good. Good food and good service there.
Speaker 11: Thank you, guys. Okay.
Speaker 0: There's a motion in a secondary closed common hearing. Part of the hearing. Members, please go ahead and cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Great. Thank you. And now we're going to go to item 14, please. | Public Hearing | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the hearing and grant an Entertainment Permit with conditions on the application of Parq Hospitality LLC, dba Playa Amor, 6527 E. Pacific Coast Highway, for entertainment without dancing. (District 3) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_10042016_16-0876 | Speaker 0: Great. Thank you. And now we're going to go to item 14, please.
Speaker 1: Communication from Councilwoman Price and Councilmember Supernova. Recommendation to request the city attorney to draft a citywide ordinance restricting oversize and recreational vehicles in residential and commercial corridors.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 9: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So I have brought this is an item that I requested some information from. Over a year ago, I think, or close to a year ago. And we received a staff report in March of 2016 on this item. RV parking in residential areas and commercial corridors has presented major problems for residents and businesses. The biggest primary concern is some public health issues because we've had illegal dumping, trash and other items left behind from folks that are staying in RVs. And that has caused a detrimental impact to quality of life for a lot of residences. And the other problem that we've seen arise as a result of RV parking is that the size of the vehicles is such that when they're parked on a residential street or in close, close to intersections at busy commercial corridors, they are blocking the view or the view corridor for line of sight for traffic safety. That's presented a quite a number of issues for people who are looking to make traffic maneuvers in the roadway and their sight is obstructed by the RV vehicles. A number of cities we've done a lot of research and so has staff. A number of cities have restricted RV parking so that they cannot be parked on residential streets or commercial corridors and require that residents who wish to load or unload the vehicles obtain, you know, a permit so that they're able to do that in front of their homes, which is reasonable. We certainly want to make sure that people have access to their RV and are using their RV. But we don't want residential streets and commercial corridors to be parking spaces for RVs. They're not meant to be. They present all sorts of public health and other issues in terms of our communities. And so I'm asking my council colleagues to support me in restricting the parking of RV vehicles in residential neighborhoods and commercial corridors. At this time, I'm not requesting that they be restricted in all of the city, but in residential neighborhoods and commercial corridors . I am open to hearing from my colleagues on any recommendations or comments that you may have in regards to this item, and very much willing to work with my colleagues in finding solutions to this that will work best for individual neighborhoods. Having said that, I note that the staff report indicated that we should have some consistency throughout the city because having a piecemeal approach, one is more costly to the city because of the signage that's required in terms of signage that has to go up different in different places throughout the city. And to having consistency in the city helps us be able to better monitor and enforce the ordinance. I did want to ask one question before I turn it over to my colleagues for their comments, and that is, is there a way to draft the ordinance, Mr.. City Attorney, such that placement of signage is not necessary so that we can I know that it's for us. If we were to do a consistent citywide ordinance, the cost is much less because we're talking about signage being placed possibly at the entry points of the city. Whereas if we do individual neighborhoods, we need different signage throughout the neighborhoods. Is there a way to draft the ordinance so that we are not incurring. That's a sign of signage. The cost of signage.
Speaker 6: It attempt to answer your question. I think currently the way the Long Beach Municipal Code is written, Section 10.24077 requires where posted no person or control the oversize vehicle is defined. And so the way the municipal code is written now we would need to post if you just wanted to do residential and commercial corridors, it would be street by street or you'd have to post those in order to enforce. The other option of a citywide is is also going to be expensive because you would have to post every entrance to the city of Long Beach and certain other cities have tried to do this and the courts have overturn their ordinance or not enforce the ordinance if they found they didn't properly document and post all of the entrances to the city. So it depending on what the direction is this evening, we'll certainly go take a look at that. And either we could bring it back or bring back a memo to the council describing the options and working with public works on what the appropriate or the associated costs with the posting would be.
Speaker 9: Sounds good, and it looks like they have an estimate of 100,000 if it was at the entry ways and $1,000,000 if it was in the individual neighborhoods.
Speaker 6: And I'm not sure how that estimate is, but I think if it was, you know, if you decided you only wanted certain residential and corridors and you. Continually added to those streets like we do other sections of our municipal code that costs would be incurred. As you added those streets, if you came out with a plan to do a number of streets, then obviously that cost would be associated with however many streets you do.
Speaker 9: As you phase it in kind of thing. Okay. But the question that I had is, is there a way to ward the ordinance or right now it says as posted, can we remove the terminology as posted and just prohibit the parking without parking without a posting requirement?
Speaker 6: No.
Speaker 9: Okay. Because the reason I asked that is because the memo from March indicated something, and I think I have it highlighted here. It says it says in discussions with the city attorney's office, there is concern that the current BMC requires that parking restrictions can only be enforced if signs stating the specific restrictions are posted. There's really no way to modify that. It would be any ordinance we'd have to have signage.
Speaker 6: That's correct. Under the vehicle code, the requires that our ordinance shall not apply until signs or markings giving adequate notice thereof have been placed. And the question is, do you place those at the entrances to the city or do you place them on the streets?
Speaker 9: And that's something that you would take a look at in the drafting.
Speaker 6: Yes.
Speaker 4: Okay.
Speaker 9: Thank you. So I would like to hear from my comments on this again, on my comments my colleagues on on their comments on this. And and, of course, the public as we formulate our approach moving forward. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Do we want to put any motions on the floor yet or not yet?
Speaker 9: Yes. I would make a motion to have the city attorney's office draft an ordinance restricting parking of. Oversize vehicles in residential corridors, residential communities and commercial corridors in the city of Long Beach.
Speaker 0: Okay. Should it turns out that all you need for that, for the motion?
Speaker 6: Yes. I believe if it's as stated here with these, it says like we would be looking at these other cities for comparable things and we would be also working with public works and streets to come up.
Speaker 0: Okay. So there's a motion on the floor. Not yet.
Speaker 9: Oh, I'm sorry. Yes.
Speaker 0: Okay. Can we. Is there a second? Okay, Councilman. Super now.
Speaker 10: Okay. I'm going to second to move this along, but I have a different approach to this. And I signed on with Councilwoman Pryce originally. My interest is the commercial corridors, and that's what we've received complaints on, not the residential areas.
Speaker 11: So how we've handled that so.
Speaker 10: Far, because as as Councilwoman Pryce mentioned, we started this a long time ago, a year ago. And so we've been placing individual signage at these kind of dangerous corridors. One is examining where it curves between Atherton and LASCARIS diagonal, where it was blocking the view. The the RVs are blocking the view of people coming out of the shopping center just because it's taken so long. We've expanded that to other streets and we're continuing to do that. We have requests in that's working for us, but it looks like we we could use, you know, something that's more comprehensive. But with that, I'd like to hear the public, because with any of these items, you know, it takes a while for the word to get out. I just realized that no one diligently, not everyone diligently reads my newsletter every Friday, which we've talked about this issue, but not everyone got the message. So I just like to get input before hear the public and maybe we'll come up with some type of hybrid here that that works moving forward.
Speaker 0: Next I have Councilmember Ranga and actually once again so ma'am, I got councilman council speaker. So just grab a seat and I'll call the public during public comment. Thank you so much, Councilmember Gringo.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Mayor. When I first read this request for a study on this and an ordinance, I had some things popped up right away. Because if we're talking about a citywide policy, equity, the the ramifications for Long Beach because we are a coastal city where Beach City and obviously implementing something citywide would affect those areas that are along the coastal zone, which means that we would have to look at other areas as well and differently because of the coastal zone. We would have to look at impacts with our local coastal plan, the LCP. It would require that we look at if we are going to implement something like this, that a lot of the coastal zone we will require. It would be the Coastal Commission would probably require a coastal development permit to do that. So there's a lot of other questions that this brings up that I don't think we've had properly reviewed as yet. And it's not within this this request here. So I would I would move that we probably move that that we receive and file this for the present time because of the uncertainties that it has, impacts on terms of the coastal areas. And we're not separating that out. And I don't think that we can at this at this point. And so I don't I don't I don't see where we have the feasibility of providing an ordinance that would address all the other issues that affect Long Beach as a whole, being a beach city. I understand that we could look at other. Neighboring cities and what they've done. However, they're not on the coast. We are. There is experiences also that I've had in the Coastal Commission that we've we've looked at these types of ordinances being put and they've all been rejected because of the fact that any, any changes would made for RV parking and other types of parking along the coast. It would limit access. And we're talking about access to the beach, not just to the parking lots and other areas along our coast. So it's incomplete. I'm not very I'm not very clear as to what we need to do with it. So I would move that we receive a file.
Speaker 0: Well, Counselor Rosetta is that I am making a substitution. Okay. I think that if you're going to do that, you have to process the stop or. Okay. Is there a second on that? Okay. That's the second on that camera. Go down the speakers speakers list. We have Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 5: Thank you. Yeah. I feel like I have a lot of questions about this, both in regards to the coastal zone, but also especially on a day when we just had hours of testimony around homelessness. And we have 70% of our homeless people in L.A. County sleep outdoors. And there's a DOJ ruling, several DOJ rulings that says that unless we have adequate beds for our housing, for our homeless, that we cannot make it illegal for them to sleep in their cars or to do camping. And so I would have some questions for the city attorney about, you know, Jones versus L.A., Joyce versus the city and county of San Francisco and a number of other rulings that would put us at risk and ask the question if we would be at risk for a lawsuit if we did something like this when we didn't have adequate housing yet.
Speaker 6: So I think you raise a very good point and a very true concern that our office will have in drafting an ordinance regarding the RVs. And you have to truly separate the issue of homelessness and RV parking restrictions. You are correct that certain cities have had their RV ordinances overturned if they're used as a pretext to either punish or try and eliminate homeless. So so you're absolutely correct. The point that Councilmember Price made, though, is a valid point on line of sight. Other issues where you have oversize vehicles that create those type of issues, I think you can properly regulate, but you cannot use this ordinance. And as some of the comments that came in electronically on this ordinance were alluding to is they see it as a remedy to cure the homeless issue or folks that are living in their cars. So, yes, that is a concern that we would have to look at, as is the concern of the councilmember from the seventh District of the coastal zone. Um, we could certainly maybe come back with a report before an ordinance or a receiving file. We can we could work on something and bring something else back at a later date. But those are two very important issues that we would be looking at in crafting an ordinance that we believe would be enforceable for regulation of RV parking.
Speaker 5: Thank you. I mean, I think I would say, you know, if we received and filed this and came back with something that know was very clearly had protections for our coastline, that ensured that, you know, our homeless population was not going to be at risk, you know, that that I'd be open to a future conversation on that . But this right now, compared to the staff report, it seems like there's still a lot of inconsistencies. And so I'll leave it at that. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzales.
Speaker 4: Thank you. I also would like to thank Councilman Price for bringing this forward. I have two business owners here from the west side. I think in the first district, what we've often dealt with are commercial corridors and having RVs block our places of business. And so that to me is a huge concern. And so I think I have a couple of questions. So when we talk about commercial corridors, is that defining a specific area or is that every commercial corridor in our city? I mean, is there a specific.
Speaker 6: That's a great question. And I would have to work with traffic engineers to talk about commercial corridors and how we would try and define that in an ordinance. So to be determined.
Speaker 4: Okay. That would be great because I would hope that it would mean everything. But who knows? It's a tough one, but okay, perfect. So we'll hopefully come back with that information. And then as far as signage, I think signage is important in this. I know it would be very costly, but perhaps we can phase it in starting with certain hotspot areas that are more liable to receive the RV oversize issue. That's just a thought. And then as far as differences in businesses and then residents, we have different perspectives because businesses I know there are some areas where in the Westside Industrial area where there's a need for oversize parking on the street. And so we've had issues where we've cited some of these business owners, but yet they are you know, they're parking there at 2 a.m. and they need to park their you know, they're parking there for, you know, a little a short time. But they're, you know, they're employee parking. And although that area doesn't have any residences, maybe there's some sort of, uh, I don't know what we're able to do and if we've done anything that has a perfect balance because that's an issue. And I know we're going to hear it on the West Side. Definitely. I'd also like to see if it is possible in our language because. In this is as to whether we can include something that states that these vehicles cannot block places of business because it doesn't state that specifically. And I think that is a huge hindrance, whether you're oversize. RV Whatever the case, I think blocking a business and I think I've heard from our business owners quite often that it's just it's really an impact to them. So I don't know. Can we include that language in here?
Speaker 6: Charlie Vice Mayor Councilmember Gonzalez Currently we're talking to the motion of the seventh District to receive and file. If we get back to the original motion, I think there's a lot of different options that we can talk about. And depending on the direction of the council, we can research in and look at what our options would be for the council to consider an ordinance if they desire.
Speaker 4: Okay, great. So yeah, I was talking to the original motion, but yes, I think I would be supportive of the original motion because I agree. I think the two issues need to be separated. I think we'll have a larger discussion in November. We're going to have a more comprehensive homeless report coming out. And I think at that time we can discuss issues related to RV. Are these people sleeping in cars, which I think is a huge issue. We talked about it at length today, but is when it comes to RV, it's an issue regardless whether it's east side, west side, north. I think it needs to be handled and we haven't really figured that out yet. So I would be supportive of doing a substitute substitute motion that would revert back to the original motion. Basically, everything Councilwoman Price entailed in here. But I would like, as I mentioned, clarification on commercial corridors, possibly an idea on phasing in signage, whether we can block places of business or we can include not to block places of business in finding some sort of balance between business and residential. Preferences. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Councilman, could you, uh. Do you mind plugging in your. But. It's not going up on my screen for whatever reason, but. I'm not getting anything. Did you really did you really push it? Okay. It just went up, actually, so. Okay, great. We have a we have a substitute. Substitute and a second and essentially is to take councilman precious motion, but then to add what Councilman Gonzales talked about as part of the discussion. Correct. Okay. Thank you. So let me just go down, Constable Austin.
Speaker 2: Thank you. So I do have a few questions for clarity, because now we're speaking to the substitute substitute motion. The I understand the intent is to to address concerns and traffic safety in our residential communities and on our commercial corridors. Is that correct? Yes. Okay. And. I'm sorry.
Speaker 9: For me, it's councilwoman.
Speaker 2: I'm Tony.
Speaker 9: Gonzales, the substitute.
Speaker 4: Councilmember.
Speaker 2: Gonzalez and Councilmember Price. Yes. And then the. The. The enforcement of the ordinance. Is that purely predicated on there being signage?
Speaker 6: Yes. In order to enforce any type of ordinance like this, the vehicle code and our municipal code require proper notification to the residents or the owners of the RV.
Speaker 2: And so Councilmember Price threw a couple of numbers out. And I guess that was based on a too far from the signage being from 100000 to $1000000. Is that correct?
Speaker 3: Yes. City staff put together just a order of magnitude cost.
Speaker 6: We haven't done a tremendous amount of analysis, but we estimated if we were to sign the entrance ways and again, we'd have to define those entrance ways of about approximately $100,000.
Speaker 3: If you're looking at actually.
Speaker 6: Signing streets and we would do that fairly liberally under the million dollars, we'd be actually looking at $1,000,000 that could actually be higher than that. But of course, we're going to try to keep the costs down if for whatever option the council chooses.
Speaker 2: So our actions tonight and giving you direction to potentially draft an ordinance, would that be committing us to up to $100 million? I mean.
Speaker 6: No, no. I mean, tonight, if there was direction then then as soon as we were completed with the ordinance, we would bring that back to the council with a staff report. And I envision working with the city manager's office and public works for what that ordinance would look like and then also what that audience would cost as far as notification and enforcement.
Speaker 2: Okay. Well, thank you for that clarification. That makes me feel a little bit better about moving forward with this. I do think this is an issue that has come up in numerous community meetings in my district, mostly on the residential front. I think if. If I could, um. And that, you know, it's not just recreational vehicles. And I don't know how we're defining recreational vehicles, but oftentimes they are large boats or oversize other vehicles. And I think it's very important that if the intent is mostly traffic safety and removing nuisances from from neighborhoods and commercial corridors, that we be inclusive with that language and making sure that it's a little bit broader. That's just my recommendation.
Speaker 6: Councilmember. I believe that the motion does include restricting oversize and recreational vehicles. If I may have just been saying recreational vehicles, but I believe that the direction is to include both oversize and recreational vehicles.
Speaker 2: So that would include boats, large boats. Is that a recreational vehicle?
Speaker 6: That would likely fall in the category of oversize depending on the size of the boat.
Speaker 2: Okay. Thank you. And then I personally had an experience recently where, you know, I used my my in-laws RV and parked it in front of my house. And it was over the weekend that we we used it and we're working family. Uh, I had to return it all the way back to the Inland Empire. And so it took a few days for me to, to actually get the muster up to, to, to brave the freeway with this large RV. Um, I can imagine if that is the case for a lot of folks, particularly families who are vacationing and using recreational vehicles and to meet a 48 hour restriction is very, very restrictive. Right. And so I would like to offer a friendly amendment to extend that that time, because not everybody in that recreational vehicle is is homeless or there to be a burden on their neighbor. Um, you know, sometimes people have vacations and people have to go back to work and uh, I like to see that that extended at least, you know, four or five days so that the families can, can have the opportunity. And oftentimes you have families visiting, visiting your home, and it's oftentimes difficult for them to find a place to park an RV. I remember many years ago, the the parking lot at McDonnell Douglas in Bowie was full of ARVs from employees, from whomever else. That was a place where it was a safe place for for folks to park their RVs. It was free. It was a, um, and it served a purpose. I don't know that we have those options available as abundant as they were. And so I just think we need to be I understand the intent here and I support the intent. I just would like to be a little bit more flexible with the with the time. And so I'd like to just offer a friendly amendment to extend that to. Days. Like four days. That's.
Speaker 0: There's a. I'm assuming, Mr. Attorney, that's possible.
Speaker 6: What counselor we would need is a decision.
Speaker 0: No, I know, but that's fine. Okay. Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 4: Yes, I would also just ask that because, again, businesses are different from residences that we look at that because four or five days in front of a bit different than four or five.
Speaker 2: Well, I'm speaking specifically to reservations.
Speaker 4: Yes. Okay. Yes.
Speaker 2: And so for residents, I think it should be extended a little bit longer. I'm just understanding that. They're real challenges.
Speaker 1: Absolutely.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next up, we have customer supernova.
Speaker 10: Thank you. I think Councilor Austin Austin just covered it for me. And that is, you know, most of this is a complaint driven to our offices, and my complaints have been on those commercial corridors. And that should include we wanted a definition of that. It has to include surface streets. That is, that run parallel to a commercial corridor that seems to be a favorite parking spot. It's not in front of anybody's house. It might be at the side of someone's house, but those load up quickly. And also, I would really like to hear public testimony, first of all, because I've sat here for so long, I appreciate that this isn't a typical council night, but I think Councilman Rawson is in the right neighborhood of of days versus hours. And but I'm sure our public testimony will zero in on that.
Speaker 11: And it just gets back back to that concept of Can I.
Speaker 10: Park my RV in front of my own house because I don't want to unload it after driving several hundred miles home, I want a few days to recoup. So I think that's very reasonable.
Speaker 6: And Mr. Mayor, if I can point something out for the council's liberation from the signage plan, if it's a standardize for most of the corridors, that is when we can do it at the entrances. If we if the council chooses to go in a direction where it's more restrictive on certain corridors and less restrictive on others, that's where signage becomes more of a bike corridor, or we have to have more, more signage. So just something to bear in mind as the council considers.
Speaker 0: Thank you. With that Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 9: Thank you. Just a few quick points. The first is in regards to Councilman Aranguiz concerns, I think they're very valid concerns, especially coming from him, from the Coastal Commission. And again, I do want to highlight that this is an issue that I have conveyed to my colleagues for over a year now that's very important to me. And I've really tried to do my best to communicate so that we can have the time to have a dialog. On March 15th, Council's TFF actually highlighted several I'm sorry, the city staff to have several ordinances and in there they wrote that specifically what Councilman Urunga is talking about in regards to the Coastal Commission, stating that.
Speaker 1: There.
Speaker 9: We would have to get approval from the Coastal Commission if any of the areas are going to involve a coastal zone, which I thought was very, very good to point out that that wouldn't prohibit us from moving forward. In fact, the same TFF talks about SEAL Beach that has a they prohibit parking within the city and Huntington Beach also has a city wide prohibition. Newport Beach has a city wide prohibition. A city of Santa monica has a citywide prohibition, which wasn't in the staff report, but some information that we research later. So that's just something for us to to think about, is that certainly we would go through the steps. But there is some precedent for this because there is a public health concern as well as a traffic safety concern with with these vehicles because of their size, which sets them apart from others. In regards to Councilwoman Pierce's comments. Again, really great comments, points that we have considered. And the first question I would ask is, Councilwoman Pierce, you mentioned that there were some inconsistencies with our item in the staff report. I'd be curious to know what those inconsistencies are, because we did a.
Speaker 1: Really, really.
Speaker 9: We tried to be very.
Speaker 1: Thorough.
Speaker 9: And go with the staff's recommendation. The TFF from March 15th has the recommendations from staff saying staff recommends a more focused approach and believes it is necessary to change elements of the Long Beach Municipal Code to provide more clarity. Further, any modifications should provide consistency throughout the city and minimize the cost of enforcement. Specific changes to the Long Beach Municipal Code should include a prohibition against parking oversize vehicles within the city right of way and in front of residential properties. That was one of the suggestions and exceptions can be made for loading and unloading of oversize vehicles. So we try to stick with the staff's recommendation in our agenda item. So if there are inconsistencies, I'd love to have those pointed out because we definitely tried to not have that and that must have been inadvertent on our part . This is very separate than the homeless issue. In fact, you know, we have there are several facilities, several areas in the city of Long Beach where people can actually park ARVs. They're permitted to do so. The Walmart location is one. We also have the multi-service center and we've talked with our our folks over and homeless services about the possibility of eventually moving towards a scenario where folks could park oversize vehicles in the parking lot area there and allow them to get some services, maybe health care services and things as a way to offer more resources to folks that may not have a place to live other than their car. So this item is really, truly about public health in terms of just waste disposals and things on public streets and in areas that are not designed for that and the blockage of corridors for traffic safety reasons, that's the complaints that we've received. That's really that we brought this item forward. Like I said way before, we were having discussions about homelessness. The TFF is from March of 2016, but the item was brought forth by my office about six months before that. So it really the motivation for this item had nothing to do with tonight's meeting or discussions that we've heard of late. There really are complaint based residential concerns that we've heard and we're trying to respond to. Having said that, if if this is an important issue and it's important for all of the communities and all the districts , I would ask because it's an important issue and because I've I really have tried to give courtesy to my colleagues and get feedback and input and allow a lot of time for discussion and individual communities that we not receive and file. I think that really is is a way to, you know, to try to kill this idea that's important to at least a couple of us. So if if there's a need for additional reports that folks have, then maybe we can approach it that way and report back on something specific. But I think to receive and file, you know, I just would say on a personal and professional level, I don't really see what the need for that is if in fact, it's important to one of our. Colleagues and we have allowed ample time. If someone doesn't like the ordinance, certainly they can vote against it. But to receive and file it is to kill a discussion that was started a long time ago with ample opportunity for involvement by everyone. So I'd ask you guys to really think about that. So thank you for your courtesy.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 10: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I want to thank Councilmember Price and Supernova for bringing this forward and the city council for their comments. And I think everyone is speaking the complete truth that is there. If it is their truth in their council district and is their reality that they're dealing with the nuisances, and we should acknowledge that and respect that. After all, that's why we have council districts with different perspectives and points of view so that we can be responsive to our community. So I'm entirely supportive of this this discussion. I do have my concerns as the ninth District Council member and with and, you know, a little bit of experience here on dealing with issues where our laws aren't flexible enough to address issues in our in our community, and it doesn't lend itself to creativity. I think Councilwoman Pearce said it best with the conversation we had earlier on homelessness. I think we have to really be clear and focused on what the intent is, what we want to address, because what I heard earlier from Councilwoman Price was about health and safety and and that I completely agree with 100%. There's no no need for the elimination or dumping of raw sewage into into, you know, gutters and things like that. I completely understand we've dealt with issues like that in my council district, and 100%, I would say the entire council would be unequivocally clear that we support we wouldn't support that activity. But at the same time, I think that's distinctly different from the individual who owns an RV and has worked it out with their neighbors. And, you know, I have an example. I was sent a text message tonight from someone, a neighborhood leader who lived in their neighborhood 20, 30 years. And they worked it out with their neighbors. And their good neighbors are actually officers in the neighborhood association. And and it's the reason that they don't they don't go to storage. It's not that they're you know, they're poor. They can't afford storage for the RV, but they've taken the time to build that rapport and they don't want to pay the, you know, whatever it might be, between 100, 200 bucks a month for storage. And we need to be able to have flexibility in cases like that. But in our neighborhoods now, I think we need to understand what the difference is between those two so that we can build public policy around it. We've gotten caught up before on this council with the concept of Not in my backyard, and that's becoming and I'm afraid that's becoming the nemesis of good public policy or compromise. So local solution, in my opinion, it needs to we need to establish some criteria for what that is. And it might take some time, but establish some criteria for what what what would determine a neighborhood that qualifies to to go no RV in the flexibility given to the traffic engineer to work with those local neighborhoods and business corridors to find solutions. We've we had an example like this. We are preferential parking districts. Our ordinance is very stringent. It has criteria and it takes a long time to put in place. And that was problematic given we had a temporary problem. El Camino College, Compton Center, which is in our city, had to open up its gates and created a parking impact on a neighborhood that typically wasn't parking impacted. So we changed our ordinance so that we could be more responsive quicker, gave the ability for the traffic engineer to go around the petition process and and make the call that this area is indeed impacted by these problems. And they put forth a 18 month process to meet that neighborhood's needs. And when construction was over, it worked and everyone's happy. Many people in the city may not know about this because we handled it locally and we address in our neighborhood locally. I know that this and we just should be very clear that this is not this is this is going to be we had a lot of testimony. This was this has been the kind of policy that takes cities sometimes years or even a decade to implement, because there are people on all sides of this. And let's not you know, I don't think there should be a receiving file, but I also don't think that we should move forward with direction to do a citywide ordinance. There has to be something in the middle that says, you know, we take our time, get it right. And, you know, we we try to avoid being divisive. We try to bring people together around what the real issues are, is based on health and safety. We should be able to define, you know, what are the parameters or criteria to define who actually has a registered RV that lives here and who is, you know. Renting out their RV to homeless folks or who's living in the RV, and we address it through services or whatever that is. So. So I just want to make sure we have an opportunity to be creative. I don't think we should rush to, you know, number one, it's going to be either motion that's on the table right now filled up in the first three speakers motions. So there was really no opportunity to be creative or put something together tonight. And that's the very reason why if I had to, I would probably vote against all the motions tonight. What I would rather do is ask that we we, you know, ask the maker of the substitute substitute motion that we work with staff, give them some flex flexibility based on either this temporary fresh rental parking district or other things that look like to look at establishing criteria and establishing a pilot that we can actually look at in a city, in an area town, this that's impacted. And we look at that and, you know, what goes in that into that pilot, that local council member can help create that pilot and should it work. Then we explore going citywide because we're larger than every city listed in the report. And and those cities took a long time to get it implemented. And they're literally a fifth of our size. And I know there are other cities that have gotten done that are bigger, but I'm just let's not let's not forget how large of a city we are and everything doesn't have to be a up or down vote . So so I guess because there's no way to do anything else, I'm just going to offer a friendly to the maker of the substitute substitute motion that they give staff the flexibility to look at a pilot and establish some criteria based on some of the things that we heard tonight. So the business corridors and things like that and report back on how they would approach that, that pilot. I think that would probably be something that I and most of the council could see in nodding heads. A lot of people can can support tonight. That's my that's my friendly.
Speaker 9: I'd like the pilot in CD3.
Speaker 4: So this would be a I mean I'm all for that, I guess if everybody's, you know, on board, but I guess are we seeing a citywide pilot? So each council district is not promoting their I guess I.
Speaker 10: I wouldn't say a citywide pilot. I think we like, you know, we when we piloted the Alcohol Nuisance Abatement Ordinance, we piloted an amount of space that our planning folks that we can manage, we can manage this in this area. And they ended up being the 9 to 5 zip code or the planning district in North Long Beach. I think we just got to leave some flexibility to staff to say, what can we do and do well and study and see, should this expand? Almost every time we do a pilot in Long Beach, it ends up getting expanded because our staff does great. Whenever we start citywide, we end up with chickens, goats and bees. We end up with, you know, things on the ballot that we could, you know, just just saying we should take our time and look at it. But perhaps the pilot can give some flexibility to staff. The things you guys brought up are not they're not unheard of. Like to protect your business teacher who who doesn't want to do that, protect feces and things like that going into the you know, on the street. Of course we wanna support that. But there but you have to agree there are very legitimate neighborhoods or people who own an RV and have worked it out with their neighbors and would really be offended if we didn't take our time and and do this the right way. So this is in the interest of finding a compromise that meets the needs, gives the tools to the local council members and the traffic engineer to make those determinations and doesn't break our budget. That's all I'm looking for tonight.
Speaker 4: Okay. I think. I mean, it should be fine, I think. I don't know if it's possible to, because I would like to see what an ordinance would look like. I don't know if it's okay to have something simultaneously. You know, it would still have to go to two readings.
Speaker 6: I understand the council person from the ninth district. I think the friendly would be to change your motion to make this a pilot program in district number x, whatever district ion CD3 volunteered, but whatever district you would want, I think we would come back with something. Again, I am to talk to the traffic engineer in public works, but some sort of a draft ordinance that would be a pilot program only adopted in that district for some period of time.
Speaker 4: Okay. Well, if we want to adopt them in the districts that I think are most I mean, such a friendly environment, I.
Speaker 6: I think well, I don't want to speak for the councilmember, but it would be very difficult if we're going to do pilot programs in eight different areas or nine different areas of the city. That would be unmanageable. I'm sorry, I.
Speaker 10: Wouldn't be a pilot to do them. A bunch of them. It wouldn't be a pilot that's essentially hashing out tonight, which is what we're trying to get away from.
Speaker 4: I'm just trying to understand what how what are your.
Speaker 10: I would recommend allowing whoever is going to working on the city site work with maybe the council members who who who brought it up and explore and look at one. One area that could be a pilot. We learn from it. If these things if there are certain things we can glean, like taking commercial corridors out citywide, then great. That's what comes out of this. If it having the tools to go, you know, look at neighborhoods that have certain criteria like homelessness issues and things like that, then those are the things we can learn from this pilot. But what we want to get away from tonight is determining citywide or which neighborhood, and we want to give some some flexibility to staff to work on somewhere that they think can be successful. Is that even possible, Mister City Manager or Mister City Attorney? Is that feasible? What I'm asking. I didn't run it by any of you. I just didn't want to have a fourth.
Speaker 6: We were just talking about that. You didn't run it by us. We're needing some direction here because our our dilemma is if we were directed to come back on an ordinance and you scale it back in size, we wouldn't be able to give you any kind of scope on the cost of enforcement because we have no idea what what the size of your pilot program would be if you give us direction that you would like to do a pilot program in and I'm making this up in CD3 and you tell us to work with a council person to determine the size. Then we would come back with it with a draft pilot program or an ordinance for that section that we could give you some idea of the scope and the cost of both signage, which would have to be by street in this case, and then enforcement costs depending on the extent of the ordinance. But here we'd have we're pretty broadly defined on the various things you've already added to your motion.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I just I guess with that, I think we're just honing in on just one specific district and I think there's more districts that have issues. So I mean, if we're going to do that, then maybe I mean, is it possible to do three or four districts? I mean, I'm trying to get some sort of I.
Speaker 6: Think the intent of the pilot is to see how well it works in there and then and then expand it as as you see fit or change it or modify the ordinance if it's not working as as correctly or in accordance with your desires. But and the timing of that is I do not know how long you would want that pilot program in place before you would consider expanding.
Speaker 4: Well.
Speaker 0: Councilman, do you mind if I just interject for a second, just maybe before you accept that or not accept that, do you mind for on this issue? Okay. So just let me I think that clearly I think what Councilman Gonzalez his concerns are, of course, is that there's concerns across the city, not just specifically in one part of part of the city. And there's also obviously concerns for those that have campers and some legal concerns on the coastal issue. Can I ask you a quick question, Charlie, because I think there's there's there's complexity to ask for a pilot without actually working towards an ordinance. Right. Because there could be some complexity to that there.
Speaker 6: Could we? The pilot would be a pilot ordinance for a specific area.
Speaker 0: It would be an ordinance because you'd have to create an ordinance for that specific area. That's correct. Okay. So just two questions. So I just remind a little bit, because this is a complex legal issue as well. We know that there are coastal issues. There's other legal complexities to this. It's similar to when we did the minimum wage conversation. You know, council directed you to do an ordinance, but before you brought back an ordinance, you kind of did a full report on kind of what that would look like, different models. And you brought forward questions that have to be answered by the council before a full ordinance could eventually be implemented. So I just want to just to throw out to the council, I think there's a couple of options here. I think there's a pilot option, which I think could be great, which would be to come back with a draft. I think the motion in that case would be to come back with a draft ordinance on a pilot project that would be a pilot specific area with pilot in the neighborhood, working with the draft, the makers of the motion. And then dependent on that success or not successful, we would then come back to the council and you'd report on that. So that's, I think, one option. The other option I think would be to direct you to work on on the begin, the beginning of constructing what an ordinance could possibly look like and bringing back to the council your kind of legal research on different ordinances on what what the Long Beach model could actually look like that could give people working, you know, connect with the Coastal Commission directly. So we understand what the coastal challenges are and then you can actually bring something back that could be implemented citywide.
Speaker 6: We could we could certainly do either one of those.
Speaker 0: So I just I think those are I think personally I'm comfortable with either, to be honest, I. I just want to just say that. I think that there is no question that that there actually is. There's a lot of good RV owners out there and a lot of people that are legitimately have concerns. But there also are huge problems with people parking some of these large trailers in RVs and in neighborhoods for weeks at a time. And it happened a lot when I was a councilperson in the first year. I remember it over and over again, the phone calls and trying to get these things moved. And so there are real concerns, does not put everybody in the same bucket because they're also very good owners that actually are legitimate owners and are doing are not creating blight. So just just to put out there, I think there are two options. Charlie, if you were to go and come back with kind of a legal report on the process, how long would it take?
Speaker 6: I think we could have something back in 30 days or something like that where we could take a look at and maybe come up with how to approach the Coastal Commission and and the steps that are involved if in fact this is to be implemented in the coastal zone. We have given that direction yet. But if the substitute comes to pass as we would, we will be looking at that and coming back with that. So that'll take some time. And then working with public works on the commercial corridors and how to, you know, craft this ordinance so that it's a workable ordinance for us and public works.
Speaker 0: So it sounds like there'd be one step in between actually bringing back an ordinance, but it'd be bringing back information of questions to be answered. If we would.
Speaker 6: I would envision, yes, it would be a combined report from the city manager's office in public works in our office on what we would recommend be included in the ordinance and and the reasons why we would recommend the legal issues to address the legal issues from my side and then maybe from operational issues from the city manager side.
Speaker 0: Okay. So I just think, you know, there's there's a couple options there. And I think one option is to ask the city attorney to begin the ordinance process, but come back with a legal report after talking to coast commission and the appropriate partners, which would be a citywide approach. And then there is a drafting an ordinance for just a a portion of the city. That would be a pilot ordinance. I think those are the two things that are at least that I just want to put on the table there. There's one.
Speaker 2: More option.
Speaker 0: And the other option.
Speaker 2: Is voting on the item, which.
Speaker 0: Is voting exactly on the item as presented. Absolutely.
Speaker 2: And I just wanted to to clarify something, if you might, if I might, with the city attorney, all of the the steps that you could go through to do that, could you do that under the existing motion on the floor, checking with Coastal Commission, checking out the feasibility? Um.
Speaker 6: We would certainly have to do that before if, if the substitute substitute were to pass as without the friendly amendment from the ninth district. Yes. Because we would have to address and reach out to Coastal Commission staff, etc. to make sure how we could or what are the options for implementing that.
Speaker 3: Okay.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Got to go back to Councilman Gonzales.
Speaker 4: Yes. Well, I would like to stick with a substitute substitute, but I do believe that we need a report in. And that's what I envisioned anyhow. Is that because I had some questions that needed to be clarified in terms of what defines a commercial corridor and that, you know, difference between the business and residences and the Coastal Commission items that Councilmember Suranga brought up. I think it will give us additional time, you know, to think about things going forward. And also, I think in a pilot program, if I envision that correctly, that is also just piece missing the issue. And I also feel that if I'm saying in the West Side, you cannot have, you know, RV oversight sites, vehicles that's going to go to another area. And I just think it just moves the issue around. If I'm just thinking preliminarily here.
Speaker 11: That's for sure.
Speaker 10: Just just jumping in because I kind of got hijacked on my I have three speakers while I was cued up. So here's well, here's what I'm saying. If we have if we have go forward with an ordinance and a study, all of that's fine with me. The issue I'm talking about is taking this citywide tonight or giving direction to explore it citywide tonight when multiple council people have just said we have concerns in our district. So I don't see an issue. I don't see a I don't see what the issue would be to simply say if they can't if they cannot write the ordinance without answering these questions, then explore flexibility and local communities approaches on what they can do, on ways they can do that, because they need some, they need direction. So I would explore both before they bring a city council ordinance back. So that's the best of both worlds. You get Mayor Garcia's compromise or his friendly to look at. Answering these questions. And you got and you answer the needs of a number of council members who brought up regional issues like coastal coastal commission stuff to, you know, frankly, having, you know, not sticking it to the guy who's doing the right thing.
Speaker 4: And that's what I envision will come back in that report is everything we're discussing all of these issues.
Speaker 10: Yeah. Let's clarify that. What what everybody understands, the report's going to come back and explore coastal issues.
Speaker 4: What issues? On the West Side issue? You know, all of the issues that we discuss, I would think that, you know, would be brought up residences.
Speaker 6: If I understand correctly, your motion was not accepted. So it would not discuss a pilot program, but.
Speaker 10: It would not evaluated.
Speaker 6: It would discuss the issues that you raised. We were just talking that we would never envision a report coming back to the council, maybe in a memo form, not on the agenda, explaining what we've looked at the process as we see it moving forward for an ordinance and what those key provisions of the ordinance would be. And then either the council or you could direct us to bring something back if you'd like to discuss it and or get further direction. And then we would come back with an ordinance.
Speaker 0: And maybe if the friendly included looking at a possible pilot that could maybe satisfy everyone's as an option.
Speaker 4: That's fine.
Speaker 10: Thank you.
Speaker 4: And we also have another colleague that's not here. I know that she was on the item, so that's fine.
Speaker 10: Absolutely. Thank you so much.
Speaker 4: You're very welcome. Very much.
Speaker 0: Great Councilmember Ringo.
Speaker 3: When I made the motion. To receive a file. Obviously, there were a lot of issues with the with the substance of the request as it is. Based on the discussion that we're having right now, those. That's validated that there are concerns with what is here because you're used to many questions to be answered. There's too many other issues to me to be addressed. My main primarily one is, is that I don't want to put the city in the position with the Coastal Commission and also don't want to put staff into a into a quandary of having to address other issues that we have with the city in terms of its LCP and whether we have to apply for a for a course of do you have a permit for those areas that are within the coastal zone? And since my receiver file created some. Concerns. I withdraw that they will withdraw my receiver file but only on the contingency that we do the study as as the as the city attorney has has requested to check into all aspects of implementing a citywide implementation of this of this magnitude. That would address all of the issues, including coastal issues, because I, I don't see where we can do both. We can have the best of both worlds. I mean, there's going to be some issues with, with, with the coastal, the coastal zone. And and it's not going to be I can tell you right now is that it's going to be it's going to be denied because it's been denied elsewhere. While the councilmember price has mentioned that there are other cities that do have it, that is not the current path that that is currently taken. We use address one recently and in Santa Cruz, that guy denied for the very issues that you mentioned earlier about the the intent of the of the of the zoning was not to address public safety issues, but the reason was to address homelessness. So people saw through that. So I don't want to put us in that position. So I want to make sure that if we do move forward with any kind of of ordinance or study, that we study it first and that you review it, all aspects of it cover it thoroughly and completely. And you come with us with recommendations on what an ordinance would look like as opposed to an ordinance because it's not ready. This this request right here is not ready for primetime. That is definitely true. And so the only way we can address it is by having a complete study on it.
Speaker 6: If I may, Mayor and Councilmember, just as a point of clarification, you can't withdraw your substitute now because the substitute services on the floor, but you certainly could after the vote on the third motion. But but your point is well taken in that as I understand the substitute substitute motion, it now requires us to come to council with a study in the form of a memo to the council on those issues that you've just discussed and raised. And we'll do our best to address all of those issues.
Speaker 3: And I'm glad you brought that up, because it wasn't it wasn't until. The concept of a Richardson right out up again, and there was some discussion on it. So now that Councilmember Gonzalez has agreed to that and I can I can support that, but I can't support the original motion. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember Pearce, then we're going to go to public comment.
Speaker 5: Okay. I think that my concerns were twofold. One is, what is the intent? The intent is to ensure safety around streets where we can see visibly and ensure that people can see around the corners and things like that. Let's make sure that we are answering that question whenever we come back with the report. Two, what kind of ordinance would help us in that area? If the intent is around public safety, health and safety, around what kind of sewage is being out there, what are some things that we are doing to address that? If we're going to how are we going to separate the homeless issue from the public site issue? And that's one thing that it would be extremely important to me and ensuring that if there's something around code violations or things like that, are we doing that on a you know, are we proactively going out there and looking for it? Is it something that, you know, like other policies that we have on the books where we only do it if it's complaint driven? How big is the problem right now? How many calls do we get in each district? Those are things that I would want to see come back. And, you know, some explanation around the temporary parking zones would be something that I'd be interested in having a follow up conversation with. I can support the idea that's here today, but, you know, that's not that so that we can move forward and get a study back . So just to be be clear. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Okay. So now we're going back to the hour. Did you want to go back to the council first before public got some of Ringo?
Speaker 3: I just want to be clear as well is. This is going to be a study. It's not going to be a draft ordinance, correct?
Speaker 6: Not knowing it would be a study and I would assume that we would have in that report back to you. Some of the key items that we believe, if you decide to go forward, would be included in the ordinance.
Speaker 3: But it's not an ordinance. It would be elements of an ordinance.
Speaker 6: Well, as the as I understand the motion, unless the maker changes it, it's a study working towards an ordinance coming back with an ordinance, or the study would identify the issues that you've raised, some of the parameters and some of the challenges that we would see moving forward, and then we would move the next step. Would we bring you an ordinance?
Speaker 0: Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 10: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I can I can support that that approach completely. I would I would say just to add a little more to the whole local. The question is about local or local pilot. Explore also, if there's a way, you know, if we end up with, say, a blanket ban in residential, if there are ways to where the good guy that owned, you know, owned his RV for 30 years can do the reverse of the preferential parking where they can go collect a petition, explore something like that, collect signatures from their local neighbors to say, hey, this guy has been fined, doesn't live in his camper, he owns his home, whatever. He lives it at his house. Carney Park is his thing here. So as a as a part of this, that's a question I want to see, too. If it goes citywide, what are the tools or tactics cities have used to create that some sort of a process to allow these folks who just would have worked with rather working out with their neighbors and go pay, you know, 150 bucks a month for the for the lot rental or or 75 bucks a month. I've heard some people some places have. So that I want to make sure that that's reflected here too.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 5: One other thing that I forgot to mention that I would like included in the report is that it's going to cost upwards of $1,000,000 where those dollars are going to come from. So just some background on that would be helpful. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And now we're going to go to public comment. Please come forward. Make sure you say your name at the start.
Speaker 1: Hi.
Speaker 9: My name is Marie.
Speaker 4: Thompson.
Speaker 1: And I'm in the fifth District. First, I'd like to say there's sort of a pilot.
Speaker 4: Already.
Speaker 9: Going on in a neighborhood adjacent.
Speaker 1: To Carson Park. It's been going on for several years. Can I say.
Speaker 5: Driveway? Just put it in your driveway.
Speaker 1: I can't get out of my driveway without being hit. I start to pull toward excuse me pull toward the sidewalk. And I cannot.
Speaker 5: See four, eight.
Speaker 1: Houses. So as soon as I get towards the street, I then have ten feet of sidewalk, grass area.
Speaker 9: And then the RV.
Speaker 1: Before I even get my bumper into the front road. And then somebody goes by, it's a horrible safety issue.
Speaker 9: Can extend it.
Speaker 1: Four or five days because you're already going over the 72.
Speaker 4: Hours of not moving a.
Speaker 1: Vehicle.
Speaker 9: There's cords. There's hoses going over the.
Speaker 4: Sidewalk over the.
Speaker 1: Night. During the day, I can't walk safely down the down the sidewalk without having something a trip.
Speaker 4: Over at at night when I'm walking my dog.
Speaker 1: I can't cross the sidewalk because there's someone parked at the corner.
Speaker 9: That you can't see.
Speaker 1: For literally.
Speaker 9: From corner to corner. As soon.
Speaker 1: As you start to cross, they.
Speaker 9: Can't see you. And in my neighborhood.
Speaker 4: There's not a lot not a lot of stop signs.
Speaker 1: The other thing was. They've even gone to.
Speaker 9: The point to put them.
Speaker 1: Up and over there, treated to the RV, the cords, and it's just out of control. And I've tried to do everything I could before.
Speaker 9: Bringing it here by going to.
Speaker 1: All the city emails.
Speaker 9: And phone calls. And I'm just.
Speaker 1: Asking, please do something about it. Even if it's just by street, by street.
Speaker 9: There's certain cities I cannot get out of my driveway.
Speaker 1: Without.
Speaker 4: Thinking I'm going to get.
Speaker 9: Hit. My neighbor has already been hit once.
Speaker 1: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Q Next speaker, please.
Speaker 11: Good evening. If I knew it was going to go this late, I would have brought my motor home today and parked it. That's true. My name is George Davis, and I have lived in the city of Long Beach for almost 73 years now and have attended all the Long Beach schools from elementary, graduated from California State College at Long Beach in 1968 with a Bachelor of Science degree in Criminology. I then went to work for the Los Angeles Police Department, where I retired for 26 years of service in 1995. Since retirement, I've chosen to mentor kids in Long Beach area at risk kids, kids without fathers. And I have. And homeless kids I have owned and lived on my property in Long Beach over 40 years. Of course, like all of us, I have seen many changes, both positive and negative. Now, why I'm here today, I am concerned with the city of Long Beach initiating this new ordinance on motorhomes parked in the city streets . I understand. Completely. Some of the concerns that both the citizens of Long Beach and the city officials have about the growing problem. Years ago, I bought a 36 foot class a motorhome. We haven't talked about motorhomes in their classes and you know, the sizes, so which is really important. But I bought a 36 foot class-A motorhome because the size is not because of its size and where I live. I acquired a space of storage that I could find ten miles away in the city of Cypress on Lincoln. After several years, I realized how difficult it was for me. Every time I decided to travel in my motorhome to drive out that distance, leave my car there, drive back, load my motorhome, go out on my trip, come back, unload my motorhome and drive back. As Vice Mayor Richardson said, it takes a lot of time. So I thought, well, it's time to downsize. And I could park my motorhome in front of my house if I bought a smaller one. So I bought a classy 23 foot motorhome. My motorhome takes up about as much space as a large van, and I moved it every Friday for street sweeping. And I have for the last five years, I use my motorhome approximately 10 to 15 times a month and sometimes more. I bought it. I brought it a day I bought a day pass at both of Chica Beach, where I sometimes take kids when I mentor them and sometimes just for my getaway. Although you say this is a new ordinance and has nothing to do with homeless concerns now happening within the city. That's not true. I too have seen the homeless parked within the city and those areas. I too have seen that they dump their sewers or their sewage in the gutters, and I am concerned about that too. I am. But there are different ways that we can deal with this without having this broad umbrella, this blanket ordinance that's going to say all motorhomes are oversize, vehicles are the problem because that's not the problem.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Time is all.
Speaker 11: Up. Okay.
Speaker 0: Sorry about that, but no problem. Thank you. Next speaker.
Speaker 11: Hello. My name is Paul Collins. It's the second time you're seeing me tonight in the West Side industrial area. The people aren't supposed to live there. It's actually zoned in that commercial or in that industrial area that residents aren't allowed. And yet we have 8 to 10 motorhomes that have been there for several years. And most of the people living in there are mentally ill and or drug addicts. And they cause they create great problems for the industrial businesses over there. There's no families living in motorhomes. It's it's a different problem than what you have in the residential area. And I totally understand that one size cannot fit all for an ordinance. There's no way. But I also know that the West Side would be glad the owners of the businesses on the West Side. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say they'll pay for their signs. We would pay for very nice signs at our businesses. If the city could draft an ordinance that wouldn't allow them to park there because they're they're creating serious problems on the west side that people in these motorhomes have threatened employees and owners of businesses. They they're selling drugs out of their motor homes. And they are they're urinating and defecating in front of business people and outside and dumping dumping their trash in the streets. And it's a serious problem on the west side does not want motorhomes. The Westside Industrial Area does not want motorhomes in their areas, parking. They don't want an ordinance that would be for oversize vehicles because the west side is a trucking area. So if you have trucks there at night, they're there because they're loading or unloading. And they they they don't park overnight. If they park overnight, they should be in violation. But if they're there working in their businesses, they shouldn't be cited. So you can't just use a blanket and say oversize vehicles, it has to be restricted recreational vehicles. And that's what the West Side would see is no recreational vehicle parking in the West Side, period. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker.
Speaker 4: Good evening, Mayor Garcia.
Speaker 1: Council members.
Speaker 4: Good evening. Especially to Councilwoman Gonzalez. She is the representative from my district and she's been helping me and listening to my plight. I am on the west side as well. I run a restaurant and I'd like to unfortunately point out the bad side of this. These are views that I'm speaking of are not the ones that are packing up the kids and the dog and going to the beach for the day or going on a trip. These are the individuals that are in some compromised phase of their lives. And it's unfortunate. But I also have to point out that they're compromising our ability to conduct business there. I'll give a specific story of customers. A lot of our customers walk to the restaurant, and sometimes I don't see them for a period. And I've asked specific groups of them and they told me that they don't want to walk to the store anymore because of the smell. So these are these are messy. They don't contain to just the parameters of their vehicle. They spread out the mess. It's physical blocking of pedestrians, sidewalks and our driveways. It's visible blight. And I don't want to be in that category of, oh, it's the West Side, and sometimes it's messy. I don't want the mess the West Side to be messy. So I make my most sincere efforts to hold the standards high for the West Side. And I think these are these are compromising my efforts. So I think it's super important that. We focus on the West Side as one of the hotspots, and it'd be great if we could be the pilot. Come study us plenty because we are one of the hotspots I feel. Come put up the signs, as Paul stated. Yeah. I'd love to help pay for the science if it goes on my street over there, but definitely put down the west side as a hotspot that needs attention. And the last thing I want to state is I know these things are complicated and we have to study all facets, but the West Side has run out of time because my customers are eventually going to give.
Speaker 12: Up and they.
Speaker 4: Won't want to walk to the store. They're going to get in a car and drive somewhere else because they don't want to walk to my store. And, you know, we have to look at the big picture, I guess, but my picture is how many customers that I lose that day.
Speaker 1: So I just wanted to say that.
Speaker 4: And thank you for listening to us. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you so much. Next speaker.
Speaker 11: I might ask you is Mike Flynn. I live in L.A. Heights. I own an RV. I started a charity Carson RV. You can't you can only get it from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. to get it out of the lot. I work during the week long days about it to take the family on vacations, on the weekends. And so for me to do that, coming home from work on a Tuesday, I'll pick it up, load it up again if it's a long weekend. Coming back on a Sunday. I got to work the next day. It takes days to get it packed up. I pay for it to store it. I only park it in front of my house. But 48 hours is just not enough. I mean, it's the four or five day thing, but it's totally unreasonable for us that are doing the proper thing and taking our families on vacation to get roped into. Obviously there's other issues, but for it being registered on a block, there should be more amount of time for using it for family vacations and whatnot to get it back. Just unfeasible otherwise. Thanks.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir.
Speaker 3: Good evening, Mr. Mayor and Council. My name is Andy Kerr. I'm the vice chair of the Homeless Services Advisory Committee, and I represent Councilman Austin's District eight. First of all, I just want to thank you, Mr. Mayor, and the Council, for your leadership in putting the homeless study session on the agenda for this evening, and that it was a really productive discussion. I didn't want to take up time earlier from the really important speakers that spoke earlier on the issue of homelessness. But I felt compelled to to speak on this issue while I completely understand the quality of life issues that were brought up. On this issue, I thought it was important to to also bring up the homelessness issue. And I appreciate the council's concerns and sensitivity in light of what we heard tonight and talking about this issue. And while I'm not concerned about the intentions, because I know most of you personally and I know your intentions on this, I'm worried about the net results of what some more restrictions might have on the issue of homelessness. And are we driving more people to losing the only shelter they have because of tickets and violations? Are we driving more homeless people from the community? Not intentionally, but as a net result of more restrictions. So I would just just ask that and I'm not encouraging the council to not take action because I think the quality of life issues are important. But I would just I think maybe this is an opportunity of how we can create a win win and address the issues that we heard earlier this evening on the issues of homelessness and address these concerns at the same time. There's a couple cities in the central coast city of Santa Barbara and the city of Monterey that have done some really innovative things. On creating safe parking spaces for people experiencing homelessness and are living in their vehicles, both ARVs and just living in their cars. And I think maybe there's an opportunity to do something creative there. It's also a way to partner with nonprofit agencies such as one of the existing organizations in the S.O.S., or maybe a new partner that we can bring into the S.O.S. to provide supportive services, to have people instead of spread out all over the city, to have them in one place. I was glad Councilmember Price brought up the Multi-Service Center and already talking to our folks in the Health Department about maybe creating a space there, I am concerned about the capacity at the Multi-Service Center. I think maybe there is very limited capacity. And does that capacity meet the need of folks that are living in their vehicles in the city? Maybe it is. I don't know, but I would hope maybe we would look at that issue. And if that isn't an appropriate issue or appropriate space for safe parking, maybe there's someplace else that we could partner with churches, with other nonprofit agencies. So that's it. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Andy. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: My name is Mark Nevin and I live in only two sites and I support the intent of the end of the ordinance. I just don't think that, you know, we should be wrapped up in, you know, RV owners that.
Speaker 6: Store their.
Speaker 3: Their RVs offsite in a storage lot should be wrapped up in the in the ordinance. The time frame for loading and unloading is not sufficient for, you know, for families loading up an RV, especially if you're on it, you're going on a big trip. It's just. It's just not. Not enough time. The other component of the ordinance was oversize vehicles, which are defined as 20 feet and larger. A pickup truck with a crew cab and a standard bed is 21 feet six inches. So that would, in essence, make all those trucks illegal to park on the city of London, on any street, on any street in the city of Long Beach. So I think that should be changed to most in the in the memo that you that was in the in the report, you brought up a couple of other cities , and they had also changed their oversize vehicle ordinance to 22 feet, which I think would be. Probably a good idea to do in Long Beach, too, since that's the size, you know, that would that would eliminate the modern modern pickup of today. The. That was it. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir.
Speaker 11: Speaker Patrick Watson, fourth district. Like the last person said, my Dodge pickup truck that I drove my family around in is now illegal by her ordinance that she wants to pass. That's ridiculous. I also appreciate Mr. Richardson's common sense on the matter as far as giving people ample time. I'd also like to know what the statistics are on how many accidents are caused by RVs being parked in front of residences. You know, you keep bringing that point over and over again. I'd be curious, you know, maybe the city attorney or the manager can bring up those stats because I doubt there are very many on the residential streets. I could see the major business fares, $1,000,000 for signage, the amount of money to do the studies that we're all talking about tonight, the added budget for parking enforcement and our police to do this. Are we taking this? You were the heroine of the homeless situation. Are we taking this from the homeless or is this money coming from. We don't have money in the city. So let's pinpoint the areas that we have to work on it. I'm sure there's a camping ordinance. Target the camping if there are people living in RVs. Target the camping ordinance. Don't punish the people at work. One last thing are the people that in my neighborhood, they're plumbers, electricians, carpenters, drywall. They have work trucks. They come home from work and they park in front of their house so they can get up at, oh, dark 30 to go to work, support their family. They can't park it from their house now. What about the guy that has a cement pumper because he pumps concrete. Can he no longer come home? Does he have to rent a parking spot to go park his work truck and then drive home or getting Uber? Let's just. I'm just asking for common sense before we come out with these ordinances that just blanket everybody and punish people. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Next speaker.
Speaker 11: Thank you to treat them in the fourth district and similar to some of the other comments. The time frame on the RV owners, I think is is too short. And personally, I've moved from the third district to the fourth District in an effort to get more room and have more property and be able to park my RV when I need to in front of my house for a few days. I store it in an office of storage lot and a boat, and if I want to use it, I need to bring it home. Use it, come home, go to work for a day, unload it, get it back. Like many people said, a lot of these lots, they're not open very long. You can get there from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., 6pma lot of us can't get there that time. You need another day or two. You take my boat to Catalina. Where do I put my trailer? You won't let me leave it in the launch ramp for more than three or four days. So I leave it in front of my house. What am I going to do with it while I'm gone now? So there's a lot of different issues. I can understand a lot of the West Side. I'm a business owner in the city. I think there's a lot of definition we could work on between cities. City streets, figure out the terminology, use the boulevards and our neighborhood, the central neighborhood areas that are off the street. I don't think we need to target right now. Let's target the stuff. You know, I see Bellflower Boulevard. I see Los Coyotes. I see examiner. That's easy. Let's put some signage on those streets. And do you have enforcement opportunities already on the books that have been there for years? That can be 72 hours for the residents if they start putting it in by residents. I can call. We can get rid of those people if they move somewhere else. So at this time, I don't think the residential smaller areas need to have the enforcement that some of the other businesses need, the West Side and some of the.
Speaker 3: Other business districts. I definitely see the need for that.
Speaker 11: So I think it's something that needs to be looked at. I never heard about this. I just saw it on social media. So we came down. I didn't see the opportunity to have any input, so I think more input from the entire community would be something we need to work on. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker.
Speaker 8: Good evening.
Speaker 1: My name is Angela Kimball. Good evening. Uh, Mayor Council. I live just outside of the city of Long Beach. I live in the county unincorporated island. And we have a significant problem in our area that is surrounded by the city of Long Beach with RV stored throughout our community on our streets for extended periods of time. We actually had an RV at the end of our street. My street on Gondor Avenue, actually, it was stored on Conant on the city side of the property for four months with people living in it and it did not move. Slide outs out. 35 foot motor home.
Speaker 12: Huge, huge.
Speaker 1: Beast with people living in it continuously. They would move it around the corner on street, sweeping day on Conant and then back around on back to go on it. One of the big concerns that I have tonight is the problem with these RVs, boats and trailers that are surrounding Patrick Henry School, which is the city of Long Beach School. The county sheriff has worked really hard with their resources to try to keep that area clean and clear of RVs, boats and trailers. We have kids crossing the street in between these vehicles. It's very unsafe over there for these kids to cross to go to school. So that is one of our big concerns. There's a lot of great RV owners heard a lot of them tonight, but we have a lot of RV use in our neighborhood that are actually registered to the city. Now, people who live in the city of Lakewood, because they passed an ordinance back in 2006, overwhelmingly their voters, they went to the polls and they had had enough of this RV all over their community. So we're asking you to really evaluate this on us and take a citywide approach, because these piecemeal ordinances do not work. We see what's going on up around Skylands golf course. We have people living in RVs all up and down. You piecemeal it up with signage up there and there they move the RV for from to to from.
Speaker 12: 2 a.m. to.
Speaker 1: 6 a.m. and then they're back and there's trash and debris and sewage dumped in the streets there. And it's a huge issue for all the families living in those residences all around. So we're just asking you to take a citywide approach. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker.
Speaker 11: Please. I hate to wake everybody up, Mr. Mayor. Councilman, but I'm from the fifth district. My name is Robert Wenzel. Sorry, I'm usually in bed by now. I'm 77, so, you know, but. I have an issue that I've been trying to work out for eight years through councilman ship ski and now Stacie Mango, who I wish was here. But I appreciate Mrs. Price invited me to come out. We're I'm sitting on a service road. A service road, which is probably a good car with narrower than a normal street. But you allow parking on both sides. So when you get an RV on one side and RV on the other side. I've seen the fire department actually have to push in mirrors to barely inch through this thing to get to the restaurant at the end of where I live. So I don't think there should be that kind of vehicle. Unless there's only parking maybe on one side of the street. The other thing is, is we don't have a stop sign for the street that has a lot of traffic on 28th Street going through. And so when you try to get out, you can't see down 28th. There's no stop sign for them there to stop. So you can maybe inch out. So you really are playing with your life a little bit. Other thing is cars are coming in from the main street and they get they don't have to stop for anything either. It's kind of difficult sometimes the safety issues that come about. The other thing is the stop sign on the service road sits almost eight feet back from the from the other side of the service road. They don't have to stop. You can't see if a big vehicle parked right there all the way to, you know, in here to the end of the street. So. I've been trying to do this for eight years. I've talked to this person for eight years. There's him and his wife. I came home even at two, 2:00 this afternoon, 212 vehicles that were parked there, owned by that particular couple. Two cars. The rest of them were a 32 foot RV, a foot attached, a 15 foot trailer behind it. He has a steak truck. He's got well, they're all big vehicles. All I want to do is have peace, peaceful enjoyment in my home and be able to know that I have some safety around there. Not everybody will come out now. I don't know if I can do this, but. A good friend of mine came to visit me and said, she's an ex mayor of one of the cities in the South Bay. And she said, What the hell is this? And I said, I know I've been dealing with this for quite a long time. So she said, Well, if you can't get it straight with your current council person, then see the city manager. So I have some photos that I would like to leave as are possible that I can do that.
Speaker 0: Yeah. In fact, sir, I'm going to we're going to contact you tomorrow at my office, and we're going to work with Mr. Beck as well. This RV issue, we have to obviously is not resolved tonight. There may be some other traffic issues there.
Speaker 11: That we can help here.
Speaker 0: So we will we will we will take we promise that we will be in touch tomorrow.
Speaker 11: I'm kind of glad I came here now.
Speaker 0: Okay. Well, go ahead and pass this, Mr. Beck here. This is our director of Public Works. He's going to contact you directly and we're going to go out there and take a look at your street. Okay. Yes.
Speaker 1: Hi, I'm Aaron Wilhelm. I was born and raised in Long Beach. I'm in the fourth district. I've owned my home for 25 years and I am married, have four kids that I've raised in college. We have an RV.
Speaker 5: We just sold our boat. We also have a motorcycle trailer.
Speaker 1: Because that's what we do. We go camping and we store them offsite, but we bring it home just like the other people that you know. And it might take a week ahead of time because depending on when we have to pick it up and drop it off and you've heard all this, but and I, I don't like the idea of doing a pilot program in a district because if you are. Pick our district because I can guarantee all the neighbors will. I mean, you're going with all the calls that are coming in saying, hey, we have a problem here. We have a problem here. Our neighbors don't call and say, hey, we've got great neighbors that have an RV. We have great neighbors that have a boat. You don't get those calls. So you think they're not there. So do a pilot program, the fourth District, and you're going to have no one complaining. Everyone has their Arby's offsite. Some of them some people keep them in the neighborhood. And they're very nice neighbors. Right. But if you do a pilot program where her store restaurant is and I get what she's saying, but you do a pilot program there, then you're going to screw the rest of us over in the fourth District , on the east side, or wherever good neighbors are. And we have our Arby's. So I don't like the idea of a pilot program in one district because it's not going to work for everyone else, because if you do it in our district, she's going to get.
Speaker 12: Screwed.
Speaker 5: And it's not fair.
Speaker 1: Also, I you know, as far as the size limits, too. My husband has a large truck. That, again, is it would be considered oversize. Some people have boats. They're small. So where are you going to cut it off? This boat's 18 feet. So it's okay to park on the street every day. It's okay to park in the main thoroughfare. Like, are you going to tickets? Are you going to tow people, confiscate stuff? I don't I don't know what you're doing and where you're going to go with all this. Um, I like Richardson. Austin's ideas about just everything they said seem to make more sense than what Mr. Price said. I don't care for her. Um, her, whatever it's called. But anyway, I just. I didn't. And then someone else was saying parking the driveway. I have a 30 foot motorhome, so I can't bring it home parked in the driveway because it's going to block the sidewalk and block the street. So then she can't walk her dog. We do park it in the street in front of our house and we put the cord above the motorhome to the balcony so that she's not going to trip on it. So she just complained about it being on the sidewalk, but she also complained about it being up top, but up top, it's above where anyone could even jump and grab it so that it's not a nuisance anyone. It's not going to be a danger to anyone. And we're being responsible neighbors that are charging our motor home so that we can go on vacation with our family. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you so much. And our final speaker.
Speaker 1: Thank you. The definition of a motorhome.
Speaker 12: Is mobile living. Mobile living. Regardless of where you're living.
Speaker 1: It's mobile living. And it just so happens that there's a segment of our community who really are living in those things. They're not vacationing.
Speaker 12: I wonder how.
Speaker 1: Inconvenient the Indians were when the first Europeans arrived here. Our convenient were they buy by the very trafficking on the ocean coming back and forth bringing all that stuff. They had to handle that. And they've done it.
Speaker 12: They handled it so much so that.
Speaker 1: American Indians have but the real Americans have been pushed.
Speaker 12: Over and we hardly ever see the Indians.
Speaker 1: Anymore. They were so inconvenience and they took it in stride.
Speaker 12: They lost their land because of it. Our discussion here of mobile, living and hazardous to the community.
Speaker 1: What really are we? What's the intent?
Speaker 12: What really are we saying? And I'm not.
Speaker 1: Going to read my prepared. Short story. Because some people's lives, their livelihoods are dependent upon the decision that you're going to make tonight. Or won't be made. What is the inherent detriment in the complaint to the neighborhood, the neighbors, the streets that warranted this ordinance?
Speaker 12: Did you ever say, really, what's bothering you, Mr. Smith? You get tired of.
Speaker 1: Looking at that thing every day. Do you know who's living in that being? Miss Jefferson? Have you ever knocked on the door and.
Speaker 12: Offered a bottle of water?
Speaker 1: And can I help you with anything? How easy is it to inconvenience the homeless? Just because the neighbors don't like the look on the street. I lived in a motor home and I'm about to purchase another one because.
Speaker 12: My work for the homeless requires that I.
Speaker 1: Be on well on point wherever they are 24 hours a day, just in case they need me. How I got the first home. Somebody called me and said, You need a motor home for the kind of work you're doing. I'm going to have it delivered to you in a flatbed truck. They paid the insurance on it for the whole year. And I told them.
Speaker 12: Lady, I dreamt that I had a motorhome five years ago. Let's be.
Speaker 1: Honest here. They are people who are homeless, who are living in these things. And the city can't provide anything for them. For whatever the reason. What is the itemized resolve for this for this ordinance?
Speaker 0: Thank you, Mr. Assad. The last speaker, Mr. Goode, here. And then we're going back to the council.
Speaker 11: All right, good. You. It seems to me at the beginning, in the end, it boils down to no matter what district, it is the public safety issue. There are large vehicles. Whether to be a motor home recreational vehicle, or what if they present a public safety issue. That issue needs to be addressed. Period. And listening to this, one of the things that came to mind. Is this a great business opportunity there for somebody? Because there's obviously a need for. Location to find locations for a number of these. Vehicles, whether they be the recreational vehicle used on weekends or for vacations, or whether it be housing for people. There's no reason why there cannot be a mobile home courts set up for people that are. Living in them as their permanent residence or a temporary residence. But it's got to be done in a safe manner, period. And I've got I'd like to think that the majority, the overwhelming majority of people that have these vehicles are responsible people. So there's a there's a definite need there. We've got maybe facilitate some business development to have those mobile parks. For various different purposes, then there'd be a, a sub the business of shuttling people back and forth. But it at the end of the day it becomes a public safety issue. As one who rides a bike a lot, they do present problems when they're taking up the roadways. Also, I do notice a number of them are operating de facto offices out of them or shops, chop shops of some sort, particularly around the traffic circle area in the fourth district and then going up Bellflower Boulevard and on out into Lakewood, so forth. So they're at the end of the day, as you say, it's a public safety issue. And it has many aspects, but it should not be an indictment of, you know, there should be an indictment at oh ten of someone's intent while you're trying to root out the homeless or the, you know, the the nuisances and so forth. It's a public safety issue, and that's how it should be examined, in my view. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Sorry. I think you didn't speak. You speak again.
Speaker 11: Can I speak again?
Speaker 0: I can't do what? It's one speaker per commenter on the topic.
Speaker 3: Okay.
Speaker 11: I just think that, uh, it is a public safety issue and it's a completely separate issue between living in a motor home and someone that owns their residence. Thank you. Yes. Get out.
Speaker 0: Of it. Thank you, sir. So. Okay, so that concludes public comment. So let me go back to the council. Councilman Price.
Speaker 9: So just a few things. I'll be very quick here. I appreciate the comments from everyone. And I know sometimes when we come to council meetings, we have certain things in our mind and we're anxious to say them. But when I started off the comment, this is for some of my neighbors who are up there and the woman from the fourth district. Sometimes we think that we make certain assumptions. When I started off, what I said was, I'm very open to hearing what my colleagues think about this and and talking about how we can draft an ordinance. And then one of the speakers talked about having, you know, read my proposal. My actual proposal for tonight specifically talks about a situation and the need for a proposal that's very different than residential people using it to parking it outside of their home for a limited period of time. It says constituents report that vehicles are parked in front of homes and businesses for weeks or even months at a time, taking up valuable parking spaces, blocking view corridors and limiting access to driveways and alleys. In many cases, the occupant is illegally living inside the vehicle. Additionally, residents have observed several instances of individual disposing waste from the vehicles into stormwater drains, as well as report of portable gas generators being used as a power source. So that was the reason it came forward. So the definition of oversize vehicle is actually not my definition. It's not what I was proposing. It's actually currently in the Long Beach Municipal Code and has been for years, and it defines an oversize vehicle, as you stated, 85 inches high or 80 inches wide or 20 feet long. Several other residents, actually, it was passed in 2005. Several other cities have definitions, and I think that's a really great point for us to think about expanding the size, because three of the cities that are cited have a 22 feet. So I think that's an excellent point and that's something that we should definitely consider updating our ordinance. The other thing is in terms of the time to load and unload. Councilman, one of my one of my council colleagues and I actually it was Councilman Austin who actually used the example of his own situation where he wasn't able to return it in time. We actually had a conversation. Most people returned from a holiday on a Sunday and they probably have to go back to work the next day. So moving it in 48 hours is probably not realistic. Where that came from again is the current ordinance. Also, the city of Lakewood has it looks like a three day loading and unloading. SEAL Beach has a it looks here like they have a two day loading. It looks like Huntington Beach has a three day loading. Newport Beach has a one day loading. Costa mesa has a 48 hour, two day one. So every city, it looks like it's about 24 to 72 hours. We can certainly make that longer. That's not the issue. Again, the intent of the ordinance isn't to go after residential owners who store their vehicles off site. I live in Alamitos Heights too. I get daily emails and complaints from people regarding some particular spots where people are parking on the street for an extended period of time. And although sometimes neighbors may not share that with their neighbors, that it bothers them. They certainly share it with their council member. So we're trying to find an ordinance that is fair. And obviously we don't want to punish people who store their vehicles. There are in the city of Long Beach currently. Ten different places where you can store your vehicle ranging from anywhere 75, $75 a month to $200 a month, depending on the size of your vehicle. So there's a lot of opportunities. We want to encourage people to use offsite storage. We want to allow ample time for people to load and unload. But we also want to address some of the growing issues that we're seeing in terms of an increase in the number of RVs that we're seeing parked in residential neighborhoods and commercial corridors. So I just I did want to clarify that and let you know that you're being heard. And really the intent of the ordinance was not to go after people who are traveling on vacation and fact that my my ordinance my proposal actually says as the summer months come to a close , fewer families will be using RVs and trailers for recreation. So this is an appropriate time of year to address a change to the municipal code that would provide adequate time for everyone to become aware of any changes before major travel months are upon us. So we're trying to work with residents who have RVs and figure out a solution that works. And like I said at the beginning of this discussion, I'm open to finding out what works for everyone as we move forward on this. But it is a very, very controversial issue. And just because your neighbor may tell you that they're okay with it doesn't mean that's not what they're telling. That's not doesn't mean that's what they're telling their council person. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 5: Thank you. I'll try to keep it brief. I'm reminded that years ago, one of our colleagues, Councilmember Andrews, had explored the idea of having safe parking places within our churches and possibly with some of those nonprofits that provide services to our homeless community. I would like to ask and I can do this, you know, put on agenda item down the road. But I would like to say that I'd like to propose that we get a report back on safe parking initiatives that have been done in places like Santa Barbara. As Commissioner Kern brought up that there are some opportunities that we can possibly partner with the Multi-Service Center, with some of these churches, with the places that provide services so that we have two outcomes. One, we're getting some of the people that are living in their cars off of the the residential streets and corridors that are important to us. And two, that we're finding another way to connect them with services that will help them hopefully get back on their feet. And so I don't know that that needs to be a part of this item, but I can direct staff, you know, in a more formal, formal way to to come back with that. And I think if we're doing that alongside this initiative, that that's something that I would definitely be supportive of.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 2: So I just wanted to add a piece to the story that I told Councilmember Price and I let everybody else in on a little earlier. So on the fifth day when I got ready to return, the RV code enforcement was sitting outside of my house writing me a ticket. So there is some enforcement in place.
Speaker 0: Okay. So we're going to go back to the motion on the floor, which I'm going to have repeated, just to make sure that we all know what we're what's being voted on. So, Mr. City Attorney, can you repeat the motion on the floor, which I believe is a substitute substitute by Councilmember Gonzalez?
Speaker 6: That's correct, Mayor. The motion that I have is a substitute submitted made by Councilmember Gonzalez, seconded by Councilmember Price, would be to now as amended, would be to prepare a study from the city attorney's office and from city management that would look at a number of issues that an ordinance like this would or may create. And they include the business district banning the definition of oversize vehicles, the application at service roads or access roads, prohibited parking in front of businesses, definition of commercial corridors. Addressing the Coastal Commission issues including coastal zone, possible CDP, coastal development permits and and the impact on the local coastal plan pilot options. The number of hours increasing for in front of residential to 48 to 72 possible tools to allow for parking in front of residential houses different hours different the number of hours for in front of businesses would be less than what is in front of residential. And then the public safety issue of illegal dumping and the notice requirements to implement.
Speaker 0: And it's just a report.
Speaker 6: That's correct. That that would be the report that we would try and answer those questions that have been raised tonight in a report to council. And in that report, if we're able maybe put in some suggestions that public works and the traffic engineer have on how we could craft an ordinance to address these issues, and then we would take further direction.
Speaker 0: Okay. Okay. So just to be clear, it's a report that's comprehensive on all those issues, and that's the motion on the floor. It's not an ordinance. It's to get information and bring it back to the city council. And I would also just add, there's a lot of folks that came tonight. So there'll be plenty of opportunities, too, in that report comes out to everyone. Take a read, take a look and have some further discussions about this issue because there's a lot of people interested as well. And I just want to re-emphasize something that Councilman Price said and having I know that she talked to me about this issue and I know that her intention has been completely to try to focus on those problematic areas that have been a blight on a neighborhood. And so whether it's the issue out in West Long Beach, there's other other campers that stay out for weeks. I've seen them at a time. It's in no way intended to affect folks that are getting nervous for their families and trying to take a nice vacation or have their boat out there and do all that and do all that work. And so I just wanted to re-emphasize that motion is on the floor. Members, please cast your vote.
Speaker 12: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. So that report will come back to the council. And now we're going to go to what will absolutely be the latest we've ever done public comment. So let's go ahead and do public comment. And once you're still here, I have Shirley Bouchard, Steve Updike and Larry Goode here. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Attorney to draft a citywide ordinance restricting oversized and recreational vehicles in residential and commercial corridors based on elements from the surrounding cities of Lakewood, Costa Mesa and Westminister like:
• No RV shall be parked on any street or alley for more than 48
consecutive hours.
• RVs and trailers not registered to a Long Beach address cannot
park on streets without a daily temporary permit.
• RVs registered to a Long Beach address may park on the block
they are registered to for no more than 48 hours consecutively.
• RVs may not be repark within one fifth of a mile from any prior
permitted location within 24 hours.
• Nonmotorized vehicles may be parked for the sole purpose of
actively loading and unloading for a no more than 24 hours. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_10042016_16-0907 | Speaker 0: I don't think there's bills here. Okay, so why don't we go to the item from content calendar that was pulled, which was item 11? Was that right?
Speaker 1: Yes.
Speaker 0: Okay.
Speaker 1: Report from Public Works recommendation to find that excavations are immediately required for the general health, safety and welfare of the city and cannot be delayed and approve a discretionary permit to excavate nine city streets. District seven, eight and nine.
Speaker 0: Johnson V Ringo.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Mayor. You know, many of our residents have waited years to have their street improvements. And here we have an opportunity for Tesoro to tear up the street within the the moratorium period of the moratorium. So I just want to include or amend the motion that we include a that we have Tesoro, maybe in partnership with our public works department to notify those residents of the pending street improvements. Well, the pending excavation that's going to be taking place. So that's for District 17, right?
Speaker 0: Okay. That's an addition to the motion. Councilman Austin, do anything.
Speaker 2: You know, like you speak in support of the motion. I want to thank council member for your Urunga for bringing it forth and removing it from the consent calendar. I did have a question for our Public Works Director in terms of the scope of the work, because particularly on one of the these streets that is actually being proposed to have the survey done. It's a street that we just spent a considerable amount of money actually resurfacing. And so what is the scope of work that will be done there? And, um, can we, can we be assured that, that the street will be repaired to the level that it's supposed to be?
Speaker 11: Yes, Councilman Austin, this is really exploratory work that De SA is doing to ensure that their pipeline cathartic protection system is working. Cathartic protection keeps a metal pipe that's in the ground from degrading as quickly as it would without it. So these are very small holes that are being drilled so they can put a probe into the ground. The holes are about three quarters of an inch. So somewhere in the in the neighborhood of a size of a of a quarter. This type of work isn't going to do anything to degrade the streets. If they do find that their pipelines need to be replaced, they'll have to come in and do trenching. And that is a whole different topic that will we'll need to address and discuss with them should that be required. But the work and the scope before Council on this item is merely a monitoring of those pipes, and there's going to be no degradation occurring in the streets as a result.
Speaker 2: And how often does do those pipes need to be monitored?
Speaker 11: Different pipeline widths and capacities have different monitoring requirements. So it really just depends on the type and size of the pipe that they're looking at.
Speaker 2: Okay. I know we just passed Measure A and we have an aggressive infrastructure repair plan in place. I would just hope that we are coordinating our efforts to make sure that, you know, we're not. Repairing streets and then going digging back into them to to repair pipes. All of that is kind of synchronized. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Can I talk to. I'm sorry. Vice Mayor Richardson?
Speaker 10: Yes, you can talk to the vice mayor of Richardson. So. So I'm typically supportive of these for a number of reasons. One, we normally like to Soros being particularly great at doing outreach and reaching out to our office and to the local community. But we were notified about this when it showed up on the city council agenda. We didn't get any notice about it. And the and we've encountered these drilled holes before in the past, and that's one of the reasons we put the moratorium in place. It's not real excavation. But it still damages the street. It still damages the street. And you can actually see it when these holes get drilled in. So my concern is, like I'm looking at a number of these. Some of them are like just a few inches ice and ice in an isolated spot, but some of these run an entire length of a street. So the first question is how like how far in between are these holes drilled?
Speaker 11: Tesoro is telling us that they are approximately 10 to 15 feet apart.
Speaker 10: And how big, how large are the holes themselves?
Speaker 11: Three quarters of an inch.
Speaker 10: Okay. And and have you know, if. So for example, some of these are brand new. We're going to what like patch the top of the hole with like a slurry seal stuff. We're gonna like paint over it. Like, What do we do to this whole.
Speaker 11: So they would put some kind of mix in the hole. Most likely a concrete patch mix and then top it with with some asphalt.
Speaker 10: Okay. So I would just say, you know, I'm not going to make a huge issue out of this because it's you know, it's late. But I would you know, I would have preferred, frankly, that we get some get some heads up and get out and get to wrap our minds around this stuff. Because if it's a length of street, you know, I just get questions like, is there an opportunity just to if, you know, if it's along the perimeter of the street, just slurry and a straight line. So it all looks looks kind of consistent. So in the future, I would just like to have just more notice and more conversation about these because, you know, some of these streets have waited a long time to be repaved. Linden Avenue was one of the worst streets in North Long Beach. And, you know, and I really don't want to see it drilled into, but I'll move forward with these things.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Any public comment on this item? CNN, please cast your votes. | Contract | Recommendation to find that excavations are immediately required for the general health, safety, and welfare of the City and cannot be delayed; that alternatives to excavating, such as alternative routing, or construction methods, such as boring or excavation of the parkway, are not possible; approve a discretionary permit to excavate nine City streets, which have been resurfaced within the previous 60 months, in accordance with Section 14.08.060 of the Long Beach Municipal Code. (Districts 7,8,9) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_10042016_16-0792 | Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: 18.
Speaker 1: Report from Financial Management and Technology and Innovation Recommendation to award a contract to Tyler Technologies for a citywide enterprise resource planning system with finance, human resource resources, software applications and related services for a one time amount of 8.4 million and an annual amount starting at 483,000 for a five year term citywide.
Speaker 0: Okay. There's emotion in a second. Is there any public comment? Yes. Please come forward.
Speaker 11: Long time getting to this. Jim McCabe on item on rating may be a great idea. There are eight pages of very dense description on what is happening here. I don't know whether it's software entirely. Hardware partially. It may it may be a good idea, but realize I think it's likely there's going to be very little discussion and almost certainly this will pass nine to nothing. But realize what's in these eight. Pages you were given is that this project is going to cost $30 million. You're buying into that. You're buying into the description that this will take. Away 25 full time employees from city work. 25. And several dozen city employees will be needed to work on this project from time to time. So we're talking from 25 to 50 city employees on this $30 million project. You're buying into. I don't know whether it's a good idea or not, but I. Point out by way of comparison that the city of Long Beach. Took away 200 police officers. And despite protests. From citizens. Has been willing to only reinstate eight. But largely without discussion today and by a nine to nothing vote on a subject. I doubt many of you have much intimate knowledge of your going to take away 25 city employees from their regular duties and an additional several dozen, however many that is. So. Try to have some perspective here. You won't as a body from the from the staff. Will not add more than eight police officers. You can't buy a police excuse me, a traffic ticket in this city because there is zero enforcement. That's just. Just the tip of the. Police. Problem, which I'm sure is more. Severe than that. Just keep things in perspective. Thank you very much for your time. I do appreciate it.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And just real just briefly, Mr. West, I just I know I recall I know we've been talking about this at the council level openly for six years or so. I remember talking about this, I think, my very first council meeting about this project and Councilman DeLong and others are very involved in setting aside the early money for this. And so just to clarify, it's not a new project. This has been going on for many years. Mr. West.
Speaker 7: I think we should have a quick staff report.
Speaker 6: By our finance director, John GROSS. This truly is the largest techno, techno, technological innovation the city has done in the history of its city for finance.
Speaker 0: Mr. GROSS.
Speaker 11: Thank you. And I'll be I'll be quick. And yes, this project.
Speaker 6: Mr. Mayor, has been going.
Speaker 11: On for years. We've been working on this particular aspect of it for over two and a half years. We have another three years to go.
Speaker 6: There are staffing people who are going to be involved. It's temporary assignment of staff and.
Speaker 11: They will be returning to their normal work.
Speaker 6: As the manager said.
Speaker 11: This is putting in new a new management system across the city for financial and human resources management. It is a momentous step in terms of technology and innovation. It impacts all the departments and operations and replaces a lot of obsolete systems. We've had over 200 city staff.
Speaker 6: Involved.
Speaker 11: Mostly in reviewing of the.
Speaker 6: New type of options that are.
Speaker 3: Available.
Speaker 11: And so a lot of staff have already been involved. It replaces very old technology.
Speaker 6: That's at risk. So we're concerned about trying to keep the city operating and also becoming more efficient. And that's what this is about. There are a lot of systems being replaced. This is a slide that shows just a sample of the major systems that are.
Speaker 11: Being replaced payroll, accounting, financial reporting, budget.
Speaker 6: Position, control, employee benefit management.
Speaker 3: There's a list of them.
Speaker 11: There are lots of improvement enhancements that this.
Speaker 6: New system will provide over.
Speaker 11: Time, many procedures and processes will only be improved. It's a it's an opportunity to improve our financial controls, to improve transparency. Employees will be involved in design. Our unions will be involved through the meet and confer process. Improvements will continue to be made after implementation. We have that opportunity with new systems. We don't have it with.
Speaker 3: The closed systems we have now.
Speaker 6: It is $30 million. It's one time money. It's not operational money. It's already funded. We expect to be in budget. We've taken steps to do that. We have oversight during the selection process for an independent firm, we'll have independent firm doing quality assurance during the project. We should be up before we move out of the new building.
Speaker 3: That is our.
Speaker 11: Intent.
Speaker 6: The implementation. There are risks to ERP systems. They have run over budget in many places. We've taken a lot of steps and a lot of time to avoid running over budget and having problems.
Speaker 11: Part of what we will do is.
Speaker 6: Try to make this a key priority for the city council will keep it as a key priority. Management will so we don't divert staff and effort.
Speaker 3: Away from it and have problems. That's probably the key remaining thing.
Speaker 6: That we need to watch and managing expectations will make a lot of improvements, but we will have some glitches, all major systems do, and then we'll continue to make improvements after implementation. The evaluation process to get to the vendor 11,000 man.
Speaker 11: Hours in this.
Speaker 6: Review process, 240 people, 240 employees involved over two years. To get to this recommendation for a vendor, we have no protests, we have no criticisms that were submitted by any of the vendors that did not are not recommended.
Speaker 11: So it's been a very good process. So our recommendation is to move forward. It is the the.
Speaker 6: Recommendation has been analyzed. The Tyler Technologies is the best financial value at best meets our needs, and we wholeheartedly recommend moving forward.
Speaker 11: With this contract.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Gonzales. If anything, nothing less me, RICHARDSON Nothing counts when I said yes.
Speaker 2: So just for Mr. GROSS, can you break down how this this project is being funded? I understand that, you know, this is not all coming from the general fund. Correct?
Speaker 6: Very good. Very good point. This is a.
Speaker 11: $30 million project.
Speaker 6: It involves all city operations. So all city operations are contributing to their funding. It's a $30 million project. A little less than $10 million is coming from the general fund. All the rest is coming.
Speaker 11: From.
Speaker 6: Funds like the harbor, water, gas and oil. So it it's very nice to be able to spread these costs over all the departments that benefit from them.
Speaker 2: Thank you. And I know, as the mayor said, we've been engaged in this for several years. I just wanted to make sure that point was clarified. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Members, please go ahead and cast your votes. | Contract | Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFP TI15-017 and award a contract to Tyler Technologies, Inc., of Yarmouth, ME, for a Citywide Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system with finance/human resources software applications and related services, including consultation, implementation, training, maintenance and support, for a one-time amount of $8,478,522, and an annual amount starting at $493,481 and increasing up to 3 percent annually for a five-year term for ongoing maintenance and support, plus a contingency amount of $1,664,772, with the option of renewing the ongoing maintenance and support contract increasing up to 5 percent annually for an additional five-year period, at the discretion of the City Manager; and authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to enter into the contract, including any necessary amendments thereto. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_10042016_16-0916 | Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Next item.
Speaker 1: Communication from city attorney recommendation to declare ordinance, conferring upon, upon and delegating to the Board of Harbor Commissioners certain additional powers and duties relating to the sale of property at Broadway and Golden Avenue, adjacent to the World Trade Center for the first time, and laid over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for Final Rini
Speaker 0: . Thank you. Motion in a second. There's a motion and a second. Any public comment saying non Councilwoman Pierce.
Speaker 5: I just wanted to be clear that this is just about selling it, but it's not about who they're selling it to. It's just giving them the.
Speaker 4: Rights to sell.
Speaker 11: That's correct.
Speaker 6: That's correct. When they the harbor department purchased this property, I think back in 2000 and possibly one, and then with Tidelands Money and in in when any of our departments purchased property taken in the name of the city, and they need the permission from the city council to sell, sell the parcels. So this is authorizing the Harbor Commission to negotiate and to sell the parking area that they purchased.
Speaker 5: It doesn't identify who they're selling it to. It's just giving them the right to sell it.
Speaker 6: That is correct. Okay.
Speaker 4: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Okay. Was that no public comment? So please cast your votes. Motion carries 23. | Ordinance | Recommendation to declare ordinance conferring upon and delegating to the Board of Harbor Commissioners certain additional powers and duties relating to the sale of property at Broadway and Golden Avenue, adjacent to the World Trade Center, read and adopted as read. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_09202016_16-0887 | Speaker 1: October 14th, our newest Hall of Fame member, Councilmember Ella Alston. All right. All right. Thank you. Thank you. So, Madam Clerk, we're going to go to item number 26. We're taking this out of order, but we have at 5:00 time certain. Would you mind reading item number 26.
Speaker 0: Recommendation to conduct a study session to receive a presentation on the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authorities ballot measure M traffic improvement plan and its potential impact on Long Beach.
Speaker 1: Thank you. So we've allocated 30 minutes for the study session. It'll begin with a 10,000,010 minute staff report from Diana Tang, followed by Signal Hill Councilmember Larry Forester and Diane Hight from the Gateway Cities Council of Governments, who will be allotted 5 minutes. Then the then Stephanie Wiggins, deputy CEO of Metro, who will be a light at 5 minutes, then public comment. So we want to thank our guests, Councilman Forester, Miss Hite, Miss Wiggins, for joining us. We appreciate your time. So let's begin with the staff report.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Vice Mayor, for the staff report. You will hear from our government affairs manager, Diana Tang.
Speaker 6: They are members of the City Council. Thank you for this opportunity to provide you with a general overview of Measure M, which is the Metro Board of Directors Sales Tax Measure to fund regional transportation initiatives. So we have for you a PowerPoint presentation tonight that should be coming up shortly. And in this PowerPoint, we'll be going over just a quick introduction of of the ballot measure, which is an extension of Measure R, and it should be queuing up. As we speak here. Those of you I'm sure you all remember measure. Our measure are has funded a number of street improvements in each of your districts. Local streets and roads has helped repave some some of the streets in your neighborhoods and is a vital source of funding for public works. There we are measure. Measure M Centers, County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, sales tax measure. So here we go. I will do an introduction, as I said, a background to Measure R and then we'll go into the details of the current ballot measure that voters will be voting on in November. Measure M proposes to increase the local sales tax in L.A. County by 1%. It also would extend Measure R, the existing half cent sales tax in L.A. County indefinitely. So both of these measures together will provide Metro with a $0.01 sales tax to fund regional transportation initiatives. And the ballot measure also includes an expenditure plan, which we will take a quick look at as well. Just to recap on Measure R in L.A. County, this ballot measure has funded a number of regional improvements, including the Expo Line, the Gold Line, the Regional Connector Project in downtown L.A. that connects Union Station with a number of different light rail lines throughout L.A. County. And then also improvements that you're seeing currently on the I-5 freeway are all Measure R projects. In Long Beach. As I've mentioned earlier, a number of streets in each of your districts have been paved using this type of revenue source. For example, Park Avenue from Pacific Coast Highway to Atherton eighth Street, from Freeman Avenue to Gladys Avenue. The list goes on and I'm sure there are a number that you know of in your district that are not enumerated on this slide. So moving forward, Measure R does expire in 2039 and Metro has identified a number of regional needs that exist now. And without funding going into the future, there could potentially be a shortage of revenues to address some of the major infrastructure projects that would really benefit the region. So as I mentioned before, Measure M includes an expenditure plan. It also projects that are included in Measure M were evaluated by Metro using a performance metric matrix that you see up there that places a pretty high value on using congestion. Nobody likes sitting in traffic on the freeways. And so it appears that that that is weighted at 45%. A number of other criteria that Metro has included in their performance matrix include safety, economic benefits, sustainability, all weighted at slightly less, but still in that performance matrix nonetheless. So what has been proposed in measure are a number of major projects, including the culvert, a tunnel valued at about $7 billion, the West Wing and a transit corridor project at about 2.5 million West Side, Purple and extension, Gold Line extension and the Crenshaw Line extension. These are all light rail extensions in L.A. County, in and around the region, but not in Long Beach. So what is in Long Beach? In Long Beach, a half cent sales tax, as you know, will likely generate about 24 million in in the city of Long Beach. And major projects that we will be eligible for in this funding source will fund improvements to Shoemaker Bridge as an early action I 710 project the Islip and ten Freeway later on in later years in the ballot measure a Wardlow grade separation as as you all know the Wardlow station off the blue line is one of a one of the worst stations that has been rated by Berkeley. And so safety improvements at that location do need to be made. Metro recognizes that, and we've had a number of conversations related to the where the grade separation project. Overall investments in blue line safety are also a part of the ballot measure. Safety on the blue line and other lines in in the ballot measure are all included as operations and maintenance and then potential light rail connecting the green line and the blue line in downtown Long Beach and that residents can get to L.A.X. This is also in there. One thing that we are looking forward to is a direct local return. The measure ballot measure proposes a 17% local return to all cities. Long Beach is expecting approximately 7 million annually from this revenue source. The 17% is an increase from the current 15% local return that we'd get from Measure R so and also based on population. So both of those items are in in Measure M and good for a Long Beach. And so similar to the type of local return revenues that we get currently for measure, our local return for Measure M could be used for streets and roads, active transportation projects, green streets that include stormwater complete streets, the bicycle boulevards that you see, public access to recreational facilities and then transit oriented communities as well. So just a quick look at the funding source or the funding revenues that we can expect you'll see there, measure our revenues. We get about 5.5 in local return annually and that's based on a 15% local return. Allow me to translate currently gets a 20% return as a transit operator in the region. If measure impasses we will get the city of Long Beach will get about 6.7 million or approximately 7 million based on a 17% local return. So in total, that's we're looking close to $12.2 million. And similar to in measure our measure M includes 20% return for me to transit the bringing their total to 8.2. And so before I conclude my presentation, the board of directors did vote to place this ballot measure on the November ballot in June, and voters will be voting on this November 8th. And with that, I'm available for questions if we don't go to presentations from the cog in Metro First.
Speaker 7: And Vice Mayor, if I can add to the presentation. Clearly, Mr.. Mr. Hang and Arturo Sanchez have been very, very involved in their staff, have been involved in working with Metro and looking at this measure and trying to make sure that if anything is put on the ballot that Long Beach's projects are are on the table and that they're considered as part of the overall strategy. So I want to thank them for their efforts.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much. And so, Mr. Modica, Ms.. Tang, thank you for that presentation. We're going to move forward to the first of our of our guests tonight, which will be Signal Hill Council member Larry Forester and Diane Hight from the Gateway Cities card. So let's queue up. Once again, I'll just remind folks, we, you know, we have a certain amount of time allocated here. So we're going to set up the 5 minutes on the map. And our guests have been are prepared for that. So let's go ahead and get started.
Speaker 8: Well, first of all, I want to say thank you for welcoming the Gateway COG to present. I am Councilmember Larry Forester from the city of Signal Hill, a member of the COG. I have a PowerPoint. I think you will have a copy of it in front of you. Okay. Let's look at the measure itself. This is what's stated on the ballot book. I would be remiss if I didn't tell you that myself and nine other cities sued against this, said it didn't meet current election law, and the judge ruled on a very narrow ruling that this was not put on by the populace so they could put anything they wanted. The Gateway COC voted to oppose the measure in 2000. July of 2016. Oh, I jumped over all the measure. M Where it's going to go. But when we voted to oppose it, the Gateway Cities looked at that measure and said it's priorities for new tax revenue or ignoring many of our cities in the cog in the South Bay. That was confirmed when both in Councilmember Diane De Voice and Supervisor Duncan Harvey voted against it, both on the MTA board. The modeling project moves some projects in different locations, some out almost 40 years. We felt that that was not what Measure R had said. The reconsideration has resulted in multimodal operations for the Gateway Cities that were leapfrogged by many other projects, and this given federal funding is a jump. Outside of the gateway card. It simply is not geographically equitable.
Speaker 1: Nor is it fair to our residents.
Speaker 8: Who will be funding these projects for decades before they see a benefit. Under the measure, I-5, which is now stopping and downhill, will go no further. I-405 i6 oh five i7 ten year end and the other end of both won't be completed for 30 to 40 years, despite recent offers of commitment from the regional mayor. It is not written, and I must emphasize that I'm here because what's in the measure.
Speaker 1: Is what the.
Speaker 8: Citizens are voting on, not the promises being made to us today. The City of Signal Hill and other cities, its commerce, El Segundo, La mirada and industry pay a disproportionate amount on this tax. When I look at and say Signal Hill, we are high. Sales tax, donate 7 million. We get 168,000 back. That's 2%. You get 23 to 26% back. With that. I just want to summarize that this is something that I personally can't support. Take the Hill City Council voted a week ago Tuesday to not support it. I can't support it because it's not fair to the residents of the Southeast, nor to the residents of the South Bay. I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have.
Speaker 1: Thank you. We're going to save council. Come. You have another minute. If and forgive me, I said Diane Height. It's actually Karen Height, so forgive me for that.
Speaker 8: Karen is our transportation deputy for the car and. She's my technical backup. But, you know, in the extra minute, it just it doesn't make sense. I've been on council 18 years. I represent the people.
Speaker 1: I hope where I present represent.
Speaker 8: Them well. I've been reelected. I cannot tell my citizens to vote for this flawed measure. I've been told by many people Eric Garcetti, Hilda Solis, John Fasano, that I will change it. Well, we've been asking for three years to have those changes put in. What happened? You know, I now have a measure that reads. As such. It doesn't have those changes in it. What guarantee do I have? So there's no way I can tell my citizens having representative for 18 years to support that measure. And Gateway COG has taken the same position. So, again, thank you. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much, Councilmember. So next we have Stephanie Wiggins, deputy CEO of Metro, who will also be allocated 5 minutes. Welcome. Welcome, Ms.. Wiggins.
Speaker 0: Good evening. Thank you. Thank you to the city council as well. I believe I have a PowerPoint as as well.
Speaker 1: Let's make sure we restart the time to.
Speaker 0: The thank you. Starting the. Okay. Again, good evening to the council and to the residents of Long Beach Metro and the city of Long Beach, as well as the Gateway City City Council. Governments have a long history of collaboration in improving the transportation system in the southern part of the county. And in 2008, under Measure R, metro allocated a significant amount of funding to the Gateway Cities area. And since then, the colleagues, visionary thinking and active participation have supported us in aggressive development and delivery of transportation projects in the region, including within Long Beach. Since Diana gave a great basic overview of Measure M I'm going to skip through some of these slides and try to address some of the key issues of importance to Metro. One, we want to reiterate for the Council that this has been a collaborative approach and process. It's been a three year process with our Regional Partners, Cities and Council of Governments, as well as stakeholders from the business, social justice, environmental communities with a bottoms up approach to identifying what the needs are out there. As Diana said, we are we have board approval for Measure M on the ballot this November 8th, which is a brand new half cent sales tax and then an expiration of Measure R in 2039. The impacts of Measure M is essentially calculated about $0.05 on a $10 purchase. That's an average of $24 per person per year based on average spending. There are a number of major transit and highway projects which are the crux of the expenditure plan. I'm going to focus on the impacts to Long Beach. Dana went over many of these, so I won't repeat it. I will say there are elements beyond the major projects, such as operations that support Long Beach Transit. You have a local street's local return that you're very familiar with. A new one that I do want to highlight for the city council is the state of good repair. Increasingly, we have an aging infrastructure. We know that with Long Beach being at the forefront of rail in L.A. County's history, with the advent of the blue line . And so as rail lines get older, we need to make sure we don't defer maintenance on those lines. Interview Who ride a blue line today. Know that we've had power outages, we're experiencing the impacts of delays and we wanted to make sure that we could have funds available to make sure we can upgrade that system, continue to make it state of the art, improve its safety, reliability, as well as not for a blue line, but all the other rail lines and any new rail line. So our board has proposed a new earmark from this expenditure plan. We've never done it before in our history and that is to actually have an earmark for a state of good repair or ongoing maintenance of the system. Another new element of the program that benefits Long Beach residents is also to have an earmark for our most vulnerable populations. That is our seniors, our students, and our disabled. The seniors, as many of you know, with over 190 senior housing places in Long Beach, it is the fastest growing population in L.A. County. And so increasingly, mobility is an issue for seniors. Also, we have a new earmark for bike and pedestrian connection to connections to transit here again in this area. Long Beach has been at the forefront. You started your bike share before anyone else in the county. We also know that transit dependent populations also tend to be high pedestrian and bicycle users. So having this earmark is very important. And while we do not have regional rail or Metrolink in Long Beach, we do provide connections to Long Beach residents, to Metrolink through Union Station, and we're proposing to continue an earmark for that service. It's really important, as many of you know, with an expenditure plan, that there be accountability built into the measure, just like we have with propositions. AC And are we're proposing to do the same here. But building upon those lessons learned, we have an Independent Taxpayers Oversight Committee that has an expanded number of participants. We're going from three judges to a seven member expert panel. They will review, among other things, the entire plan. It's an assessment. It's not a replacement of the plan to identify the performance of the plan. It's important to note that the Independent Taxpayer Oversight only can review and comment to the board about the plan. They cannot make changes to the plan. Amendments to the plan are subject to such restrictions or firewalls. However, project acceleration can happen at any time with a two thirds vote of the vote, and I'll expound upon that later. There are impacts of the measure calculated by the Los Angeles Economic Development Corporation. Almost a half a million jobs will be created through Measure M. Clearly, this can be a local economic stimulus program. It's been proven that way with Measure R in terms of providing local jobs. One of the challenges, as you've heard from the previous speaker, that some projects will go.
Speaker 1: Forgive me, Ms.. Wiggins, but we need you to conclude so we can be fair to both opposition.
Speaker 0: Sure. Let me conclude by saying a couple of things. Project accelerated acceleration has been a key. We've been hearing it from stakeholders across the region. We did have a performance modeling process. We looked at geographic equity as well as other provisions. It's important to note that these performance metrics were approved by the board. We are also committed to ongoing acceleration. We have a meeting this Friday with the secretary Kelly on the priorities and goods movement projects for the five in the 710.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much. And to all of our presenters, let's give them all around applause for coming in and joining us down here in Long Beach. At this point, we have some counsel, some council comments. Then we'll go to public comment, beginning with Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 5: Thank you. Thank you very much for the presentations, everyone. I think this was very educational, at least for me. I didn't know much about this proposition prior to tonight, so I do have a few questions and they were touched on through the presentations, but perhaps staff could could guide me through some of these. So if Measure M were to pass, what would the sales tax in the city of Long Beach be?
Speaker 6: Councilman in the city of one each the sales tax with measure passing the current measure ah measure A from that just passed in June, our sales tax would be 10.25%.
Speaker 5: And what is it in? In nearby cities, like if, you know, in Orange County City's SEAL Beach or Los Alamitos.
Speaker 6: Councilman, I didn't compare our sales tax to those in Orange County, but the base sales tax in L.A. County is currently 9%. Proposition 30 sales tax, the quarter cent sales tax is scheduled to expire at the end of this calendar year. And so that'll take it down. But then there are increases with Measure A and then measure are still in in effect as a house that sales tax.
Speaker 7: And then it's important to remember that measure is $0.01 for six years and then drops down half cent. So it would go down after that.
Speaker 5: And what about Measure M? Is this expected to sunset at any time?
Speaker 6: Measure, as it is currently written, does not have a sunset now.
Speaker 5: And it'll stay the same consistent rate. It's not expected to be reduced after a certain period of time. Like Measure was.
Speaker 6: Councilmember? No.
Speaker 0: Okay.
Speaker 5: Are there any limitations in terms of Measure M expenditures? I noticed on one of your slides on page 12, you talk about what the project types include. Are there any limitations to this?
Speaker 6: Bear with me in just one moment while I get to that slide. Carl Zimmer. The project types that are included on on slide number 12 are projects that are eligible to be funded via local return. So that is the amount that the City of Beach receives directly from Metro as a part of this ballot measure. The ballot measure itself funds a number of other projects, including state of good repair system connectivity projects. If you could let me get to that page.
Speaker 5: Page 11.
Speaker 6: In the ballot measure itself. Actually, there's funding for transit and operating and maintenance. There's funding for first and last mile capital improvements from existing transit stops and future transit stops. There's funding for highway improvements, active transportation and complete streets, and then as well as the local return formula.
Speaker 5: Can you talk to me a little bit more about the local return? I'm not sure I understand that. That phrase.
Speaker 6: Sure. So the local return is the the phrase that is used to describe the direct level of funding that cities can receive from this ballot measure. So all cities will receive 17% directly back to cities for our expenditure on the two project types that you saw on slide number 12. That number will jump from 17% to 20% upon the expression of Measure R and 2040. So that's increased funding directly to the city of one, which for use as we see fit as as it's eligible for streets and roads in the same way that we currently spend the funding in Measure R.
Speaker 7: So and if I could just add to that measure, our funding, something that we did in the last time we did a sales tax increase through Measure R, we really fought for that language to make sure it's as flexible as possible. Other county money tends to be used only for transit quarters like A and C, but Measure R is really open and flexible for transportation uses. And that's really what we in the city of Long Beach used to fund our residential street program. Other than that, there really is no source of transportation money that can fund residential streets.
Speaker 5: Okay, so the $7 million annually is that the projected annual revenue until 2040?
Speaker 6: That is correct. That is correct.
Speaker 5: So then at 2040, that 7 million would go up because our percentage would go from 17 to 20. Yes. Okay. So that $7 million that would come directly to the city and could that be you? Are there any limitations to how the city could use that? Is it limited to just what's listed here?
Speaker 6: At this time it is. Metro still has to adopt guidelines and regulations for how we can use that money. We expect that it will be substantively similar to what is in Measure R and enumerated in the ballot resolution as it's described for green streets, complete streets. And a lot of the active transportation type initiatives that we in Long Beach have, I've taken a lead in doing in the region.
Speaker 5: Okay. So could we use it for I mean, just.
Speaker 0: In.
Speaker 5: Really basic terms, could we use it for a residential street repaving?
Speaker 6: Yes, that is an eligible use.
Speaker 5: Okay. And is there who has the discretion in terms of how the money is used? The 7 million is in solely in the city's discretion on how they want to use that money like Measure R.
Speaker 6: Yes, that is correct.
Speaker 5: And is there any sort of an oversight body for Measure M or any one that would make sure that the expenditures are within the the framework of the the measure, as it's worded now?
Speaker 6: Yes. So the ballot measure does include a plan for an independent oversight board, as Metro had described earlier. If you'll allow me to flip to that page one moment. I believe that's a seven member panel comprised of seven members, one retired federal or state judge, one transit professional, a professional with a minimum of ten years. Experience in management and experience and financial policies. Professional with experience on large scale construction projects. A licensed architect or engineer, a regional association or business representative, and three members of the committee and the members of the committee must reside in an L.A. county.
Speaker 0: Okay.
Speaker 5: Great. Thank you very much. I have no additional questions, Mr. Vice Mayor.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Councilwoman Price. Councilwoman Gonzalez?
Speaker 6: Yes, thank.
Speaker 5: You. I have a couple questions as I see here, and I think they've mostly been answered.
Speaker 0: By council.
Speaker 5: Woman price. But I have a question related to, of course, our larger projects.
Speaker 6: Of course.
Speaker 5: All of them I would like to see completed shoemaker, bridge, ward, low grade separation, especially being the worst in the county and then the potential for light rail and then added.
Speaker 6: Additional safety measures for the blue line.
Speaker 5: So are these not dedicated? They're not dedicated funding within the measure, is that correct?
Speaker 6: Councilmember funding for the ward. Low grade separation is in the expenditure plan as attachment a it's a footnote item number five. I'll can read it to you very briefly that your board of directors will prioritize the Wardlow Grade Separation Project to receive new funding and or grants and assign this project to be included in Metro's State of Good Repair program. And with respect to to the Shoemaker Bridge, that item is also footnoted as item F, I believe, as a note as part of the I7 ten South Corridor Project, Phase one Early Action Project. And that is in the ballot measure as well.
Speaker 5: Okay. So because I see here it says the increased revenues are not Long Beach.
Speaker 6: Projects described within.
Speaker 5: The ballot measure, but not as specific line item expenditures.
Speaker 6: Sure. So the ballot measure includes a number of attachments in in the expenditure plan. The one that is most detailed specifies project names, has a schedule of funds available and sequenced groundbreaking dates. And in in that portion of the expenditure plan, our projects are the word low grade separation specifically is not listed. The funding for Shoemaker Bridge is a part of the I-70, but Shoemaker Bridge itself is not a specific line item in the detailed expenditure plan. Okay, great. I think those are all the questions that I have for now.
Speaker 5: But thank you very much.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Council Member Super nine. You know, I'd like to reserve questions till after the public speaks, but I just had one very quickly that there's a, I believe, a Sequoia component to Measure R is that sort of wave for residential streets. And then how does that factor into measure? And if anyone knows.
Speaker 7: Yeah. So we can get you a more detailed explanation on square. But I don't we don't do a higher level sequel clearance for those is just part of our normal street work and they fall under a secret exemption. So residential streets would be just, you know, done the way we would do other normal maintenance projects.
Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Pierce.
Speaker 6: Thank you. Yes, thank you, Councilmember Price, for answering some of the questions I also had.
Speaker 0: I had one question that just came up.
Speaker 6: I'm curious if. The dollars that come through with these projects be covered by our city wide project labor agreement. Sorry. Curveball.
Speaker 7: So it depends on what types of projects they are. Our project labor agreement has a threshold of 500,000 projects and higher. However, projects in the right of way that are typically streets are not currently covered by the project labor agreement. But if there are other types of projects that don't fall in that description, then anything over 500,000 would trigger appeal.
Speaker 0: Okay, thank.
Speaker 6: You. And do we have any. I'll just make a statement and say that it seems like it'd be something that would create a lot of local jobs and a lot of great opportunity. And I read the memo upstairs and I left it upstairs, but it was great to see that it was highlighting a lot of green investment and transit oriented and the fact that it's not just rail, but that it could be used for bike mobility and everything else. This seems like a great opportunity to.
Speaker 0: Help.
Speaker 6: Push us in the right direction that we've already started taking a lead on. And yeah, I'll leave it there.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. In seeing a more public comment here, let's go ahead and open it up to the public for any public comment here in the audience on our study session.
Speaker 8: Good evening. My name is Don Darren Hour, our I'm with the Senior Citizen Commission. And at one point it was mentioned that according to the Metro, that Measure M would designate special funding for transportation for seniors who are their fastest growing population. And I just like to ask how that is going to be applied to seniors and what the amount would be.
Speaker 1: So this isn't the point to ask any questions, but I'm sure staff can be here to answer those. Afterward.
Speaker 8: I'd like that to be made public, however.
Speaker 1: Certainly. Thank you.
Speaker 8: Thank you.
Speaker 1: Next speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Very good. I'd like to see the MTA set up a paradigm and where we have leaving from the transit mall, maybe 6 to 8 express busses that leave the transit mall, get on the freeway, perhaps at Wardlow or even before that. But I think Wardlow would probably be the best and barrel up the freeway in the bus lane down to seventh and fig and then have an equal number coming back in the evening. I think that makes a lot of sense. Instead of going to Europe, in addition to that, have everything green lighted out of Long Beach. You know, it takes 20 some 20 to 24 minutes often to get from here to Wardlow. And that's ridiculous. We stop at every red light possible. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much. And seeing no more public comment, we're going to take it back behind the rail. Councilman Austin.
Speaker 2: Thank you. And I want to thank. Larry in Gateway Cities called for their presentation. I want to thank Stephanie Wiggins from MTA and Staff for an excellent staff report. I thought it was very important that we bring this item forward for a study session. Obviously, it is a major issue facing the voters in L.A. County on the November ballot. I did have a couple of questions. And just in full disclosure, I am the city's representative, along with Councilmember Urunga on the Gateway City's Council of Governments. I currently serve as the president. I can tell you that that the Gateway Cities did vote to oppose this measure a couple of months ago. And I want to just commend Mayor Garcetti. I want to commend the MTA for sticking with it in terms of having ongoing conversations with the the all of the gateway cities, individual cities , and trying to understand the projects and the importance of the major projects and how it impacts the residents in. And there has been a lot of back and forth. This is a very, very I would just say, very highly political issue. But I see light at the end of the tunnel potentially. Ultimately, this is going to be up to the voters not only in the city of Long Beach, but throughout the county and our values and. In terms of a regional transportation will be put to the test to complement Measure R. There were a couple of questions that that I do have. I want to ask the question that Mr. Donna were asked in terms of how the measure and proposes to to benefit seniors. I know there was a like a $2.4 billion number. What specifically will be done to aid the senior population? Just one question.
Speaker 0: Thank you for allowing me to clarify that. So with the earmark for seniors, students and disabled. The idea is to keep fares affordable. So we currently have a discount program for seniors, and this funding would ensure that we can continue that discount available for seniors. Again, for seniors, both students K through 12, as well as college students and community college students. And then for our disabled riders, that's the purpose of that funding.
Speaker 2: Okay, thank you so much. And then there was a lot and Councilmember Pearce mentioned the jobs, local jobs that could be created. I believe the number in the presentation was through the from the L.A. EDC. So we're over 460,000 new jobs will be created by Measure M If somebody could ask me whether or not those jobs, is that an annual on an annual basis or is that over the life of the project? And what type of jobs will they be?
Speaker 0: Excuse me. I'll stay closer. It is estimated for the life of the project. For the program, at least the first 40 years where we were able to actually articulate specific projects. So that's what that relates to. And we can make the full report by L.A. EDC available to the council. But they identify both direct and indirect jobs, construction related jobs, planning jobs, or principally construction related jobs.
Speaker 2: Okay. And in terms of the major projects for for the city of Long Beach, I know it was mentioned regarding the I-70 and Freeway. Staff, can you tell us where we are with that, that project in terms of shovel readiness and and when that project will be funded in the measure M schedule?
Speaker 8: Vice Mayor Richardson threw the chair to Councilmember Austin. The the project 710 project currently is in IRR phase. It is moving towards a final year. You will actually receive a project update on Friday at the project committee meeting that's taking place at 11 a.m., where Metro staff will come and discuss where they are in the development of the environmental review and the measure that's proposed. Measure M proposes funding in 2020 647, ten, actually breaking ground and moving forward with the project.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Why have you there? Can you also explain the war? Low grade separation? Footnote what? That project actually. Made do or proposes to do.
Speaker 8: Yes, sir. Through the chair again of Council Member Austin, the ward low grade separation proposes to look at redesigning the WARDLE station. Currently, it is a station that has a number of problems related to traffic in and around the station and the way that people get to and from the trains. And so we have been working with Metro at relooking at that station and whether or not there's an opportunity to take the rail below ground and separate it from the grade so that you could still have traffic traveling over and the trains would come down, re-imagine what that what that station could look like and help improve overall transit around the area, both for cars and for busses and for the trains themselves.
Speaker 6: Okay. I'll go ahead and add to that at the Metro June board meeting. As Mayor Garcetti's supervisor, Don Carnaby and Mayor Dubuffet put forth a motion to look at grade crossing, pedestrian safety gates, fare enforcement and safety station maintenance and station gate installation. The board also voted to initiate a feasibility study to improve safety and security at the Blue Line Ward Low Station. And so there are a number of blue line improvements in in Metro's plan to upgrade the blue line in in Long Beach. And so even though it's not detailed in the expenditure plan with the specific groundbreaking dates, this is something that the City of Long Beach has been working with Metro on and hopefully with increased funding can make a reality.
Speaker 2: Okay. Thank you very much. You know, I'm going to keep my comments very brief in the interest of time and understanding that we have a big agenda ahead of us. I can tell you that this conversations regarding Measure M are happening daily. There is a lot of activity around this to look at alternative funding and identifying federal funds to help with some of these projects as well. And much hasn't been talked about in terms of propositions A, C and A and C in terms of funding available and how that can be leveraged as well. On October the sixth, the Gateway City cargo will reconvene. And this is this item will be agenda ized again. And so I will just just ask that the voters do do what you need to do to do your due diligence to understand this issue and weigh out the benefits that this potentially could have or not for the city of Long Beach. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. And as we go into the second round of comments, let's just remind everyone we have a full city council meeting to go to next. So, Councilman Price.
Speaker 5: Thank you. Vice Mayor. I think I think this is an important topic, so I appreciate your indulgence. And going into the second round of comments, I do have some follow up questions regarding some of the things that have come up. Is there a disbursement schedule.
Speaker 6: Or.
Speaker 5: What? How will the funds be routed to the individual cities? What's the timeline for that?
Speaker 6: So on the local return we will likely receive the measure and funds as we do measure are so they will be included in our annual budgeting process and factored into our capital improvement plan.
Speaker 5: And so how soon with those funds start to come in to the city of Long Beach? They do. They come in on an annual basis, quarterly basis.
Speaker 6: That we we may have to go back and check with, but they will not be any different than how we receive measure our local return funds.
Speaker 5: Well, I'm interested. I mean, my colleagues have made some really great points. And yes, all of these projects bring about more jobs, which is definitely good for everyone. But the concern that I have is that the sales tax in the city of Long Beach is going to be incredibly high as a result of this. And, you know, we just had a very passionate discussion about minimum wage and trying to make sure that our residents are set up for success. And I'm concerned about, you know, how increasing sales tax for individuals will be. You know, how that will impact people. So that's that's my preliminary concern, hearing hearing these discussions in terms of some of the big projects that we have, not the local transfer, but that the bigger projects that are part of measure. And when are those monies expected to come to the city of Long Beach?
Speaker 6: The funding for Shoemaker Bridges in early action 710 project is slated for 2026 in the expenditure plan. Funding for Wardlow for the grade separation does not have an expected groundbreaking date yet, but that is something that we're actively working with Metro on.
Speaker 5: So it's 2016 and we expect the funding to come in about ten years for one of the major projects.
Speaker 6: That is.
Speaker 5: Correct. Would that be the earliest project that we'd get funding for? Of the identified project.
Speaker 6: Of the identified project. That is the earliest project that is identified. Yes.
Speaker 5: That our residents would be paying into measure for that ten years without any other. The bigger project starting in the city.
Speaker 6: Correct. In the meantime, we will be getting the local return revenues back in approximately 7 million. But for the larger projects, the earliest one that is slated is Shoemaker in 2026.
Speaker 8: Okay. One point of clarification is I believe there is some funding and perhaps Mr. Wiggins can correct me if I'm wrong before 605 Freeway. It is an issue that we are dealing with on the east side with regards to the bottleneck from the Orange County side leading into 605. And so if. If I may indulge Ms.. Wiggins in answering my question as to whether or not six or five funding comes earlier than 2026. Okay.
Speaker 5: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Yes, Arturo. So in the expenditure plan, there is an earmark for the six or five hotspots interchange project. It's $1,000,000,000 from Measure M that's earmarked for that program and it would start collecting money, money being allocated to it. And I believe anyway 18 and 19 at the latest. There are also would be money directly on day one, Long Beach Transit as well.
Speaker 6: And one thing I'll add about the major Long Beach projects, if we are to secure federal funding or are able to make a strong case to the Metro Board of directors, we are able to move projects up with a two thirds vote.
Speaker 5: Okay. So if we had like a map, a cost matching or something like that.
Speaker 6: Moving projects up an expenditure plan would require a two thirds vote from the Metro Board of Directors, and so I would assume that they would want a number of qualifying factors presented to them for that vote.
Speaker 5: Okay, great. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Vice Mayor.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 0: I think the two thirds.
Speaker 6: Vote was going to be my question, but I'll just hopefully end on tonight and saying that, you know, we when we invest in our cities and we invest in infrastructure and we invest in things like our waterways or our sewers, ensuring that our transit system is strong when we're innovating technology and investing in that, that's when we get great cities and that this is another opportunity to do that. And so I'm very thankful for the study session today and learned a lot. Thank you, guys.
Speaker 1: Thank you. And I'll just say just to close it out that, you know, we had our own discussion about a sales tax here in Long Beach that took a lot of our focus. And I have to admit myself, I'm just finally turning my eye to November and all the things that are coming down in November. And so I do want to thank staff and thank all the speakers for their diligence in the presentation tonight. And I know that, you know, a lot of times with discussions like this, they you know, sometimes you don't get everybody on the same page. The one question I do want to ask is, how have we I haven't necessarily paid attention. So forgive it if forgive this question. But has there been a level of engagement outside of these city council meetings, perhaps the business community, environmentalists, community? Has there been some level of engagement or are people surprised by this measure? And I'll ask that of city staff or or of Metro.
Speaker 0: Yes. There's been a tremendous amount of engagement. In March of this year, when we released our draft plan, we went had in-person community meetings at all nine subregions. We also held telephone town halls through all major subregions where we were able to reach thousands of residents of L.A. County. We had online forums and we received thousands of comments during this public comment period. In addition to that, working with business chambers, environmental groups, social justice groups, as well as engaging with our Council of Governments.
Speaker 1: Certainly. Thank you so much. And that concludes our study session. Thank you very much. And let's go ahead and reset. We're going to take a moment just to reset and get ready for our city council meeting. Just a moment.
Speaker 9: Thank you. Thank you, Vice Mayor. We are going to go ahead and transition into the rest of our meeting here in just a second. We're just going to start in just just a minute. Okay. Thank you. I want to thank the council here who has had some good discussions so far tonight and a couple announcements just to . And I'm not sure if these were made earlier. Vice Mayor But I just repeat some of them. Our first presentation that we're going to go to, our first item is we're going to take the item surrounding the Olympics conversation up first, then we're going to take the presentation and discussion on the Queen Mary, which will come up next. Then I have an announcement on item number 15, which is an item by Councilwoman Pryce. That item will actually is going to be we're going to take it up later, but it's going to be postponed, I believe, to the next council meeting or Councilman Price is going to ask for that that discussion to be postponed to the next council meeting. So if anyone's here for that, just as an FII, the item around ARVs will be taken up, I believe, as you're going to make that October 4th. Okay, October 4th. We're also going to be moving up our commission appointments and then as well, I believe it's the item 24. And so a lot of moving today because we have people that have time certains but we'll try to get through everything as best possible. And so we're going to go first into the item around the Olympics, which is item 25, which we need to get out of the way. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to conduct a study session to receive a presentation on The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s (Metro) Ballot Measure M: Traffic Improvement Plan, and its potential impact on Long Beach. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_09202016_16-0889 | Speaker 9: And so a lot of moving today because we have people that have time certains but we'll try to get through everything as best possible. And so we're going to go first into the item around the Olympics, which is item 25, which we need to get out of the way. So Madam Clerk, read the item and then I'm going to kick us off and turn it over to staff.
Speaker 0: Report from City Manager a recommendation to enter into an agreement with the L.A. 2024 Exploratory Committee to host a portion of the 2024 Olympic Games at the Long Beach Convention and Entertainment Center area adjacent to waterfront and other possible areas throughout Long Beach Citywide.
Speaker 9: Thank you. Let me let me just go ahead and begin I want to just begin by saying over the last approximately 6 to 7 months, we've been working directly with Mayor Eric Garcetti and the L.A. 2024 Committee to ensure that Long Beach is well-represented. And as part of the official United States Olympic bid, which we know that Los Angeles is carrying the flag for our country in the 2024 round. As we probably are aware, many of the sites initially that were released preliminarily were out in the public. And since that time to today, I really want to thank but particularly our city staff for working with us so closely to ensure that we would be well represented as part of the bid. But in addition to that, I want to thank the our convention visitors bureau staff who did fantastic work to ensure that our Olympic bid know the quality of events that we're able to really put together here in the city of Long Beach. In addition to that. I want to just say that Long Beach has a long history with the Olympics. This is an Olympic city. We have hosted games and events in this community. We have almost more Olympians in any other major metropolitan area and certainly one of the largest cities that produces Olympics anywhere in the country, particularly when you're talking about all of our events that happen to do with swimming and volleyball and all of our aquatic events. And so there's a strong tradition of the Olympics here. The to be a part of the United States bid, we know, would be historic and would also be, I believe, if structured appropriately, which I know we would, an incredibly strong economic benefit to the city of Long Beach. And so, again, I want to thank Mayor Garcetti for his partnership, and I look forward to being able to move forward and bring the Olympics not just to Los Angeles, but bring the Olympics to Long Beach as well. So with that. Mr. MODICA.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think you covered it very well. What we're asking for as staff here is the authorization to enter into an agreement with the L.A. 24 exploratory committee to host several events here in Long Beach. We would essentially be entering into an agreement to reserve the space and time we expect, as noted in your staff report, that the cost of the venues would be offset by the by the Olympic Committee. They would essentially pay for the costs associated with those. And then if there was any costs that aren't going to be covered, we would come back to the city council at a later date. We would essentially save that time for them. And then if we are selected next September 2017, we would essentially be talking more in specificity about costs and what that would look like in our city. So we're available for any questions. And we we know we're going to get questions about what those events are. And we expect to hear very soon from L.A. 24, announcing all those proposed locations and exactly which events are going in which cities. So they're going to make that announcement soon.
Speaker 9: Thank you. And and with that, I have a motion to second Councilwoman Gonzales.
Speaker 5: Yes. I just want to thank city staff for their hard work as well as our mayor. I know this is incredible for our city. We are an Olympian city. I would also like to see when we get that information, what type of economic impact that will bring to our city, because I know it will be, you know , very, very positive. And I'd like to see that those numbers to see how we can really benefit from that economically.
Speaker 6: So thank you very much for your work.
Speaker 9: Thank you, Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Mayor Garcia. And I know it's really preliminary and there's still a lot to learn, but I just want to express how exciting this is potentially to have be on the world stage, you know, right here in Long Beach. And this is, I would say, once in a lifetime. But I think we've calculated with 40 years since the last time I was in L.A. so maybe twice in a lifetime opportunity. But we're really excited about this and I hope it all works out.
Speaker 9: Thank you. Councilmember Pierce.
Speaker 6: Yes. When I go, the sentiment for my colleagues, I think this is a great opportunity to continue to keep Long Beach on the map, to celebrate the assets that we have in this city. Looking back at the other two years that we had the Olympics in Long Beach, from just some initial research, it looks like we did make money and then additional funds that were made were actually invested back in the youth programs. And there's a commitment from the Olympics to continue to do that investment. So really looking forward to what might come and continuing to have the conversations about what economic impact there might be. Thank you.
Speaker 9: Thank you. And public comment, please. Anyone from the public.
Speaker 8: Very good. You click as the address. As I mentioned when it was first announced, a number, you know, two years ago, I fully support the concept. There's no reason why we can't duplicate what happened in 1984. If. The bid is structured properly. My analysis, my perspective comes from having studied the bidding process when I first became involved in the growing community in 2000, in 1984, excuse me, 1982, two years before the games. And I've been studying it ever since. And my sense is that we can certainly do it. And that is particularly true if it's well-managed. The key will be having say so. I'll make a very blunt. But before, as you remember, I had after the Paris attack attacks, my position was and it still is I don't think it would prevail still is that the U.S. should stand down. This term, this bidding cycle, support this republic's oldest ally. Having said that. The key to SoCal receiving the bid. Will depend upon the Long Beach, the enhanced new Long Beach Marine Stadium. If the Marine Stadium is not the rowing venue, so Cal will not prevail. And that comes from an analysis and understanding of the IOC and its culture. The. And I'm not in the IOC. But the the growing dynamic within that IOC. It is the oldest. There is. And those members are embedded in a civic, social, financial, governmental, military paradigms. Other countries, the former British Commonwealth, the former Great Britain, all those countries, the former Soviet Union, South America. They want to come here, period. Lake Casitas turned out to be a turnoff to far away, even driving, speeding up at speeds I won't tell you about on barren freeways. They and they recognize that. Then the second place they were going to put it in, the sign was Balboa Lake Balboa in the middle of San Fernando Valley in the summer with 103 degree heat. That's absurd on its face. The last announced location was as far down the coast, but beyond at or near Chula Vista, which is the same as well, distant up out of Lake Casitas. It's too far from the Olympic vibe and so forth. Long Beach Marine Stadium with the enhanced enhanced open channel, which apparently should be remembered, was.
Speaker 9: Thank you, Mr..
Speaker 8: Genesis, for that. So it was the USOC Olympic Committee. Thank you for that was their idea.
Speaker 9: Unfortunately, you're going to hear time all day. Time is up. Thank you very.
Speaker 8: Much and understand the appeal.
Speaker 9: Thank you very much. Next up is Council Member Supernova.
Speaker 1: Thank you for public opinion or public comment.
Speaker 9: I didn't see anybody else here.
Speaker 1: Thank you. I would just like to add to the proposal here that we add a component to look at our rich history in the Olympics. And if we're going to have members of a committee visiting our city that we take a look at, some of the historic sites, Marine Stadium, and in particular in the fourth District is a traffic circle. The traffic circle was built for the 1932 Olympics, and it's not in real good shape right now. So I'd like to see us get some enhancements in there. So if we did bring visitors to the site, they would enjoy that. Also, we have Lakewood Boulevard in my district. That was part of the 1984 Olympic torch run. And I think just showing visitors those historic sites may mean a lot. And I haven't discussed this with the councilmember from the first District, but actually a vacant lot at the corner of 14th and Locust won the contest that the local paper put on for decorating or enhancing vacant lots for the 32 Olympics. And you think we have rough economic times now? Imagine 1932 in the Depression and they went to the public for volunteers to do decorations and whatnot. My grandfather won that contest that year for planning flowers on that lot, so I don't know if it's a friendly amendment, but I'd just like to add to this that we have a component involved that we look at our historic sites and maybe put some energy and maybe money into enhancing them.
Speaker 9: And I think absolutely. I think if tonight goes and proved, I understand that management worked directly with the 2024 team. And then if awarded, there will be a long series of of involvement of the council as well as the community. And the community will be asked to participate. It will be a huge city wide effort, and I think that's an excellent suggestion and idea. See no other comments on this. Members, please go. Oh, there's another public comment. Sorry, I didn't see you there. Please come forward.
Speaker 8: Tom Shannon, one word for a rival entrepreneurial to beach. I had the good fortune of being involved in the 84 Olympics in yachting and can assure you this is a huge plus for this city to come back and have this opportunity again. We had over 2000 volunteers put that together and all of the funds that came through to this city for all the venues we had were substantial. So I encourage every one of you to really seriously get behind this process and make it all happen. Thank you.
Speaker 9: Thank you, Tom. See no other comments. Please cast your votes, members.
Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 9: Excellent. Good news ahead. Let's go ahead and take the commission item, kind of. Some of them are here and I want to make sure that we're get them on their way. Madam Clerk. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to enter into an agreement with the LA 2024 Exploratory Committee to host a portion of the 2024 Olympic Games at the Long Beach Convention and Entertainment Center area, adjacent waterfront, and other possible areas throughout Long Beach. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_09202016_16-0878 | Speaker 9: Let's give them all a round of applause for serving and thank them. Thank you. We're going to go now to our item on the Queen Mary. And it's a it's listed as both a presentation and agenda item. So we're going to move that agenda item and just do the whole thing here in one item. So if I can have the clerk, please begin by reading item 25 and then I'll kick us off. I'm sorry. Now that I'm 25, it's item number 17 and they'll kick us off.
Speaker 0: Report from Development Services recommendation to receive and file the guiding principles recommended by the Queen Mary Land Development Task Force District to.
Speaker 9: Thank you. We're going to before we turn this over to two staff, I just want to make a couple opening comments. I want to just begin by thanking first the council and then the task force that the council formed, this Queen Mary Tibet Land Development Task Force probably about a year ago or so. And Vice Mayor Lowenthal at the time had brought this forward along with myself, just to ensure that we would have a extensive community input process throughout. As far as developing these principles and guidelines for the development of the Queen Mary land around the Queen Mary. As a reminder, this is probably some of the most important undeveloped land, not just in the city, but really in the region. This is significant property. It is adjacent to our iconic Queen Mary. And there's a lot of potential to really connect this parcel to the rest of the city and build something really special for not just Long Beach, but really for for the region and for the state. So it's been an exciting process. And I want to start by thanking all the members of the task force. This was a a phenomenal group of people that served on this task force. There's four of them that are here, but I want to thank each of them first. The chair was Michael Bowen, who is going to be saying a few remarks today, who, as we all know, is a senior principal and design director at Studio 111. Geoff Hoffman, who wanted to be here so bad but is actually traveling for work. Who's who's vice chair of Hoffman and Associates was the Vice-Chair Ryan Elton Toon, who we know is a developer and the executive VP of Energy and Pacific Stewart Ashman, who was the CEO of Mohler, Becky Blair from Blair Real Estate. Julia Wang, who I know is here, who is the founder of Imprint Venture Lab and the CEO of Inner Trend. Kathleen Irvine from the from the community in the Willmar City area. Ken McDonald, who is the CEO of Long Beach Transit. I see Cheryl Perry, who's here, who is with Long Beach Heritage and president of the Long Beach Navy Memorial Heritage Group and one of our premier historic preservationists in the city. Kelly Ruggiero, who is the executive director of the Long Beach Symphony. And Kelly is also here. Steve Sheldon, who is the director of entertainment events at the Queen Mary. I saw Steve here. If he's not here now, he was maybe spoken in and out, but I did see him. Come in. Come in down here. And John Bendis, who's the principal and founder of German DS, Inc., I know if you want is here or not, but it's it was a a phenomenal group. They've worked very hard. They've been putting together a lot of their work. And you're going to see the culmination of their work tonight. And so with that, I'm gonna turn this over to city staff.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Yes, we certainly agree that the task force has done a tremendous amount of work, a tremendous amount of visioning and bringing community input into what is really Premiere site in Long Beach. So Linda Tatum will go through from development services, will go through a bit of a staff report to give you an overview and highlights of what their work product was in your packet, you have kind of the full report which gets into a even greater detail and we'll give a summary of the great work that the care that the task force did.
Speaker 0: Linda Thank you, Mayor, and members of the Council. I'd like to start by just acknowledging the staff that worked on this incredible project, and that would be to my left here, Fernandinho, who's the planning staff? She was the project manager. I'd also like to recognize one of the our department's interns, Olivia Jonge, as well as our department director, Amy Bodak. And I would also like to acknowledge the assistance that we had, the very capable assistance we had from a project designer, an architect, a local architect who assisted the task force in their deliberations. So with that, I'd just like to introduce the overview of this project by acknowledging that the selection of a new leaseholder for the Queen Mary site was a very opportune time for the city to step back from the site and take the opportunity to really significantly reimagine what could occur on the site. It's an underutilized site. And this time and the appointment of the task force really played a critical role for the city to re vision that site. So with the mayor's creation of the task force there, their charge was multifold. It was, to, number one, recognize the Queen Mary ship, but also to re-envision the site as a world class destination, something that that could be and also to for the task force there key role was really to provide leadership in that deliberation and in that conversation with the community, their charge was to get a broad base of community input in terms of what that vision could be and to take that input and feedback from the stakeholders and the community and synthesize it into a. He's the vision for the site. And that resulted in the Queen Mary document that the draft document that you have in front of you in the course of their appointment over about eight months, they had a total of ten meetings. And during those meetings they routinely had very active community input and participation. Those meetings included presentations on topics related to the President, related to the topic of the vision, but also some very specialized presentations such as a potential aerial tram for the site, as well as the restoration of a historic carousel. So those were some of the topics. In addition, they had several design featurettes that were hosted by the architect Gwyn Pugh and his firm to facilitate that discussion. So I'd like to briefly just summarize the guiding principles that were that drove the the ultimate vision for the site. They started out with, first and foremost, the acknowledgment that the the Queen Mary ship really is the focal point. It serves a significant iconic cultural landmark for the city. And the idea is that whatever development occurs on the site should recognize the Queen Mary and its contribution to the city's history and culture, and that any development of the site just needs to compliment the Queen Mary. But the task force didn't forget that the other key role or the key objective of the development of the selection of a leaseholder is to really begin the process of developing that site so that it can allow funding to restore the Queen Mary to its historic grandeur. Another one of the key principles was esthetics for the site. And the important component here was that whatever is developed on the site, that it's attractive and that it's it is authentic architecture that really reflects the setting of the site itself. The other key point that the task force recognized was that whatever happens on the site, it has to have broad public access, not just getting into the site easily, but also just getting out of the site and providing very ample and adequate parking for the site. Another one of the guiding principles was connectivity. I think that there was a lot of focus that talked about how the site itself needs to be connected not only to the downtown, but also the activities and the the various events on the site must be connected to each other and that the public and those visiting the site must must have a different options or modes for actually access in the site. And also connectivity included visual access. It's not just getting around the site, but having the site be visual or be actually visible from the downtown and other parts of the city, as well as promoting the great views of the site itself across into the downtown area. Also the notion of complete community. The task force wanted to make sure that we weren't just creating a single purpose type of setting. The idea was that there would be multiple purposes for there, and that would include everything from social, cultural, educational opportunities as well as hospitality for the site. So it was really important that when you go to the site, it could serve a multiplicity of functions for for visitors as well as for local residents. Also iconic. That was the term that is intended to make sure that whatever gets developed on the site, not only does it respect the Queen Mary ship, but that be iconic in and of itself. So that, again, those views of the site of the Queen Mary site from the downtown and other parts of the city reflect something that's very substantial and and worthy of the the location on that piece of property. And lastly, the the task force deliberated on this one a lot and we added it. They added it at the last minute that because it kept coming up in the conversation, the need for this outdoor venue, this very unique outdoor venue to provide a very iconic and a high quality outdoor venue that would rival other local regional venues such as the Hollywood Bowl. The thought was that this would be unique because of its waterfront location and that it was certainly a a and a great unique opportunity for the the city to take advantage of. So with that, the other major component that went into the the guiding principles that are reflected in the document are a number of about seven or so key themes. And these are the key themes and elements that were were tossed out. There are tons of ideas that came out of the various members of the of the task force. And but they were all coalesced around these key themes that are represented here. They were things like not just the sense of arrival or creating a sensible arrival, but having the arrival to the site be an experience in and of itself. Making arrival there easier with wayfinding. Making, as I mentioned earlier, circulation to the site, getting to the site and and traversing the site itself through different modes, be it walking, biking, coming to the site, using other modes of transportation, including your cars, the water, taxi, but just be highly accessible however you choose to get there. Also making the parking accessible. And the other consideration was the esthetics and the design of the site. The idea, again, was to make sure that the the site and the the architectural features and everything was cohesive and really made the site that that world class destination that will be attractive not only to local residents who may want to spend an afternoon there, but for an international visitor, for example, who may stay at a local stay at the hotel on the site and spend the weekend there. So the idea, again, making sure that the site is attractive, that it is welcoming, that the building is all the buildings on the site are cohesive and they orient and enhance the Queen Mary itself, enhance the site and make it a world class destination. The other component was the open space. The task force felt that it was really critical to take advantage not only of the park site, but the open space of the site itself and with the orientation of buildings, the placement of the buildings to make sure that those open space corridors are actually maintained, so that at no time is the site overdeveloped. So you don't get to continue to take advantage of multiple open space opportunities on the site as well as open space views. And then lastly, the key uses of the site. The task force spent a lot of time and they had a lot of great ideas. And again, these are summarized in the they're presented in a little bit more detail in the document itself. But the idea is that there would be a variety of uses, cultural uses, entertainment uses, recreational uses, hospitality. Again, the ultimate goal being to have the site be a world class destination that that brands the city of of Long Beach, as well as the Queen Mary itself. So with that, I'd like to close out the presentation by talking about the next steps after the council takes an action on the these guiding principles. Tonight, we will be formally presenting them on the Mayor's behalf to the urban commons, the leaseholder and the I just to make sure that the you're aware that urban commons has been they attended many of the task force meetings and so they were they were there we know that they were listening to the incredible feedback that came directly from the community and from the task force. And the idea is that these guiding principles will inform their ultimate design of something truly iconic, something truly esthetic, and that really enhances the site. And we will look forward ultimately to their submittal of a set of plans for the long term development of the site. And that concludes staff's presentation. Be happy to answer any questions you might have.
Speaker 9: Thank you. And I know that before we get the questions, I'm going to have Mr. Bowen come up, who's going to say a few words on behalf of the task force. And he led our group along with Mr. Hoffman.
Speaker 8: Well, thank you. As the chair of the Queen Mary Task Force. We are very proud and excited about the document. We've put a lot of energy into it and we think that this could be a really great document for the developer and the community to use as a guide. We hope that you support the document that we produced today. I also want to say that I want to thank the mayor for putting this group of task force members together. They were the best. They're very passionate. They're very talented and knowledgeable. And everything that's in this document has a reflection from all of the members. Didn't always agree, but we always were able to work things out and we think we have a really phenomenal document. I also wanted to thank Gwen Pew and Linda with Urban Studio. They were the consultants that helped facilitate some of the community meetings as well as our meetings, and they are one of the best in Southern California. I've worked with a lot of different firms and they're really wonderful. It was a really great choice. I also want to thank the city, particularly Linda Tatum and for I know for being very patient with us, listening to us and being such great communicators. And so and then finally, I want to thank the community. We had many people that showed up to all the meetings. We had some that went to a few. We had about 60 to 70 people come to one of the workshops. And again, as an architect, I've been to hundreds of workshops, and I was the most proud of our citizens of Long Beach. They were professional. They were respectful of each other. And they had a lot of great ideas. So there's a lot of their ideas that have permeated into this document as well. So we hope that the developer will find this document useful. We hope the city will find it useful. And we hope that they will embrace the developer, will embrace many of the ideas that are in there, if not all of them. And we ask for you to support this document tonight. Thank you.
Speaker 9: Thank you. The developer. Well, I think. Let's go ahead and Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 6: Thank you for that. I want to first just thank everybody that has been a part of this process I attended as a resident before I got into council a few of the task force meetings and just thought that you guys asked a lot of phenomenal questions. You gave a great opportunity for the community members to be involved. And everybody that attended, I think, came wholeheartedly with Let's Dream Big. And that dreaming big is how cities become great. But I also want to thank the mayor and previous vice mayor, Sara Lowenthal, for process. I think that our city has come a long way in the way that we envision things, the way that we say we're going to invest, whether it's homelessness, whether it's.
Speaker 0: Recognizing.
Speaker 6: The gravity of what this piece of parcel is, and it's about process to put everybody in a room together and say, let's vision together. And that's how we get away from investing in projects that might not pan out. And so I am very hopeful that while we've spent.
Speaker 0: Many years.
Speaker 6: In the past talking about this site, talking about what it could mean, that this is the first opportunity that we've really had to invest in it with a vision that includes not part of the community, not some, but everybody. And so just thank you to the mayor and previous vice mayor for that process. I've always been supportive of it, and I think that what we have here with these guiding principles is really historic. Not to say that, you know, people have come together and say we want to have a process that's that includes everybody. But it's historic because the Queen Mary is 80 years old. It is a place that is often sometimes people's first experience when they come to Long Beach. And it's a place to experience history. And I love and the guiding principles that it says, let's have a sense of arrival, because I think a lot of times you go to the Queen Mary and that that parking lot just kind of stops you.
Speaker 0: And it takes away.
Speaker 6: Some of the magic that could be experienced on the Queen Mary. And so having a place of arrival, but also having a place, a sense of an experience that you leave wanting to come back in. And so it's a historic day to be able to say that we as a city have spent time and energy and a process and didn't just throw money at something or make a decision in a silo. And so today for me is is about the vision of what we can have happen at the Queen Mary. But it's also about a process that's including everybody from workers to community members to the environment, to talking about transportation, to dreaming big, about having something that that brings people across the water to the mainland. Those are big, exciting ideas. And it takes a community that's wholeheartedly behind that to make that happen. And so I'm really excited to support the Guiding Principles today and excited about what's going to come in the future. And thank you, everybody, for your hard work.
Speaker 9: Thank you, Councilmember. Councilwoman Gonzales.
Speaker 5: Yes. I, too, want to congratulate the task force. I think it's.
Speaker 6: Very.
Speaker 5: Mindful this work was just all encompassing. As Councilmember Pierson mentioned, she said it so well that, you know, this was a great process. It was a wonderful to be able to see all of this kind of come together and that all of you in your expertize. I know, Cheryl, I go to her for my historic preservation, anything related to historic preservation. I go to Cheryl and I'm glad she was a part of this. And so many of you will now have a lasting impression on the Queen Mary.
Speaker 6: Because of your work. And so I also want.
Speaker 5: To acknowledge.
Speaker 6: Scott, who is in the audience as well. I know when I first got elected, we talked about a carousel.
Speaker 5: And adding.
Speaker 6: A carousel.
Speaker 5: To the Queen Mary. And so I don't know if there has been any discussion on that and where that's at, but I know that there's been a lot. But Linda, would you like to answer that question?
Speaker 0: Yes. We actually had a presentation on the historic carousel and the potential for it to be located on the site.
Speaker 5: Okay, wonderful. Because I heard all these magic things about this carousel.
Speaker 6: So that would be a great addition.
Speaker 5: But thank you all for your tremendous work.
Speaker 6: Again, appreciate it.
Speaker 9: Thank you, Councilmember Ringa.
Speaker 3: Thank you. One of the things that I'm more accommodating now, when you talk about an iconic district, we know that the Queen Mary is iconic, is probably the most iconic feature that we have along our coast is Queen Mary. But the city of Long Beach itself has a long history. Used to be a naval town. Back in the day when I was a kid growing up in East Los Angeles, we would make a trek to the pike down at the town on the shore here. And there were a lot of iconic structures there as well. I remember the the cyclone racer, the roller coaster, and you guys are too young. Probably the only one who remembers it. He probably built it. But you remember it well, you know. And right now, when we drive under under the under the bridge right there on the shoreline drive, we you see the light going up and down as if there was a rollercoaster there. So, I mean, I think that I'm not I'm not suggesting that we build a roller coaster along with a carousel, and that's a totally different project. But I think that we should look at some of those iconic structures or iconic features that Long Beach had back in back in its heyday. We're trying to bring back some waves. Look, we're studying the breakwater. So, I mean, we could look at inclusion of some of those features as well. The carousel we just mentioned right now, which is somewhat of a throwback to the days when when the pike was activated and very and very well attended, millions of people kept along beaches to visit the park. So you want to include some of those that features that well as well, I think would be very beneficial. And and add to the the the development of an iconic district right around the Queen Mary.
Speaker 8: If food for thought.
Speaker 9: Thank you. Very. Summer Richardson.
Speaker 1: Thank you. I have a really important question. Where's the NFL stadium? I thought that was a part of this. I guess. I guess not. I would say.
Speaker 9: That somewhere.
Speaker 8: Else.
Speaker 1: So I think this is a I want to talk about the process. I think this is a great model for the city to select the task force and put together these guiding principles. I would imagine this would be very helpful to a developer. You guys did half the work, so hats off to the task force for doing that. And, you know, we need to think about replicating that model with with other developers. We, you know, partner with doing some of this outreach. And I'm sure we'll get a tremendous product. There are some really great things here. One thing that I think is stood out to me the most is the potential for a performance facility like, you know, Hollywood Bowl type performance facility. I think that would be a tremendous, you know, asset to our city that folks wouldn't have to go all the way to, you know, the Anaheim, you know, to Anaheim, to the Verizon or whatever they call that Anaheim Meadows. I don't know Irvine Meadows, whatever they call it, to change some names or go all the way out to Hollywood. But have something here, I think that could be really a hit. Also, it's it's you know, it's always been hard to describe when I when I have meetings or something at the Queen Mary or at Hotel My , it's always hard to get people to to describe how to get to the south waterfront. So I love the creativity here in that we in the guiding principles make it easy in thinking about a gondola and things like that. So I just want to say to all involved, so Staff Task Force Council is all involved. This is fantastic work and you should be proud of it. Thank you.
Speaker 9: Councilman Price.
Speaker 5: Thank you. I want to echo the comments of my colleagues and thank the task force for their great work on this. I've had a chance to speak with a few of them who have reached out to me to explain kind of the process and their vision. And I appreciate you taking the time to do that. I think it's going to be fantastic, and I really do believe that we need to have more venues to support the arts in the city. And using the the landscape that we have in this city is very important for us to think about in terms of our future planning. So thank you for the work that you do and the efforts that you put into this committee.
Speaker 9: Thank you. Any other public comment on this? Any public comment? Please come forward.
Speaker 8: Good evening, Mr. Mayor. Council Members. One of the advantages of being real old is that this is kind of a repetition of what I've heard over the last 30 years of coming here. We actually had a presentation by the designer maker, manufacturer of a wooden roller coaster who wanted to put it over on that side, stood right here and suggested a wooden really coaster. Also was a large demonstration of the overhead gondolas. The manufacturers of that ride came by and we would leave from where Point Avenue was, was going to go crossed over there. But I think there may have been a missed opportunity because I know I didn't go any of the meetings, but had we had a different alignment in the in the cosmos, we may not have had to have this study because some of you who are old, I remember when Disneyland was going to develop the whole thing. And my thought was, is there any archival information of what Disney's design was? Is there any way of getting hold of that? I mean, they're the best in the business doing what they do. I don't know what happened to shoot that down. But that's just a thought. Maybe someone in that task force could see if there is any archival designs, concepts, that kind of material around. So I just wanted to share that with you. And so it was the roller coaster, the carousel and, and the gondolas have all been discussed at this council in previous years. Thank you for listening.
Speaker 9: Next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: Good evening, Mayor Garcia, City Council members. My name is Alexandra Wayman. I'm a representative of Unite Here Local 11, a hotel and restaurant employees union representing over 20,000 workers in L.A. and Orange County. We have members that live, work and play in the city of Long Beach. First, I would like to say thank you to the Queen Mary Redevelopment Task Force for their work on the guiding principles for this redevelopment project. The Queen Mary Redevelopment Project will include many new uses for the Long Beach community to enjoy, including public space, recreational activities, venues for entertainment and a hotel on the lounge on the land surrounding the Queen Mary. Our purpose in being here is to make sure that these offerings are not negatively impacted by a labor dispute. Our union has entered into labor peace agreements on projects that have a public interest. This includes a strong track record throughout Los Angeles County, including LAX, the city of Los Angeles, in the city of Santa monica. This project will have public uses, and you, as the city, have a right to require a labor peace agreement to protect that interest. We strongly recommend that the City Council require a Labor peace agreement for the landside hotel development operations to ensure the city is protected against lost revenue. Thank you so much for your consideration in this matter.
Speaker 9: Next week, please.
Speaker 0: Good evening. Mayor Garcia and city council members. My name is Carol Roberts. I've been a Long Beach resident for 36 years. And I do remember the Cyclone Razor, by the way, but not when I was living here. I'm looking forward to the redevelopment of the land surrounding the Queen Mary, because I always enjoy visiting the Queen Mary and going to the restaurants there and taking out-of-town visitors to the Queen Mary. And I'm excited that you're going to make it even more of a destination. That will be great. I hope that the proposed redevelopment project will uphold the working standards in Long Beach and that this project will serve as a model for future development projects in Long Beach. The Queen Mary Redevelopment Project should ensure that workers are treated with dignity and respect and that and that all future projects are future jobs at the site surrounding the Queen Mary are good jobs that provide workers with good wages. I encourage the city to implement a local hiring program that will provide jobs to residents in the Long Beach community. Additionally, in compliance with the California Coastal Act, the project should include affordable accommodations and recreational activities so that all residents and visitors to the city of Long Beach can enjoy spending time in the coastal zone. Thank you for your consideration.
Speaker 9: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Very good you cook as the address one another advantage of the Queen Mary's circumstances were to have it. I have suggested to Anita, to to France and to Casey Wasserman, as well as to Don Carnaby, that if the Long Beach Marine Stadium is selected as the rowing venue, which will solidify, I believe, the event. We can look forward to having a site that would be seen in no other place on the face of the planet, i.e. a rendezvous of the Queen Mary, the Queen Mary two and the QE two, which would make a tremendous backdrop for festivals and particularly fireworks displays following the events here. And I think they are looking at that. And so everything that can be done with the Queen Mary to keep it and keep it puffed up, I think is certainly not withstanding the the Olympics is the key attraction that brings people here to this city. Thank you.
Speaker 9: Thank you. See no other public comment to go back to the council. Great Councilman Austin.
Speaker 2: Thank you very much. I just wanted to be brief. I mean, this presentation has kind of brought back the very first issue regarding the study session. And and I can't just emphasize the importance of as we are building up our downtown and and this this this land development task force and the planet, the guiding principles that we are probably will be adopting this evening. It's important to to emphasize the access to Long Beach along the 17 freeway. I can't emphasize that enough. You know, it's very important that we we work with with our regional partners to make sure that we identify the resources, to make sure that that freeway is improved. And access to our downtown and to the Queen Mary is actually improved as well. I did have a question because one of the comments commenters mentioned a hotel, but I don't know if I heard that in the the actual presentation for staff. Is that a plan part of the plan?
Speaker 0: Yes, it is included in the guiding principle in terms of the complete community as well as the one about a destination. So the task force spent a lot of time speaking about having a hospitality use on the site and you'll see it in the backup material, in the actual document.
Speaker 2: In just one of my personal favorites over the years. I just have to ask, was the casino considered?
Speaker 0: I don't believe it came up specifically, but they talked really broadly about other entertainment and recreational activities.
Speaker 2: Okay. Just just just wanted to throw it out there.
Speaker 9: Thank you. See no other comment from the council or the public. Again, members, please cast your votes. And as we do that, thank you to the committee members that are here, the task force members. Fantastic work and a great group. And we look forward to the developer and the next step of the process. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 9: Great. Thank you again. Moving on then, we're going to go ahead and do item 15. We're going go to public comment right after a couple of quick items. So 15 is the one that's being postponed. I'm going to turn over to Councilman Price. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to receive and file the Guiding Principles recommended by the Queen Mary Land Development Task Force. (District 2) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_09202016_16-0876 | Speaker 9: Great. Thank you again. Moving on then, we're going to go ahead and do item 15. We're going go to public comment right after a couple of quick items. So 15 is the one that's being postponed. I'm going to turn over to Councilman Price.
Speaker 5: Thank you. This is an item regarding oversize vehicles and RVs, and I'd like to make a motion to move it to October the fourth for two reasons. One, that's the night that we're having our homeless study session. And it makes sense to have this discussion in combination with with that study session and to a councilwoman, Mango is not here tonight. And this is an issue that's really of concern in her district, as many of the public comments that we received in the packet tonight indicate, many of them are her residents. So with that, I'd request support from my colleagues to move this to the next council meeting.
Speaker 9: Thank you. There's a motion and a second. Any public comment on moving it? CNN members, please cast your votes.
Speaker 0: Vice Mayor Richardson. Motion carries. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Attorney to draft a citywide ordinance restricting oversized and recreational vehicles in residential and commercial corridors based on elements from the surrounding cities of Lakewood, Costa Mesa and Westminister like:
• No RV shall be parked on any street or alley for more than 48
consecutive hours.
• RVs and trailers not registered to a Long Beach address cannot
park on streets without a daily temporary permit.
• RVs registered to a Long Beach address may park on the block
they are registered to for no more than 48 hours consecutively.
• RVs may not be repark within one fifth of a mile from any prior
permitted location within 24 hours.
• Nonmotorized vehicles may be parked for the sole purpose of
actively loading and unloading for a no more than 24 hours. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_09202016_16-0888 | Speaker 0: Vice Mayor Richardson. Motion carries.
Speaker 9: Okay. We're doing 24. Then the public comment.
Speaker 0: Communication from Council Member Muranga recommendation to receive and file a presentation on the Century Villages at Cabrillo 2016. Social Impact Report.
Speaker 9: Mr. Guthrie. Anger.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Mayor. The Villages, it really is a wonderful project, has been a wonderful partner in the West Palm Beach area, providing homeless services as well as housing for those in great need. So I thought I would invite them to make a presentation, give us an update on some of their projects that are are going on there . And and also give me an opportunity to thank you for all the work that you do out there in the west and west side of Long Beach.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Councilman. Good evening, Mayor. City Council. City Staff. My name is Brian D'Andrea and with century villages at Cabrillo for some of our newer council members, CVC is a nonprofit that owns, manages and develops the 27 acre villages that Cabrillo Community in West Long Beach that's home to more than 1300 individuals on any given night, including 550 veterans. The Villages was previously a naval housing site serving the Long Beach shipyards, and in 1997 the site was conveyed under the McKinney Act for the benefit of the homeless. We at century think of ourselves as the stewards of this really special place. And I think the the secret to our successes out in West Long Beach really has to do with this growing collaboration of more than 20 different partners that have come together to advance our our mission of restoring health and hope among our population. And at the heart of that collaboration is the city of Long Beach, which is really the ultimate backbone of our larger efforts to end and address homelessness across the city. Each year at the Villages, we pause and we take a look back at the prior year to to to evaluate our progress. That process requires an incredible amount of coordination across all of our partner agencies and under the supervision of an independent evaluator, Dr. Beth Menke, who's unfortunately not here tonight. She's with Cal State, Long Beach. We go about the process of aggregating outcomes and impacts and successes. I want to take a moment to acknowledge the hard work of one of my colleagues, Kim Crawford, our director of community development, who's behind me here. And I'm here tonight just to share a few highlights of our of that effort and of our 2016 village. That could be our social impact report. You all have a copy of it. The theme of this year's report is collective impact, and that's an approach to solving incredibly complex social problems by relying on the energy and talents and time of many different partners unified around a common agenda. And that's precisely what's happening out in West Palm Beach. Last year, thanks to the combined efforts of nearly 300 staff across all of our partners, we serve more than 2000 residents. We're achieving housing stability rates at at at a pace that exceeds industry standards. We're also helping our residents grow their incomes at a pace of nearly 5.5% per year, and that far outstrips both local, state and national averages. This year, we also evaluated the economic impact of the villages, looking at both our real estate development activities as well as our ongoing operations. Our operations have created more than $42 million of annual economic output across the county, supporting more than 600 jobs in our real estate development activity over the past past three years has generated more than $72 million of economic output, supporting nearly 375 jobs. So our report really validates, I think, what we've always known along the way, and that's that investing in permanent supportive housing changes lives and it can drive the economy. Lastly, I want to highlight one of our proudest accomplishments. A significant expansion of our internship program. Thanks to partnerships with local universities like Cal State, Long Beach, we've benefited, benefited from interns, volunteers and students who've contributed their time and energy to supporting our efforts. Last year, we had nearly 900 interns clock more than 30000 hours of service. They obtained meaningful and life changing experiences as a result and help support our larger effort. So we want to acknowledge all of our partners at the local university and obviously the students and interns that have have helped us. Next year, the villages will be 20 years in the making. Hard to believe. And over that time, the city has provided extensive support not only to our agency, but to many of our partners across the campus. That support spans many departments at the city, from Housing and Community Improvement to Housing Authority Planning, Building, Neighborhood Services, the port and many others. The city really should be incredibly proud of its investment in the villages and its leadership in helping to create the special space. The need for what we do is great. We know there's a large discussion happening at the city right now about homelessness. We look forward to being part of that dialog and continuing to partner with the city to to address this issue and continue our work together. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you.
Speaker 9: Councilmember Andrews.
Speaker 8: Kind of.
Speaker 9: Oh. Oh. I was going to the. He's the second in the motion.
Speaker 8: Okay.
Speaker 4: Okay.
Speaker 9: Any other public comment on this item?
Speaker 3: I just want to thank Brian for his presentation this evening. And I think one of the most important things you left out is the current project that you're working in on the expansion of an additional 80 beds.
Speaker 8: Yes. Our anchor place development which the city has invested $4 million of capital and in 75 project based fashion vouchers is under construction. 120 permanent supportive homes will be coming online late next year.
Speaker 3: Thank you.
Speaker 9: Thank you. You guys do great work, Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 1: Thank you. I just want to chime in and say what a what a fantastic report. This is the presentation. I just took a moment to look at it. You guys are doing great job. A great job. I wish we could duplicate you and take you all over town because the need is certainly there. And and you're definitely on the radar in the region, you know, at the Scaggs regional, you know, regional discussions, we you know, when we talk about the greenhouse gas cap and trade funding, Long Beach is up in the front at the forefront because frankly, because you guys have led those conversations. We want to continue to to support you in that. If it hadn't been for you, Long Beach, you would have seen a dollar of cap and trade funding. So thank you.
Speaker 9: Thank you. Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 6: Yes. I also wanted to just say what a great job you guys have done. I have taken a tour twice of your facility and really been inspired by the stories that have come out of it and the model is fantastic. Really looking forward to partnering with you guys while you're based in the seventh. Your impact is citywide and anything that our office can do to work with you to build on all your successes and find ways where we can help other organizations connect with you and build on that as well. A great job.
Speaker 9: Councilman Gonzales.
Speaker 5: Great job, Bryan, to you and your team, I think. Incredible work. And I have to say, your social impact report is one of the best I've ever seen. It's, you know, just exciting to see all of the the numbers and what your impact is, not just in Long Beach, but just regional. And it's incredible. So great job. Thank you.
Speaker 9: Thank you. With that seeing no public comment, please go ahead and cast your votes to receive and file.
Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 9: Thank you. With that, we're going to go on to back to public comment. We're actually going now to the regular agenda. All the requested items have been moved up. And let me read the order of folks that are going to speak here. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Council to receive and file a presentation on the Century Villages at Cabrillo 2016 Social Impact Report. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_09202016_16-0869 | Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 9: Item seven.
Speaker 0: Economic Report from Economic and Property Development Recommendation to adopt resolution approving the annual report for the Bixby Knolls Parking and Business Improvement Area, declaring its intention to levy the annual assessment and setting the date of hearing for Tuesday, October 18, 2016. District seven and eight.
Speaker 9: Councilman Austin.
Speaker 2: Move approval and look forward to the hearing on October 18.
Speaker 7: And Mr. Mayor, staff would like to make a clarification of something that's in the report. Sure. Fisk.
Speaker 3: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members. This item is the annual approval that BHP Knowles Parking Business Improvement Area Assessment and Annual Report. Council Action Tonight will continue the assessment for another year. There are no proposed significant changes to the activities and no changes to the existing boundaries. The revised assessment formula reflects the board approved increase to include a CPI adjustment as well as $20 added to each assessment. Therefore, staff request that Council receive the supporting documentation in the record, approve the resolution and set the hearing date for October 18, 2018. That concludes my report and I'm available for questions.
Speaker 9: Okay. Any public comment on the item saying that? Please cast your votes. | Resolution | Recommendation to adopt resolution approving the Annual Report for October 1, 2016 to September 30, 2017, for the Bixby Knolls Parking and Business Improvement Area, declaring its intention to levy the annual assessment, and setting the date of hearing for Tuesday, October 18, 2016 at 5:00 p.m. (Districts 7,8) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_09202016_16-0879 | Speaker 0: Vice Mayor Richardson Motion Carries Item eight. Report from Financial Management Recommendation to approve the designation of one time infrastructure funds for City Council, district infrastructure projects and existing programs and approved related budget and appropriation adjustments citywide.
Speaker 9: There's a motion and a second. Councilmember Pierce.
Speaker 6: Thank you. Yeah, I just wanted to say that we'll be removing the funds from Cherry on Broadway and hopefully reallocating that to another corridor for improvements. Possibly Corridor seven. But those funds are already. That street is already covered by measure. Is that correct?
Speaker 7: Yes, that's correct. And Lee, if you can help us with exactly which item for the record needs to be adjusted.
Speaker 0: To the chair. So this item does approve the designation of one time infrastructure funds and approves related budget appropriation adjustments in the category of the designation of one time infrastructure funds for public works projects. We'll be removing $34,001 for the Broadway between Cherry Avenue and Temple AV project, and that will then have a revised total of $170,955 of designated projects. Great. Thank you.
Speaker 9: There's a motion in a second. Any public comment? Please come forward.
Speaker 0: Good evening, Counsel and Staff Susan Miller. I've lived on East Ocean Boulevard since 1993. I want to respectfully request the Council to remove on item eight all three items related to Ocean Boulevard in District three, totaling $121,000. I have no issues with any of the other projects, and item eight $121,000 is 75% of this item. That is too large of financing. City management agenda at size the item as a financial management matter. It makes no mention of the road diet and diagonal parking in this narrative text simply listing the road diet in I have an attachment. There are currently no public published, publicly accessible graphics or description text on the city's website or on any of its social network pages, or on Councilwoman Price's website or on her social network pages on this. Simply put, there is zero online trans transparency. The proposal is camouflaged within consent calendar and buried among a list of non-controversial items bundled for so-called council district discretionary fillings, which are actually paid by taxpayers citywide. So with no information available anywhere for the average residents to gain information, the three Ocean Boulevard items need to be removed from item eight. This action is not in accordance to support for transparency and desire for public participation. Ocean Boulevard is a major artery for traffic infrastructure in this city currently and for the future. The proposed $100 million plus Belmont Pool is on Ocean Boulevard in city planning. I cannot fathom a major swim sporting event looking at a venue that only has a one lane road being the only access. Please remove the three Ocean Boulevard items from the agenda. Thank you.
Speaker 9: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 0: Good evening, Ann Cantrell. And I'd also like to speak on this road diet. I appreciate that. Jack Cunningham from Councilwoman Prices Off Office sent me an email with some of the explanation of why this is being done. It stated that a study had found the volume of traffic that Daily Travels Ocean Boulevard is less than half as much as the road was designed to transport. I have questions about this study. What time of day was it done? What days of the week? What time of year? There are many days in summer, especially on weekends and during special events when the traffic is heavy on ocean and two lanes are needed. Perhaps cutting down to one lane will slow down traffic, but it will also have the effect of bringing it to a standstill when traffic is heavy. And where is the room for cars to pull over to allow fire trucks, ambulances and police cars to access the area? This road diet is supposed to provide 150 new non metered diagonal parking spaces along the south side of ocean. I'm wondering. This sounds wonderful. Why would anyone pay to park in the Granada lot if there's non metered parking on the street? Perhaps a better solution would be to take the meters out of the beach slot. This supposedly this road space will be available. That it creates enough space for a buffer zone between the diagonally parked cars and the bike lane. And I ask you to look at this picture, which I got from L.B. report dot com showing what we were told is perhaps the plan for this. Here's the diagonal parking. Here's the bike lane and here's the one lane. Cars backing out are going to be backing out right over this park bike lane into oncoming traffic. Perhaps the people that are using this bike lane could use the beach park bike bike lane, which is already there just a few feet over on the beach. I think this is a very dangerous proposal. It is suggested that stop signs are illegal to slow down traffic. This makes no sense to me.
Speaker 9: Thank you, Miss Cantrell.
Speaker 0: If it's legal to make narrow lanes, then it should be legal to make put in a stop sign. Thank you very much.
Speaker 8: Next speaker, please.
Speaker 0: Mayor Council, L.A., Neil. I live in Belmont Heights. First time I'm up here, I'm a little nervous. Agenda item number eight, item number 16, dash 0879. I'm here to urge the Council to not approve $85,000 funding for the ridiculous Ocean Boulevard rodeo between Livingstone Drive and 54th place in Belmont Shore. That's the portion of the $121,000. There are no drawings. There are no diagrams that you are voting on. You don't even probably know what is involved in that. The proposed road diet lane reduction design is severely flawed and will cause an increase in traffic congestion. And unsafe, perhaps hazardous conditions that degrades the quality of life for Belmont Shore and the Peninsula homeowners and residents. It also negatively affects thousands of tourists, visitors and special events on the beachfront. Well, I appreciate the city traffic engineer, Eric Webster, and for trying to come up with parking spaces for Belmont Shore. He does publicly state that he wants to cause congestion because that's what gets people to slow down. Well, as I understand it, the original problem identified by Belmont Shore residents regarding Ocean Boulevard was crossing the street to the beach at a few intersections. As I understand it, residents identified intersections that they wanted marked pedestrian crosswalks or stop signs to help alert drivers to their presence. As they cross. Somehow this request turned into a reason for the most. Undoubtedly lamest road rage inducing emergency vehicle restricting air quality, destroying traffic, congesting bicycle li bicyclist endangering pedestrian ignoring street improvement design. Thank you.
Speaker 9: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: My name's Jennifer Cameron. I live on 65, 63rd place on the peninsula, and I've been a resident of Long Beach community for 36 years. I have driven Ocean.
Speaker 0: Boulevard ever since I've lived there. I've never seen.
Speaker 6: Speeding is they're talking about, but my concerns are traffic. I'm not sure where this.
Speaker 0: Idea came from. It was first presented.
Speaker 6: At the Alameda Space Preservation Committee meeting, came out of the blue.
Speaker 0: No one at the meeting was expecting this. And when the majority discussed this.
Speaker 6: Afterwards and they had a vote.
Speaker 0: No one was interested.
Speaker 6: In pursuing this for the peninsula.
Speaker 0: Well, that.
Speaker 6: Goes as well for the rest of the Belmont Shore area. We at least have a group that met and discussed it for the Belmont. Sure.
Speaker 0: I don't think people know about this. I don't think there's a group that's discussed it.
Speaker 6: It just came in. And suddenly here we are with a vote on it.
Speaker 0: I think the traffic engineer, I don't know when he put out his tabs.
Speaker 6: And and did the traffic analysis, but he certainly didn't do it during the summer.
Speaker 0: Because we have so many events. We have the pirate event, of course.
Speaker 6: We have the pool.
Speaker 0: We have the volleyball event as well. We've had.
Speaker 6: The sand the sand event. And that day I was driving, it took me 20 minutes to get from the beginning of Bayshore through Granada, and they brought in police officers to help direct traffic. And that was with two lanes. And now they're talking about one.
Speaker 0: As you realize, there's only so many quarters. We have Anaheim.
Speaker 6: We have Seventh Street, and then we have Ocean.
Speaker 0: People have to get.
Speaker 6: Through not only locals, but people that come in and work.
Speaker 0: In Long Beach and leave. And I don't understand. I think if you.
Speaker 6: Put down one lane.
Speaker 0: The traffic is going to go somewhere. And where else will it go on crowded days? It's going to go right through that community and people will not like it. As well. There's discussion about safety. If you have, as we know now, lots of SUV and lots of big trucks and they're diagonally parking. Do you know how dangerous it is to back up and try and get out? I have a smaller car. I can't see past those cars. I think they're backing up. You'd be going right into the back lane. You wouldn't see those bikers. Right now, there's parallel parking. You can turn. You can look. You have a rearview mirror.
Speaker 6: And it's safer. So I think there's a safety issue.
Speaker 0: I think for traffic reasons, for safety and for alerting the community of this upcoming diet, I think this should be voted against.
Speaker 6: And taken off.
Speaker 0: Agenda eight. Thank you.
Speaker 9: Thank you. It looks like our final speaker.
Speaker 0: Okay. Anna Kristensen again, this time just representing myself and my street of Termino Avenue. I was driving down Broadway after this issue of the road diet came came up and with the paint and the new lines and the thing and I noticed we now suddenly have a left turn lane painted in on my street, which doesn't even have a stop sign at Broadway. So I'm wondering, is there an excess of paint in the city? I mean, we have like a lot of leftover paint that we have to get rid of because, you know, you know, a good idea is one thing. But taken too far, you know, it gets a little bit crazy. And I think both with this parking thing, it seems like the second and third are kind of mixed up. Maybe the diagonal parking should go along First Street where our congressman lives. That seems to be a kind of off limits area first between Redondo and the park there. There's plenty of that's a very wide street. They need some parking there. I don't think those residents would be very happy about it. But all I can say is, as someone who spends a lot of time going up and down Ocean Boulevard, you know, I just I just don't see anybody speeding. I walk a baby across there in a stroller. And I think you're trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist without going to the source of, you know, the people who would be most affected, the community. And I really wish you'd erase that left turn. LANE Everybody's going to start thinking we are a major thoroughfare on terminal, and it's been pretty quiet lately and we like it that way. Thank you.
Speaker 9: Thank you. See no other public comment. Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 5: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So a few things. Just to be clear, the item tonight is to set aside money for this project out of our infrastructure funds. So we're setting aside money for the project. We're not approving a project tonight. Having said that, this is a project that is a recommendation by the city's traffic engineer in regards to ways to reduce speed. It's not it's it's it's kind of like when we put additional stop signs in or we put additional lights on or we reconfigure roads, those aren't projects that necessarily come through the council. So I understand the concerns that everyone has, but we just added some lighting, some traffic lights on seventh and Santiago. We just did a Broadway road diet. Those items don't come before council. They come as a result of traffic engineering. So having said that, I know our traffic engineers are here. I'm just going to go through a couple of points and then I'm going to ask if if Eric, if you wouldn't mind, Eric, what's coming up? Just so we can go through a couple of points and then for anyone who's here who feels that they don't have the information or anything like that, please let me know. But I do. I do note that Susan was talking about a lack of transparency. I'll note that on we've been in communication, Susan and I have specifically on this topic. And with this there was a presentation made to the Belmont Shore Residents Association, and then there was a meeting at the field office. And no, the PowerPoint was not functioning. Mr. Van Dike's PowerPoint was not functioning. So Susan did receive, as I said, everybody else who was there, including the neighborhood association, presidents, copies of the PowerPoint. And in fact, in the email that Susan sent on August 12th, she actually attaches a number of slides from the presentation. And I know that she had sent that email, you know, late in the afternoon or like almost 6:00 and and responded within a few minutes saying that she had concerns with the project but hadn't had a chance to see anything so or ask any questions. So, you know, there was obviously some some concerns about it and I get that. But in regards to transparency, at least for the speakers this evening, at least two of those speakers had a copy of the full PowerPoint and the traffic study. The way this came to be is that a traffic study was requested through the Belmont Shore residents. We have repeatedly we get calls every day from residents and businesses on Ocean Boulevard saying that people are taking Ocean Boulevard in in order to avoid other streets. And that's causing a lot of safety issues because pedestrians are almost getting hit crossing the street and that people are driving above the speed limit. So there was a request by the community for traffic engineering to do a study. They did a study. It's actually a very thorough study. I think that's a great suggestion. Susan, we will put this on our website so that everyone has a copy of the study, but they did a study. It's an 11 page study and it goes through many aspects of Ocean Boulevard. So Ocean Boulevard was designed and built for 25,000 vehicles a day of traffic. It currently gets in the peak months, 7000 cars traveling through it a day. So it was built for 25,000. It gets 7000. A lot of the residents suggested that we put in traffic I'm sorry, stop signs as a way to slow traffic down. And this is an area where really we have to defer to our traffic engineers to some extent because this is an actual science. They've they've done a lot of research and study on this. But stop signs aren't designed to slow traffic. They're designed to indicate right of way. It is an in applicable use of stop signs to put them there to try to control traffic speeds. Traffic calming can only be achieved through engineering and design. And so the recommendation based on the size of this road and the number of vehicles that it receives is to do what's called a road diet. Some people have, you know, kind of made fun of the name. That's not really our name. That's a name that's in the traffic industry. I know that Eric came from Seattle. They did a lot of traffic road diets there. He's done one. He's done it in other cities. And again, the the road diet that was done on on Broadway has been extremely successful. We get thank you emails all the time from residents. So that's how the study was conducted and recommendations were made. And it is those recommendations that were acting upon were acting upon Traffic Engineering's recommendation. So I would like Eric to just briefly speak on this, but I do want the public to know, and especially the folks who are here, we are going to have another meeting where we're going to talk about this a little bit more in detail and then also. The timing and the impacts that this is going to have on the community as we implement it. In regards to the peninsula that the woman that was here from the peninsula. I appreciate you coming. Just so you know, the peninsula has the pic and within the pic they have a traffic committee. And the traffic committee originally had wanted to slow traffic by instituting these things called traffic humps, but they only wanted them on one side, one lane. So they wanted a hump on one lane, but no hump on the other lane. Traffic engineering felt like that was not a good solution because cars would be driving around the lanes and also because nowhere else in the country had anyone implemented these traffic humps on only one lane of a two lane road. So what I said to the traffic committee and they were not very happy with me because my predecessor had agreed to implement these traffic humps. But what I said was that I did not feel comfortable implementing the traffic humps because they were not with the standard of traffic design, but that we would do a traffic study for the peninsula. So they said, great. We did a traffic study at their request and all we did was present the findings and the recommendations of the traffic study. And there's going to be a presentation to the Peninsula Group. We haven't had that presentation yet, and I think that's going to happen in October. The money is being set aside, but that project is not going to get implemented for a while. And also the south and north side of ocean are not going to get implemented at the same time because we want to have an opportunity to see how this is working. Because if it's not working or if it's what people think it is, then we we can fix it. But our traffic engineers believe very strongly that this is going to have a positive impact. And I've heard a lot of comments about diagonal parking. You know, this is an unusual diagonal parking scenario because the buffers and I think Erik can speak to it more, are a lot bigger than they would be in any other place. There's there's a whole bike lane and there's a buffer before the bike lane. So it provides ample opportunity for for drivers. The people can say a lot of times that they think that diagonal parking is dangerous. There's really no data to back that up. In fact, parallel parking has proved to be incredibly dangerous because we've had we've seen numerous instances where people are injured as a result of a driver opening their door and a bicyclist driving into the door. There's actually a lot of published data on that. In regards to diagonal parking, there's really very little published data that talks about the dangers of diagonal parking. Finally, you know, this traffic study was done for the purposes of traffic, not for parking. The parking is just an added benefit of this design. It's going to allow for 156 additional parking spots for residents to park overnight free of charge in a parking impacted neighborhood. So that's just an additional added benefit. And although a lot of people don't like the change or the idea, you know, we don't want Ocean Boulevard to be a thoroughfare. We want it to be a safe place where residents and beachgoers can cross the street and not be concerned about travel vehicles traveling at a fast pace, which the data reveals that everybody speeds on Ocean Boulevard. So if you have an experience that I challenge you to stand over by the digital counter and just watch because my staff does it every day, we have one of our staff members who lives right there, and we've been tasked every staff member to drive through there every day at different times in advance of this road diet. So we have staff members driving there in the morning, in the afternoon and at night almost on a daily basis, because we want to make sure that we support a project that we think is going to work. And finally, when we talk about special events, traffic engineering has a whole plan in place for what we do for for special events. So for special events will be working with the Special Events Department in advance of the event to coordinate the traffic plan. And that means that some of these diagonal parking lanes will be opened up for thorough for for through bound traffic so that we do have two lanes on days where we have special events. But as Erik often says, we don't design roadways for special events. We design them for the other 345 days of the year. So I'm going to allow, Erik, if there's anything that you want to add to what I said, just to kind of clarify anything that might be inaccurate.
Speaker 8: Okay. Thank you, Councilmember Price. I think you've done a great job of getting into the details. So Eric Wood, Strand City Traffic Engineer, we've completed two road diets in Long Beach this past year. Both are working very well. Broadway and Alamitos. The reason for doing the road date on Ocean is to improve safety for pedestrians. Crossing ocean is riding along ocean and drivers traveling along it. As Councilor Price mentioned, this road has an excessive capacity. We feel that the analysis done shows it will still function just fine with one lane each direction we take into consideration emergency vehicle access. We take into consideration the development coming in the corridor with the pool. And with the special events taking place during the summer, the road diet is not designed to increase congestion, but it is designed to get motorists to drive closer to the speed limit that if that results in people going a little slower , that's okay. The slower people go, the safer it is for pedestrians. Reducing the street to one lane in each direction also means that pedestrians only have to cross one lane of traffic each direction, which is inherently safer. You do not have a multiple vehicle threat condition when that happens. As Councilor Price mentioned, we've had several outreach meetings along the corridor. There'll be more outreach that takes place. The diagonal parking will provide a buffer between the parking lane and the bicycle lane, and then the travel in. This setup is also designed to allow emergency vehicle access along the corridor. Traffic data that was collected for the study was taken during the summer months, both on Thursday and Sunday of the summer months and also during the spring. As was mentioned previously, while I was at the city of Seattle, I conducted ten road diets that were successfully implemented. Most of them were controversial, but the results are in going in and working well. I also was a coauthor of the Road Diet Information Guide, published by the Federal Highway Administration. That concludes my comments. Thank you.
Speaker 9: When I call you Mr. Road Diet.
Speaker 4: From now on.
Speaker 9: I'm getting maybe a bad joke right now, so thank you. We've done public comment. We've done the motion in a second on the floor. Seeing no other comments, please cast your votes.
Speaker 0: Councilmember most motion carries. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to approve the designation of one-time infrastructure funds for City Council District infrastructure projects and existing programs; and
Approve related budget appropriation adjustments in accordance with existing City Council policy. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_09202016_16-0877 | Speaker 0: Councilmember most motion carries.
Speaker 9: Okay. Item Karis, thank you. Now we're moving on to item 16, please.
Speaker 8: We have the hearings, Mayor, right here.
Speaker 9: In one of the hearings right after this.
Speaker 0: Report from City Manager Recommendation to approve an agreement with the Volunteer Center for their expertize and guidance in Volunteer Management citywide.
Speaker 9: Councilman Gonzales.
Speaker 5: Do we have a staff report on this?
Speaker 7: Yes, we do. This is a fantastic opportunity for us to encourage volunteerism in Long Beach. This is based on some council member outreach, particularly in the fifth District and others that have worked on volunteer days in the last year. And so we are partnering with the Volunteer Center to basically kick off about a month of service for volunteer projects in Long Beach. And we do have a very short presentation from the volunteer center, who's going to be our partner in this effort.
Speaker 5: Thank you very much. My name is Sarah Myers. Many of you know me. I had a passion for libraries for eight and half years in Long Beach. My new home is the president, CEO of the Volunteer Center, South Bay Harbor, Long Beach. And I have a quick presentation about the Long Beach Service project. I'd like to start by thanking Mayor Garcia and the council, especially those council people, Councilwoman Mango, who have championed volunteerism. Many of you in your districts have. And I'd also like to say a special thank you to the city staff, especially Ryan Murray and Mark Marlee Williams and Tom Monaco, for their help in and assistance in this project. The Volunteer Center quickly is a nonprofit organization. While it is a new home, to me, it is not new to Long Beach. It was actually founded in 1963 by the Junior League of Long Beach. We have an office here in Long Beach on Fourth Street. Our mission is to mobilize people and resources to deliver creative solutions to community needs. We work with all kinds of volunteers, retirees, corporate employee volunteers, teens and millennials. If anyone has that passion and that spark to wake up and say, I'd like to give back, we are the place that connects them to hundreds of nonprofits that need their time and talents. Our motto is that we are at the heart of helping and we've been at the heart of helping for more than 50 years. The Long Beach Service Project has several goals. I think you all know and we see constantly in social media how fantastic our volunteers in Long Beach are. There are so many examples of amazing residents doing amazing things and this project is to bring it all together and to really celebrate it and give it some visibility. In addition, we are launching a brand new online tool for Long Beach residents. This is the pilot Long Beach Service, where people can log on and sign up for these opportunities. However, it's there for the rest of the year and we hope it's an ongoing partnership. And we also will provide a highly visible platform again to celebrate those volunteers and their activities. We've relaunched our website. It is up this evening. The residents at home and any viewers can go to WW Dot Valle Center Dawg and under what's new there's a Long Beach service icon and that will be hope. That will be up and running tomorrow. And this new pilot, this online tool, we're the first volunteer center in the nation to implement this 3.0 version. So this is the fastest in the easiest implementation. And we're very proud of this tool. So residents can go on, they can sign up and register. They're going to see a quick fields like this. And what they can do is they can say, you know what, I'm free on Saturday, I'm interested in animals and they can browse through opportunities. Long Beach Serves. We'll have 20 opportunities up tomorrow and they'll be city hosted opportunities and then more will be joining the whole thing every day. The opportunities will start on October 1st and they'll culminate with Make a Difference Day National Make a Difference Day on October 22nd. So we are very excited about this partnership. I think it celebrates Long Beach being such a together community where we do give back, but this is one time where the entire city can get involved and we can really celebrate all of those activities and do what we do well. And I did hear earlier when they said that there were 2000 volunteers in the 1980s for the Olympics. We have the new Queen Mary. Everything I heard, my ears perked up. Volunteers, volunteers, volunteers. So this is the start, the catalyst of something that I hope becomes a longer platform and a longer partnership to celebrate volunteerism citywide. So thank you for your time.
Speaker 9: Great. Thank you. I'm going to try. Did you have city staff to do anything else to add to this? Okay. Councilman Gonzales.
Speaker 6: Sara, congratulations.
Speaker 5: This is great. I'm really looking forward to seeing how this evolves. And I think there are so many people and residents in the city of Long Beach that come to our offices to volunteer. And now this will be a great nexus for them to be able to see all sorts of opportunities in the city. Great job. Thank you. Thank you.
Speaker 9: Councilmember Austin.
Speaker 2: Thank you. I'm happy to see this. And welcome back, Sara. Your your bubbly personality is perfect for volunteer coordinating. And so I think this tool is going to be a great resource as well and looking forward to working with you.
Speaker 5: Thank you. I've missed you all. Thank you.
Speaker 9: Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 6: Yeah. I just want to say thank you so much. I know you guys are in the second district and anything that we can do to partner with you. I know that you also work with organizations like the LGBT Center, and so thank you for your work and look at us as a resource to help with anything.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 5: So much. Thank you.
Speaker 9: Vice Mayor Richardson, thank you.
Speaker 1: And we're looking we've got a couple of projects queued up this district. I'm looking forward to it. One of them's going to going to hopefully turn into a dog park when we're done with it. So that's going to be pretty cool.
Speaker 5: Outstanding. We look forward to it. Thank you.
Speaker 9: Thank you. And thank you all for your work. I know that Councilman Mongo, who's not here, has been really spearheading this and I want to thank her and all of your support as well. So thank you.
Speaker 5: Thank you. And thank you to all your city staff members. We really appreciate it.
Speaker 9: Thank you. Any public comment on this item? Seeing none. Please cast your votes. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to approve an Agreement between the City of Long Beach and The Volunteer Center South Bay-Harbor-Long Beach Volunteer Center for their expertise and guidance in volunteer management and the use of their online volunteer opportunity platform in order to launch and execute the City’s upcoming inaugural “Volunteer Campaign.” (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_09202016_16-0863 | Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 9: Thank you. We're now going to go to the first hearing.
Speaker 0: A report from Economic and Property Development. Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record. Conclude the public hearing and adopt resolution continuing the Fourth Street Parking and Business Improvement Area Assessment for the period of October 1st, 2016 through September 30th, 2017, and authorize the City Manager to extend the agreement with the Fourth Street Business Improvement Association for a one year term district to.
Speaker 9: Okay. Thank you. Turn this over to city staff.
Speaker 8: Mayor Garcia and members of the city council making the presentation will be Catherine McDermott, Interim Economic and Property Development Director, and Jim Fisk, Development Project Manager.
Speaker 3: Honorable Mayor and city council members. This item is the annual approval of the Fourth Street Parking and Business Improvement Area Annual Report and Ongoing Assessment on August 2nd, 2016. 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 significant changes in proposed activity. Therefore, staff request the City Council receive the supporting documentation of 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.
Speaker 1: Report. Thank you for the staff report. And before we open it up for public comment. Councilmember Pearce, would you like to speak to your motion?
Speaker 6: Absolutely. Mr. Forrest, thank you so much for all your work with them. I love seeing you at their bid meetings. I think Fourth Street has come such a long way in the last several years. They've done rebranding. We've got a new, amazing restaurants like The Hip that are really bringing a lot more folks to Fourth Street. And I'm talking a lot with the bid about what's the next phase. And so looking forward to the next year and trying to hopefully expand where we're at from Cherry over to Alamitos. We've got a lot of great businesses over there looking at some new ideas for revenue for them so that they can do bigger things, but just really excited about expanding this and look forward to new work in the next year. Thank you so much.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzalez. Thank you. As any public comment on this hearing. Seeing none. Please cast your vote. And I'm a yes. | Resolution | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing, and adopt resolution continuing the Fourth Street Parking and Business Improvement Area assessment for the period of October 1, 2016 through September 30, 2017; and authorize City Manager to extend the agreement with the Fourth Street Business Improvement Association for a one-year term. (District 2) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_09202016_16-0864 | Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzalez. Thank you. As any public comment on this hearing. Seeing none. Please cast your vote. And I'm a yes.
Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Great. Thank you. Let's have hearing number two.
Speaker 0: Please report from economic and Property Development recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record. Conclude the public hearing and adopt resolution. Continuing the Belmont Shore Parking and Business Improvement Area Assessment for the period of October 1st, 2016 through September 30th, 2017, and authorize the city manager to extend the agreement with the Belmont Shore Business Association for a one year term. District three.
Speaker 1: Thank you. And there is no oath required here. Is there a staff report?
Speaker 8: Vice Mayor Richardson and members of the City Council providing the report will be Jim Fisk, Development Project Manager.
Speaker 3: Honorable Vice Mayor and city council members. This item is the annual approval of the Belmont Shore Parking and Business Improvement Area and report and ongoing assessment. On August 2nd, 2016. City Council approved a resolution granting approval to set today's date for a 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 significant changes in proposed activity. Therefore, staff requests that City Council receive the supporting documentation of record. Approve the resolution, continue the levy of the assessment, and authorize the city manager to extend the agreement for an additional year. That concludes my report.
Speaker 1: Thank you. And Councilwoman Pryce, would you like to speak to your motion?
Speaker 5: Yes, thank you. First of all, I would like to thank Jim for the excellent work that he does with this particular committee and with the entire Belmont Shore area. And just without him, I think we'd be in a lot of trouble because he keeps it all together. He's like the glue and we're very grateful for that. So thank you, Jim. And this this item is an incredible contribution to the city, and I'm happy to support it. And I asked my colleagues to do so as well.
Speaker 1: Thank you. As any public comment on this item. Seeing none. The hearing is closed. Please cast your vote. | Resolution | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing, and adopt resolution continuing the Belmont Shore Parking and Business Improvement Area assessment for the period of October 1, 2016 through September 30, 2017; and authorize City Manager to extend the agreement with the Belmont Shore Business Association for a one-year term. (District 3) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_09202016_16-0880 | Speaker 1: Thank you. And I believe we already handled the consent calendar as item number 18. Next.
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: Report from team.
Speaker 0: Report from Long Beach Gas and oil. Recommendation to adopt resolution authorizing the city manager to adjust certain rates for natural gas service to reflect market conditions citywide.
Speaker 1: Is there emotion? And a second. Thank you. Our staff report.
Speaker 7: Bob Dow can give us that report for seven.
Speaker 8: Good evening, Vice Mayor. Council Members Agenda Item 1608 806 to approval to adopt a resolution to adjust certain rates for natural gas services long as meets gas and oil routinely reviews its gas utility rates against those charged by SoCal Gas and other surrounding utilities pursuant to the Long Beach City Charter and the Municipal Code. The CPC recently authorized increases to the gas transmission rates charged by SoCal Gas and SD genie to its ratepayers effective August 1st, 2016. These increases were approved to provide the necessary monies to fund replacement of aging natural gas pipeline infrastructure, to fund pipeline integrity programs as required by federal regulations, and to facilitate compliance of federal and state environmental regulations. The proposed rate increase sought this evening only affects the transmission rates for all customer classifications. The current the commodity price is charged. All customer classifications will continue to reflect the actual cost of monthly gas cost. Revenues collected from the transmission of natural gas not only depends not only on the actual rates, but also on the volumes used by the customers. Between 506 and 515, the volume of natural gas used by all LBGTQ customers decreased approximately 36%. This decrease in volume of natural gas used, along with the increase in pipeline maintenance and regulatory costs, require the proposed increase in transmission rates to meet the ongoing additional operating needs for the average residential customer in the city of Long Beach. This proposed rate increase would net approximately a monthly increase of about $0.87 or a 3% increase. This concludes my report, and I'm available to answer any questions you may have.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Council Member Eureka. Pierce. Okay. So any public comment on this? I'm seeing none. Please cast your vote. | Resolution | Recommendation to adopt resolution authorizing City Manager to adjust certain rates for natural gas service to reflect market conditions by implementing Gas Rate Schedules 1 through 5, 7, 9, and special conditions and incentives in Exhibits A and B. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_09202016_16-0882 | Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Item number 19 please.
Speaker 0: Report from police recommendation to execute a new agreement between the Long Beach Police Department and the Long Beach Unified School District to staff school resource officers for an amount not to exceed 745,000 citywide.
Speaker 1: Thank you. And I made the motion here. Councilman, your English. You'd like to speak to your second Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 6: Well, actually, there's a staff report. I just had a.
Speaker 5: Question actually just on if there's not. That's okay.
Speaker 1: Okay. Let's go ahead and hear the staff report.
Speaker 0: Okay.
Speaker 8: Commander Louis Police Department. This agenda item basically executed a new agreement between the police department, Columbia Unified School District, to staff school resource officers for the upcoming school year. The agreement will not exceed $745,480, with an estimated cost to the city's general fund of $186,372. Long Beach Unified School District share of the agreement is 75%, which basically encompasses $559,116. The 186 372 portion is the other 25% that the city of Long Beach Police Department.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Is there any public comment on this item? Seeing the.
Speaker 6: Vice mayor. Sorry, I just had a question. Sure. So, Commander, what are the four schools that will be selected?
Speaker 5: Because it mentioned four police off. I'm sorry. The four police officers will be assigned to the high school campuses. Which high school campus are campuses?
Speaker 6: Will the.
Speaker 0: Police officers be located at.
Speaker 8: Jordan Poly Millikan and Gabriel High Schools.
Speaker 6: Okay, perfect. Thank you.
Speaker 1: And this. This is a continuation of existing resource officers, correct?
Speaker 8: Yes. Okay.
Speaker 1: Please cast your vote. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute a new agreement between the Long Beach Police Department and the Long Beach Unified School District to staff School Resource Officers for an amount not to exceed $745,488, with an estimated net cost to the City’s General Fund of $186,372. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_09202016_16-0825 | Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Item number 23 Please.
Speaker 0: Report from Financial Management Recommendation to declare ordinance approving and adopting the official budget of the City of Long Beach for the fiscal year 2016 2017. Creating and establishing the funds of the municipal government of the City of Long Beach and appropriating money to and authorizing expenditures from said funds for said fiscal year, declaring the urgency thereof and providing that this ordinance shall take effect on October 1st, 2016. Read and adopted as read.
Speaker 1: There is a motion and a second. Is there any public comment on this item? Seeing none. Please cast your vote.
Speaker 0: Councilor Pearce. Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Thank you. We've already handled items 24 and 25 and 26. I understand. So that satisfies the agenda. So we want to open it up now to public comment. This opportunity is given to members of the public who have not addressed the City Council and non agenda items. Each speaker is limited 3 minutes unless extended by the City Council. Is there any public comment?
Speaker 0: Good evening.
Speaker 6: My name is Renee Lawler.
Speaker 0: And I'm actually here to speak about agenda item number 20, which I don't see that you actually addressed. I provided a letter that I submitted to the clerk. So you skipped item number 20. And I wish to read this letter. I'm. Oh, it was withdrawn.
Speaker 1: It was withdrawn.
Speaker 0: Okay. And forgive me. When is it going to be reinstated?
Speaker 1: Miss Clark, do we know?
Speaker 0: No. No date was given.
Speaker 1: Okay, it'll be placed. It'll be agenda and notified publicly.
Speaker 0: Okay. So then I will provide my comment at that time. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Any. Any further public comment? Seeing none. Let's go ahead to new business. I want to begin just by adjourning in memory of someone very special. I'm sorry. Do we have another? Okay, let's have one more. Is there anybody else? Thank you. Please. Please. Come on down. Now is the time. Thank you. Name for the record, please.
Speaker 5: Good evening, Mr. Mayor. And City Council. My name is Tanya and I'm the VP Development from the Association of U.S. Army Greater Los Angeles Chapter. I would like to take the opportunity to make that announcement for our upcoming veterans honoree. Is the second annual.
Speaker 0: And we last year we.
Speaker 5: The purpose of this event is to honor veterans from all services our branches and also to raise funds to support the Veterans Service Center located at the Joyful Training Base in Los Alamitos. Last year we started the right at the joyful training base. We stop at the VA Long Beach here to honor veterans, and then we end arrive at the American Legion in Los Alamitos. This year, we planned to start the ride to Huntington Beach Pier, and we still cannot stop the rate at the VA Long Beach. We planned to go inside the hospital to visit the wounded and sick veterans on the weekend of the Veterans Day. Actually, the event going to be on Sunday, November six. And and we're going to end right at the American Legion as 716 in Los Alamitos. AM 100% proceeds of this event is again going to support the Veterans Service Center located at the joyful training base. This center opened its doors in 2008 and the nonprofit support and we step.
Speaker 6: In to.
Speaker 5: Make this fundraising efforts to and efforts to expand the center with the upgrade and hopefully bring in more service.
Speaker 6: Providers.
Speaker 5: To serve our troops veteran and their family. So we we hope to see the community participate. And this will be a great event.
Speaker 6: Oh.
Speaker 8: Thank you.
Speaker 5: You have any questions?
Speaker 1: No, ma'am. But thank you so much for for that. And so public comment is now closed. We want to adjourn in memory of someone very special we lost ten days ago in a tragic accident. Maria mendoza was the mother of a member of the City Hall family, Isabel Avia, who works in Councilman Andrew's office. | Emergency Ordinance | Recommendation to declare ordinance approving and adopting the official budget of the City of Long Beach for the fiscal year 2016-2017, creating and establishing the funds of the municipal government of the City of Long Beach and appropriating money to and authorizing expenditures from said funds for said fiscal year; declaring the urgency thereof, and providing that this ordinance shall take effect at 12:01 a.m. on October 1, 2016, read and adopted as read. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_09132016_16-0809 | Speaker 7: Great. Thank you so much. We are now going to move into the hour items which are our budget continuation, the budget hearing. We have a variety of budget items. Once you get past the budget hearing, then we're going to go into the council agenda. There's probably a few of you for some of those items from the council agenda, but those will wait till after the budget is passed. To do this, what we're going to do is I'm opening up the hearing. I'm going to take all the public comment, any additional public comment that maybe we have not heard up to this point. And then from there, I'll turn this over to the chair of the Budget Oversight Committee to go through a variety of of items that she's going to have to go through. So at this time, if we can just take all or any public comment that want that want to be address in regards to the budget. Now would be the time. Am I seeing? No public comment on the budget. Okay, here we come.
Speaker 9: We figured there'd be about 2 hours of you guys talking, so he turned it on us. Good evening, Mayor Garcia, Vice Mayor Richardson, council members. My name is Margaret Smith. I am a resident of the third district and I am speaking tonight, as I did earlier at the BBC as a representative of the Long Beach Public Library Foundation, which most recently has raised over $1,000,000 for the new Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library. Thank you. We couldn't have done it without all of you, especially Vice Mayor Rex Richardson. But on behalf of library supporters and users throughout the city, we are extremely grateful for this budget, which includes measure a funds for infrastructure improvements to five libraries , one time funds to continue sun hours at three branch libraries. And we are also very grateful that it also includes a recommendation for an additional $65,000 to fund sun hours at the fourth Branch Library in Long Beach, El Dorado. Sun hours are a critically important time for a lot of people. In fact, for some people, the only time that working parents and school age children can share a library visit together. In fact, Sunday hours are important for a lot of people in this city who work or otherwise occupied between Monday and Saturday. Sunday is an important investment. It has immediate benefits to many people throughout the city. In fact, on Saturday at the Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library opening. Mayor Garcia, you emphasized the importance of providing library access to everyone in our community. Access to technology and education and jobs and information and culture. And unfortunately for some people in our city, a safe place just to be. Sunday hours are about that kind of access. And so we thank you, Mayor Garcia, for your continued support of libraries. We especially want to thank Council member Susie Price for initiating the pilot program for Sunday hours and for continuing to support the expansion of Sunday hours at other branches. And we thank all of the council members for considering this additional funds of $65,000 for a fourth branch library. And we hope that in future budget discussions, there will be an opportunity to fund Sunday hours for every single library in Long Beach. In this information age, libraries are more important than ever to everyone every day of the week. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Share your thoughts. And Consultants Form Group and Associates 2007, the city entered into, I believe, what was a statewide, if not countrywide resolution to end homelessness in the year 2007. As of to date, we are at a deficit. Council members. We have a new mayor now. When God told me that you were going to be mayor in 2006, I didn't even know if you had considered to run, but God showed me that you would be the mayor and here we are. So I know that I have arrived at this moment, both in spirit and in person. In his will, as I address this issue. Next year, you will be at a deficit. You will not have met your objective, although you might have received millions of dollars from the federal government to end homelessness by the year 2017. You have not met that objective contrary, and in spite of that, you're giving many of your employees raises. And I'm not going to argue that right now, but you're in arrears and you had a client here with her, her her crippled son, who needed you to meet that objective this year. Gina, your new Rex, your new Al, your new but a host of us, we've been here meeting about this issue since 2012 is when I showed up on this assignment. You are in arrears. To have met this objective. And there's no one in line to applaud you for having met this goal. Think about how many goals you have met for which you have been applauded and commended. But you've not met this one. That should have been at your top of your agenda. The homeless needed you seven years ago and you did not meet that objective. Now I'm a fast forward. This is how God works. First he talks to your conscience. This is how you learn to hear his voice. When you follow his conscience. When you don't follow your conscience, then he sends a person when you don't listen to the person. Then he starts letting walls fall down. Ocean start opening. And you are without any assistance. So we're in we in this warning process. He sent ten signs to Farrow before he dumped him in his chariots and in soldiers. In the deep. In the Red Sea.
Speaker 9: You may not get no.
Speaker 1: Other warning if you don't put this at the top of your agenda because you have not met it and you cannot be commended in this regard. You stand guilty and I may be the last warning you get.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Mr. Assad. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Good evening. And Cantrell. And maybe the reason you didn't have a lot of people come rushing down to talk is that many of us have not heard the recommendations of the Budget Oversight Committee. That's what we want to talk about, is what those recommendations are and whether we want you to approve or disapprove of it. I missed the beginning of the Budget Oversight Committee, but I understand that there was a recommendation to take the $500,000 from Measure A and the $500,000 of the budget surplus. Out of the giving it to the pool. And I'm not sure what is going on. We need to have information before we can discuss this. May I reserve my comments until after the Budget Oversight Committee recommendations are made?
Speaker 7: This is the public. The public comment period. So there was no objection to that. So we're we're doing a public comment period. Mr.. Mr.. Parkin. I think all the public comment period right now, ma'am. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Will there be public comment period after the motion is.
Speaker 3: As follows.
Speaker 1: Robert's Rules of Order.
Speaker 7: Well, we checked this with the city attorney. We're going to one public comment, period. Is there any change to the city attorney?
Speaker 10: It would be up to the chair to allow additional public comment. This is the public comment period that the mayor's designated for the budget.
Speaker 3: Well.
Speaker 1: Isn't there supposed to be public comment on a motion?
Speaker 10: There's supposed to be public comment on the agenda item. And today the agenda item is the budget. And so that is the commentary.
Speaker 7: And it's a continuation of obviously of a hearing we've had multiple times. And so that's just the process. So please continue.
Speaker 1: Well, I am opposed to taking measure a money or budget surplus money for the pool. And I'm also I've never gotten my questions answered about what parks are receiving artificial turf and the cost in the budget is $2 million. I'm wanting to know if that's new money or if that is the money that was approved in the 2014 and 2015 budgets and which parks are receiving this money.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Hi. I'm Laura Spinner. I'm a second district resident and also a member of the friends of the Long Beach Municipal Band. And first, I want to start out by again thanking all of you for partnering with us to bring the six week of concerts this last summer. And also want to applaud and thank Mayor Garcia for recommending six weeks of concerts for this next summer in 2017. In the 25 years that I've been attending band concerts, it's been an amazing thing to watch grow because right now many of you know that the band is servicing over 10,000 people per week at the concerts, and I think it's now up to seven different districts that are being serviced. And I know that many people would like to see all the districts serviced. And I know we.
Speaker 4: Heard from Dee Andrews last.
Speaker 1: Week and Rex Richardson, and that is so encouraging. I think that we are all very positive about that. We would love to see more band concerts. Everybody wants more. We want to see 20,000 people.
Speaker 4: And all these things I'm sure.
Speaker 1: Are achievable over the course of many years.
Speaker 4: What I would like to say is our friends.
Speaker 1: Group, we are very committed to continuing to work with the city and work with partners of parks and work with Parks, Recreation, Marine to help continue to support the band. And we would be happy to to be on a committee and discuss about how perhaps we can continue to increase the number.
Speaker 4: Of concerts so that we can get to all the different districts.
Speaker 1: At the same time, understanding the proposals.
Speaker 4: Of trying to move it.
Speaker 1: From six weeks to eight weeks and move it all around, I think I'd have to agree with what Miss Price said during the B or C, that it's a little bit complicated to try to figure that out for the next year. But having said that, please let us all continue the discussions with Parks and Rec and the conductor and all of us to try to figure out how.
Speaker 4: We can continue to bring concerts.
Speaker 1: To more and more areas of the city. So that's all I wanted to say. Appreciate it.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council. My name is Sandra Krall. I live on Atherton Street in the third District, and I hadn't planned to speak at all tonight and accept that there have been things talked about and things that are in the budget. I know that. Take me back over the last 14 years that I've been working on issues of homelessness and affordable housing. What I want to say is that my spirit is really lifted these days and not so much by the specifics of the plan, because I've not paid that much attention to that. But I know there are there is money going there, but it's the spirit and the tone of the discussion that I'm finding so encouraging. We are now looking at what we can.
Speaker 1: Do.
Speaker 4: For the homeless instead of.
Speaker 1: What we should do to the homeless.
Speaker 4: And that makes me very, very happy. I've been involved in this since somebody referred to the ten year plan for the to end homelessness. I've been involved in that. Some of the people who were involved in writing that plan, which was published six years ago, are no longer among us. They have gone on to a better life someplace that we can't quite specify, but I know they would be happy to see.
Speaker 1: Finally, the council is.
Speaker 4: Aware and most of you are new to the council since those days, but you have an awareness that this plan exists and possibly something will come out of it. There's lots of stuff in that plan and nobody expects absolutely everything that happened. But I hope you do look at it very closely and find the things that are possible in this day and age and onward and upward. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you so much. Next speaker.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Mayor Garcia and honorable mayor and members of the Council. As I'm beginning to speak, I would like to ask all the rental housing owners who are here in the audience tonight to stand. Please. Honorable mayor and members of the council. My name is Elaine Hutchison. I come to you as an property owner in Long Beach, but also with many of my fellow owners and as a member of better housing for Long Beach. I want to especially thanks Stacie Mongeau, the chair of the Budget Oversight Committee and the committee members for their support of the rental community in curbing rate hikes in inspectors in the city of Long Beach. The pier up is now is new and we support waiting to have the full data on the rental communities across the city before making any adjustments. Thank you for helping us let the process play out, including the focus on slumlords. Thank you very, very kindly. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Carolyn Burns. I live in the second district.
Speaker 1: At first and Falcon and I'm.
Speaker 5: Here and I know.
Speaker 1: You can't parcel things out of the budget. You've cobbled it all together and each.
Speaker 5: Department has worked very hard at putting the budget together and sharing it with all of the districts in the city. However, I.
Speaker 1: Protest the budget for the water.
Speaker 5: Department and I protested on the grounds of.
Speaker 1: Proposal.
Speaker 5: Prop 218, which states that.
Speaker 1: A utility in the state of California.
Speaker 5: Cannot raise the rates unless they can justify that an increase in rates is necessary due to a shortfall.
Speaker 1: In their budget.
Speaker 5: Period.
Speaker 1: Unfortunately, it's come.
Speaker 5: To my attention and that of several others.
Speaker 1: That.
Speaker 5: There has been a very.
Speaker 1: Large quantity of money. $10 million that has moved from the water.
Speaker 5: Department to the city Department.
Speaker 1: Of Revenue. For some reason, that number doesn't even show up on the income part of the statement for the budget. I don't know how that can be. Maybe someone can.
Speaker 5: Explain it to me some. But I'm also honored to speak to the people who.
Speaker 1: Are watching at home, because this budget item has not gotten very much attention.
Speaker 5: But maybe you're the silent ones at home that would like to come out.
Speaker 1: You'd like to speak out, and maybe you can call your council.
Speaker 5: Person, or maybe you can send an email.
Speaker 1: But it's been my understanding that only.
Speaker 5: 14 people.
Speaker 1: Have communicated with the water department about this issue. And four.
Speaker 5: People attended one.
Speaker 1: Public meeting. There were four public meetings. So I invite everyone to take the risk and come out. People do listen. People are being polite and is being heard. And I would like to have the oversight committee guide. The. Council would like to have the council guide the council that it would be in the city's best interest not to follow a precedent that Burbank and Fullerton have followed in which their citizens. Had rebates.
Speaker 5: Once the water budget was really analyzed.
Speaker 1: It would be best not to go down that road.
Speaker 5: And so I strongly encourage that type of activity within it. At the very least, the water department and I thank you once again.
Speaker 7: Thank you so much. Next speaker, please. Yes.
Speaker 10: My name is Josh Butler.
Speaker 0: Executive director.
Speaker 10: For housing Long Beach. And I guess renters and landlords tonight also have.
Speaker 0: In common the color red.
Speaker 6: As our folks are hearing.
Speaker 10: Red tonight as well. Everybody can just where we don't need to stand up and take that kind of time. Thanks. The city of Long Beach.
Speaker 7: A majority of our city rents.
Speaker 2: 58%.
Speaker 10: And that number is on the rise within with more units being put online here in the city of Long Beach, especially in downtown.
Speaker 0: So we need to make sure that we have a robust.
Speaker 10: Inspection program where we'd like to see improvements to our current inspection program, not expanding the program to meet the needs of Long Beach renters who are living in increasingly aging housing stock would be a failure.
Speaker 0: This is a community health issue. We have a tenant.
Speaker 10: Here tonight who has a.
Speaker 0: Section eight tenant. She could not speak. She had to go. She's going to likely lose.
Speaker 10: Her Section eight housing because of deplorable conditions that are being kept by that landlord. She's been cited by our program.
Speaker 7: But when.
Speaker 10: Housing authority went to do their inspection.
Speaker 0: Those.
Speaker 10: Violations were not fixed. They told her that she's going to.
Speaker 7: Have to very.
Speaker 0: Likely relocate.
Speaker 10: We also had something here tonight from the Department of Family and Children's Services. He also could not speak tonight, but.
Speaker 0: He's going to be speaking in.
Speaker 10: Soon. He's at a point where he's going to have to break.
Speaker 0: Up a family and take.
Speaker 7: Kids out because the families.
Speaker 10: Living in such deplorable conditions and they can't get the landlord to fix those things.
Speaker 2: So we have a serious problem.
Speaker 0: And that's just the tip of the iceberg as we know that many.
Speaker 10: Residents are fearful of even speaking out or saying anything or reporting problems for fear of retaliation. If they speak out, their landlord can hold over their head an eviction, a rent increase, and oftentimes they do.
Speaker 7: So we need a program. This is a great this is a great.
Speaker 0: Start to have a.
Speaker 10: Program that we can point to. It'd be nice to.
Speaker 0: Increase the opportunities.
Speaker 10: For tenants to feel like they.
Speaker 0: Can call that program without fear of retaliation.
Speaker 10: We're hopeful we have that conversation.
Speaker 0: But for the right for right now, to not move forward with this program would be an error.
Speaker 10: And so we encourage the council to adopt the recommendations made by the Department of Talent Services, and we look forward to improving and expanding the program.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Hi. I want to.
Speaker 3: Address the budget issues around the Belmont Plaza pool. First of all, like Ms..
Speaker 1: Cantrell, I was just informed that about $1,000,000. Half of it. And general funds. The other half in Missouri funds are now not going to be directed toward the pool, which I think, as I learned by going to four budget meetings in one week, is a is a really good way to make difficult choices.
Speaker 3: So I think that's good that that makes you feel like maybe somebody is actually.
Speaker 1: Thinking and being open to change. So while you're at it, there's another million dollars going to the pool from the Tidelands Oil Fund. It's in 518. Hard to find on that thing. It's a tiny little triangle, but it doesn't have to have a description of what what it is or when it is, because it's not for 17 , it's 18. So why? Why is it even bad now to spend our tidelands money? Why? Because it's a money pit. One location. Because the Belmont Pool Project is to be built on sand at sea level. And projected sea level rise must be calculated into the design. It will be constructed on top of a seven foot high cement base. I have it from a member of the committee that the base alone will cost $500,000. It has plumbing in it, though. Still, there is other possible sites able to receive Thailand.
Speaker 9: Fund moneys that would.
Speaker 1: Not be on sand. And so you don't have to spend half of the budget on a seven foot high piece of cement size. It is not a replacement for the old pool complex, as people like to say. It will not have one but two Olympic size pools, a diving tower and a diving pool. Others smaller pools. And a restaurant. A good community pool. Again, 10 to 12 million for community pools could be built for the cost of the base that block of cement time. Due to falling oil prices, the Tidelands Fund has not provided the income that was expected. The savings set aside are not keeping up with the projected four plus million dollar cost increase. In reality, we have.
Speaker 3: Less funding every year, so I'm here.
Speaker 1: Strictly on a budget related matter to say why.
Speaker 3: Not? As long as you're at it, take that million dollars out of Thailand's. You could hire a.
Speaker 1: Couple of lifeguards. Then maybe those kids you honored last last couple of weeks, you know, you wouldn't have to count on them. You know, they were only there that day because the wind came up.
Speaker 3: Spend it on lifeguards and better yet, swimming lessons. Then you wouldn't need so many lifeguards.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: Good evening, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Vice Mayor, an honorable council members. My name is Matt Barnett. My address is on record for ID. I am also serving as the president of the Eldorado Park South Neighborhood Association. I want to echo my comments I made earlier in front of the Budget Oversight Committee to fully support the Budget Oversight Committees recommendation to increase funding for homeless services and the Neighborhood Safety Campaign Program. And additionally, I want to provide my input on a conversation that was had during that committee meeting on using Prop eight fund for other purposes. When the campaign was kicked off, many of you sent out fliers showing exactly which streets would be repaired. And I want to make sure that we stay true to that promise as a city, to make sure that we are always repairing our streets, that if that's what the campaign said, we would do. The fifth District has the most streets and the most sidewalks of any other district, and some of the streets are often damaged by large trees and need constant repair. I use my Long Beach job whenever I can to repair any potholes or sidewalks. But the plan for Prop eight as it was presented to the voters was very clear on which streets would be repaired. And I want to make sure that we stick to that. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Any other public comment? Please come forward. Okay, guys. So let's go to the lineup. If there's any more public comment, please come forward. Mr. Good Hugh Laurie, good to you. CLARKE As he dressed like a number of other people, I want to repeat because of the import of what I had mentioned at the budget hearing . And let me start with the. This situation you face is in large measure of your making.
Speaker 9: You made a choice to urinate away near $9 million.
Speaker 7: On this build on a.
Speaker 6: Replacement building here. Excuse me, $90 million on the replacement of this building, which, if my information is correct, you were told face no imminent danger.
Speaker 7: Though the elevators should be replaced.
Speaker 9: On the pool.
Speaker 6: Its design. I'm not a swimmer, but I would.
Speaker 7: I'm hopeful the city will rely on those who are.
Speaker 9: Well skilled in designing and using such pool pools. But as I.
Speaker 7: Pointed out.
Speaker 6: Last week.
Speaker 9: Also to think of it just as a pool is.
Speaker 7: Rather parochial thinking and the playing the.
Speaker 6: Race card really doesn't serve the public well. There's a full.
Speaker 7: List. I read them off and I'll read them off again.
Speaker 0: Bike paddling.
Speaker 7: Board paddling. Stand up paddling. Canoeing. Kayak surfing. Kayaking.
Speaker 0: Outrigger outrigger canoes. Sailing, windsurfing, even skinny dipping. And watching.
Speaker 7: The sail with the submarine races are a whole variety.
Speaker 6: Of things.
Speaker 9: That are not available in other parts.
Speaker 7: Of the city, period. Again, it's design.
Speaker 6: I would leave to.
Speaker 9: Those people that are skilled in that and it would.
Speaker 6: Be an outstanding facility for people that want.
Speaker 9: To be another Michael Phelps or Patty McCormack. I personally am not that enthralled about swimming, but if you come down and swim, get your butt out of there and avail yourself when you're finished are the full range of other.
Speaker 7: Activities you can have in terms of an overarching position relative to the budget in an ad hoc, unrelated conversation. Our city attorney.
Speaker 9: Seemed to have opined to me that he seems to think that the price of oil will soon reach $300 per barrel. So I don't think the financial situation is as dire as people projected to be.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: Hi. My name is Roman. I'm from District five. Um, I am like, to compliment the mayor or someone named Daniel. I don't know what he looks like, but he has. He said that one of the best things to do is to get people together and sign documents. In the more people I get, the better off, the easier it's going to be to get some of the stuff that we want. So, um, I've been in communication with my district office and went through some of the neighborhoods with some of the others. And I've got about, this is just one set of about 500 signatures and it basically says that we want to have our parks fully watered. We got we're only watering about 80%. And so it's asking for more money that we have not budgeted currently. So, um, this is just one package of about six or eight more. So there's about 3000, maybe more or less of how many people I just got these documents from some of the block captains today. So, I mean, it's here. We're we're wanting to have that. We're also asking for the there is $1.7 million that have been, we believe, been allocated for artificial soccer fields. And we want to keep that money, even though we're not going to use it for for artificial turf. We want to keep all of that money for District five and not give any of it to the seaside park or to the admiral kit. That's what we're asking for, and we're going to keep pushing for that. Also, this document doesn't have that. But but Marie has asked for more bands to go from 6 to 8 weeks. District five has been pushing for that for a long time. And I understand. Ms.. Price doesn't quite understand things. It's more convoluted, but I think that if she looks at it more closely, she'll see that it's a very sound plan and it's something that we support. I'm going to continue to try to get more money or not more money more more people to sign this thing. We've got about 3000. My goal is to top about 5000 to make sure we go over the top. That's pretty much what I think Daniel said. So I'm going to keep going. That's about it. I thank you for your time and I'm going to give my time to someone else, whoever's got it. But I appreciate you listening to me and we're going to keep pushing for that. It's going to be even stronger because we need to get more signatures from District five.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Good evening.
Speaker 5: Honorable mayor and council members. My name is Maria Lopez.
Speaker 1: I live in the first district. My address is on file.
Speaker 5: I'm here to support proposal for more funding as well as more code enforcement for our communities. But I have to say that efforts to weaken program, this program, especially from districts that don't have high numbers of renters, would be selling out our single mothers, our communities of color.
Speaker 1: But especially our low income communities. There are many communities where we see more problems.
Speaker 5: Especially slumlord problems, old housing stock, as well as our residents being taken advantage of because they don't know their rights because they have a language barrier or because they have children that they have to fend for. And so they don't put up a fight because their children need to go to school tomorrow and their children need a place to sleep. So, P.S., please remember, don't sell out our communities. We all deserve inadequate.
Speaker 1: Housing in the city we love. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 11: Good evening to the ladies and gentlemen of the council member. My name is Harriet Lawless. I live in 4109 Massachusetts Long Beach. I have been a resident of Long Beach since 1970. I bought my first property, then unit apartment in 1978. The experience that I have gotten over the years. I own steel, a few properties. Is that an investor or a property owner who is going at today's market, invest two $300,000 for eight or ten years in an apartment. He's not going to let it go down or, you know, become a slumlord. There is some slumlord I dealt on the west side of Long Beach back in the eighties. Yeah, there are few, but I think there are very few. I look at my property tax bill and a lot of things think one thing that many tenants do not realize is that the property bears unified school, district taxes, community college, and every time that there is fees against the property, the rent is going to be going up. So if you really I mean, there is a department in Long Beach. If a tenant has a problem with a slum landlord with an issues with their you know, with a unit, you can always call the department and, you know, there is a person or an inspector goes and inspect the property. Over my 35 years of owning your property, I had one time a tenant who moved out after he messed up the apartment, who called the city. And they come out and, you know, we have a nice talk. And I explained to him what was going on and the damage that was done. So by creating another department and hiring more inspectors and go in and knock doors, eventually you're going to be imposing fees against the property owners, which we're going to be passing to the tenant. So before you know what basically you're trying to do or try to accomplish, helping tenants is, you know, is going to be backfiring. It's not going to be helping them because property taxes, unified school district, everything goes on the property and the rents are going to be going up. So that's another view that I want you to take a look or see before you make a decision. You know, hiring more inspectors and spending more money. Thank you very much.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Seeing no other public comment, I'm going to close public comment period for the budget hearing. Okay. I'm going to go ahead and close that for the budget hearing. Thank you. So we're going now transition on to the budget. We just need a minute to go over the order. Just give us one sec, because there's a series of votes that have to start. So we'll just resume on that in just a minute. Okay. Thank you. I'm going to go ahead and turn over the floor to the chairwoman of the BBC. There's a series of actual votes that have to be taken on a on a series of different items. And so the way this will work is Councilman Mongo will call the number of the item. Madam Clerk, I'll have you repeat the number of the item and then we'll turn it back to the chairwoman who will walk us through each one. That makes sense. So I'll turn this over to Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 1: So I hear a lot of talking in the crowd. This is similar to last week. We're passing each budget of each department, one at a time like we did before. So the first one will be item 16, dash 809. Is that what you'd like me to call it? Which is the citywide? Originally noted on the agenda as item one. Yes. Wonderful. Report from Financial Management Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing and take the actions necessary to adopt the fiscal year 2017 budget citywide.
Speaker 6: So there would.
Speaker 10: Be no motion or a vote on this item. You would go directly into your next item. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing and take the actions necessary to adopt the Fiscal Year 2017 budget as listed in Attachment A. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_09132016_16-0820 | Speaker 1: Motion carries. Item 20. Recommendation to adopt the budget oversight committees proposed funding recommendations as amended to the fiscal year 17 proposed budget. Oh.
Speaker 7: Okay. I think. Mr. City Attorney, just on a protocol question. I think Councilman Wingo, as the chair, does she have the floor to explain it, to go over the the item?
Speaker 10: That is correct. The earlier this afternoon or this evening, the Budget Oversight Committee considered certain recommendations that were passed and the chair should introduce it and then it would be subject to debate on the floor.
Speaker 7: Okay. Councilman Mongo. And there's already a motion and a second on the floor to approve.
Speaker 10: The motion on the floor is to accept or to adopt the Budget Oversight Committee proposed funding recommendations as determined earlier today.
Speaker 1: Earlier today, the Budget Oversight Committee. Recommended a budget that is not balanced. And so I am asking my colleagues to vote no on this item and receive and file. And I have a I have a substitute motion. Can I receive in file this one and then make a motion or should I just substitute?
Speaker 10: I think what we need to do first is explain what was what was approved by the budget over.
Speaker 1: Capital.
Speaker 10: City so that the the body can decide whether you want to discuss amending it or approve as it was recommended by the budget oversight.
Speaker 7: Okay. Why don't we actually, I think what would be helpful is I think there's a there's Bossi recommendation handout that was passed out and councilman, go why don't you go through that so that it's pretty clear what the recommendations are. And then at that point, you can either substitute or we can vote on the motion.
Speaker 1: Thank you.
Speaker 12: Wonderful avoider. I'd like to speak to the motion as well.
Speaker 7: Oh, everything with the motion.
Speaker 12: Okay. Absolutely.
Speaker 1: Today, a budget oversight we recommended. Just for a point of clarification, I'm. Miss Eriksen, would it be best if I used the order from the structural document that we created after that meeting or. Can I read from the itemized document? Is this okay? Will your stuff be good with this one?
Speaker 4: The motion in languages is perfect. Perfect? Yep.
Speaker 1: I'm on it. Okay. Motion to amend Mayor Garcia's proposed budget recommendations and recommend the following changes to the City Council motion to use 1.666 in general fund one times, including for 75 from City Manager's Fiscal Year 17 proposed general fund strategic one time investments 600,000 in fiscal year 16 General Fund available 70,000 in fiscal year 17 General Fund Temporary surplus in 521 from a relief of reserves for litigation and liabilities that are no longer needed for their original purposes. This funding is to be appropriated as follows. 695 in the police department for the hiring of officers offset by reduction of force 75 and the city manager's proposed general fund strategic one time investments for minimum wage. Education and enforcement and 220,000 previously approved by the City Council for Wage Theft Enforcement. 280,000. In Health and Human Services Department for Homeless Rapid Response 150. And the Public Works Department for tree stump removal 96 in Parks Rec and Marine for expansion of Be Safe 65 and Library Services Department for the expansion of Sunday Library Hours 130 in Health and Human Services Department for Public Health Professional two and the Office of Equity 250,000 for Capital Infrastructure, Economic Development or existing city programing to be divided by nine for the City Council districts, any exceptions must go to the City Council for approval motion for contingent appropriation of fifth fiscal year 16 general fund surplus in the amount of 500,000, subject to funding availability for capital, infrastructure, economic development or existing city programing to be divided by nine for the city council districts. Any exceptions must go to the City Council for approval motion to use propositions and Proposition eight beginning funds available to appropriate $250,000 each in the police department and fire departments for homeless rapid response. Motion to use special advertising and promotion funds. Beginning funds available to purchase. I lost my line. Thank you. Appropriate 60,000 of Parks Rec and Marine Department for Municipal Band six week schedule motion to use fiscal year 17 savings and Thailand's Debt Service and appropriation in 500,000. And Public Works Department for Belmont Pool and Aquatic Center. Motion to Make 80,000 of the 176 in City Manager's proposed General Fund strategic one time investments for b safe structural offset by a decrease in structural funding for the Language Access Program, which will instead be funded as a one time in 17. And that's part of the Office of Equity Funding that's back uniting that motion to designate 500,000 of the 2.2 million for police overtime in city manager's proposed general fund strategic one time investments to a Neighborhood Safe Streets Initiative to be directed at the discretion of the police chief motion to use 1.08 million and measure a revenue in the fire department for the Restoration of Fire Rescue 12, offset by a reduction in public works department measure a funded residential street repair projects. An additional 30,000 is needed to fully fund the restoration, and then city staff are directed to utilize cost savings and or funds available to make up the needed balance.
Speaker 7: Thank you. The way we're going to do this, I just checked in with Charlie because I want to make sure we have the the protocol, right. Because Councilman Mongo does have the floor, but there are a first and a second on a on another motion, even though the councilman wants to make a substitute motion. So what we're going to do, I'm going to hear first from Councilmember Austin and then we're going to hear from Councilman Price. And then I go back to Councilwoman Mongo, who can then at that time, if you'd like, make another motion.
Speaker 12: Councilmember Austin Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And it has already been a very long day with the Budget Oversight Committee having a great, great work and debate on on this FY17 budget. I want to first start out by thanking you, Mr. Mayor, for proposing a a budget and giving us a strong guideline, our city manager, our financial management staff. I want to commend the work of the Budget Oversight Committee chair, Councilmember Mongo and Pryce as well. We've all put a lot of sweat equity and brain equity into coming up with a document that I believe truly reflects the values and priorities of the residents throughout the city and the diverse priorities of the residents throughout the city of Long Beach. I am in support of of this Budget Oversight Committee recommendation, and I'm encouraging the City Council to support it as well. There is an area of a rub. And as you heard from the Budget Oversight Committee chairperson, she believes that there is a structural imbalance in this proposal, which is her prerogative. But I disagree. In this city, managers and mayors proposed budget. They propose to restore public safety services in the same vein in which we are seeking to do so in this Budget Oversight Committee recommendation. We looked at this budget very carefully and looked at where opportunities were, and this $1,080,000 to restore rescue 12, in my opinion, is very necessary. Just in the past week, we have had two rescues go out of service, which meant delays. And those delays can result in a loss of life and our inability to save lives. We made a commitment as a city council to the residents of the city to restore public safety services. To the best extent we possibly could make. And we didn't tell you them that we were going to put this much in to this and this much into that. I mean, I think the city empowered this council to come up with priorities and to to to to address the needs of this city. And and I want to thank Councilmember Price for her support on the Budget Oversight Committee for this recommendation as well. I do have a question for for the chief. I made my comments. And also I want to while the chief is taking coming up, I do want to just recognize the the advocacy from some of our council colleagues, member Rich Richardson, in particular, the last budget cycle. There were people lined up here from North Long Beach. There were postcards. There was a campaign put forth to restore Rescue 12. It was a priority for our city, which we weren't able to deliver. A year ago, we went to our residents and we we asked them to take the leap of faith to raise their sales tax in an effort to improve public safety and infrastructure. And I will tell you that in proposed the Nephi 17, there will be some tremendous infrastructure repairs throughout our city. Public safety resources will be restored. And not only police, but fire. But at this juncture, I think it's very, very important to look at this as an opportunity. We're talking about $1 million a year over the next three years, over the next five years, whatever it takes. That is a small investment for livelihoods in the city of Long Beach. And so, Chief, Mark, my question is, will this $1,080,000 in measured revenue, is that adequate to restore rescue 12?
Speaker 6: Mr. Mayor. Council Members Council. Council Member Austin. Yes, I mean, it's about $50,000 less than the actual cost of a rescue. What we would be able to absorb that.
Speaker 12: All right. And then and then secondly, I know as a department chair, as a as a department head, you laid out priorities for restorations, for rescues and engines for this council over the last couple of budget cycles. Can you remind us what those restoration priorities were.
Speaker 6: For Council Member in 2013? I sent a memo to the mayor and the full council that outlined those restoration priorities. It began with Fire Engine eight, which has been a topic of discussion in this proposed budget. Then would come rescue 12. Then would come engine 17. Then Rescue 22. And finally on to Engine 101. And today, as of today, that the data sets that we used to make that decision in 2013 have not have not changed.
Speaker 12: And with the restoration of rescue 12 help take any strain off of the existing system for four. Paramedic responses.
Speaker 6: Well, Councilmember Yes, the the reality is any time you put another resource into this system, it will ease the pressure on the entire system and in turn, provide greater opportunities for us to lower our response time citywide.
Speaker 12: All right. Thank you. I have no other questions. I would just ask to my council colleagues. Support the C recommendation. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Next up, we have Councilman Price, who is the second year on the motion.
Speaker 5: Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. I, too, want to start by thanking our the chair of the block, Councilwoman Mungo. She worked really hard on this budget and her recommendations. I agree with almost entirely. And I really appreciate the work that she's put into the budget. Again, almost everything that she's recommended, I think is spot on. I also want to thank the mayor for the budget recommendations that he brought forward. I think those are very thorough and they take into account the budget priorities that the residents have voiced to us over the course of these last few months, as well as in the budget surveys. And of course, our staff has worked really hard on this. Leah Erikson should be commended for working so closely with Councilwoman Munger, Chair, Mongo on this budget. Both of them have done an exceptional job. I support this motion, but I do want my colleagues to know that I'm open to suggestions and recommendations. My hope is that we can have a discussion. We measure a past. And we talked about some of the proposals for Measure A in terms of infrastructure. But I don't believe that we have yet had a discussion regarding the proportion of money that we allocate to public safety and the proportion of money that we allocate to infrastructure . And having to modify that. Our public safety scenario in the city is changing very rapidly. I think many of us on the council are receiving more and more calls every day regarding the types of crimes that are impacting the lives of our everyday residents. We are receiving calls regarding public safety issues like a lack of resources in terms of fire resources. And I think those issues are something that we need to talk about as a council. Just because we had a plan in place at the time of the measure. A campaign doesn't, in my opinion, at least this is how I communicated to my residents, is that our focus would be infrastructure and public safety and that we would be working together as we go through the years, through the months to make adjustments, as long as that money is allocated for those two purposes. And I think this is a time for us to have a discussion regarding our priorities moving forward. I think that as chair of the Public Safety Committee, I receive calls constantly and also we discuss within the committee the resources that we have and the lack of resources that we have. And that's why for me, any time we are allocating money to any causes or or any issues, the first question I ask is where else could this money be better spent? Where else would our residents be needing this money more? And it's important for me that we think mindfully about that before we make decisions on allocating money. Because the number one response that I give to my residents when they call and they want more enforcement or shorter response times, is that we have a lack of resources. So it's hard for me to be able to justify that answer if I know that we're allocating money elsewhere. So for me, most of the time, I'm probably going to be in favor of allocating any extra money that we have to public safety. In regards to Councilman Austin's motion. You know, we have areas in the city of Long Beach that have 10 to 15 minute response times for paramedics and 911. And we're meeting the standard of the the national the recommended standard of 6 minutes, only less than half of the time when we're responding to two two incidents. And of course, with the addition and the restoration of services, gradually that number will get better. But I think when you're thinking about that response time, if you're a person in need of care and you have to wait 10 minutes for the paramedics to arrive, that is a higher priority than getting an additional two streets fixed or three streets fixed. I just think it's important for us to have a little bit of perspective here in terms of what we're allocating our money to. I'm not saying infrastructure is not important. It's absolutely important. I'm just saying it's important for us to think about perspective as we move forward. We have for the next six years approximately $47 million of revenue that but for an unforeseen circumstance we can count on in the city of Long Beach, we can plan that that $47 million over the course of the next six years and try to get as much of our infrastructure done as possible. But I think we should have some perspective in terms of the proportion of money that we're allocating to public safety versus infrastructure. Both of them are great causes that. Benefit the city. But I think that we need to focus really on that. And then finally, I did want to make a comment and I said it in Boise, and I'm not sure how many of my colleagues were there, but the money that we reallocated as a recommendation from wage enforcement, you know what I said it Boise is I'm perfectly okay with giving some money to wage enforcement. I have a hard time with the 700,000 because I don't believe that that's money that's necessary to go into that department or that that effort. Now, perhaps once we find out whether we can even enforce, we can allocate more. But I don't think that's money that we need to allocate today. Instead, I think that's money that we can use towards beefing up our public safety resources. And I would like that money to be allocated to the police department for their use in terms of additional police resources. But again, I'm open to suggestions. I'm open to talking with my colleagues. You know, this isn't one of those things. I have a feeling that there's, you know, some agreements in the works or whatever. I just want us to make sure we have a discussion that we're all kind of involved in so that we can move forward . And I also know that in regards to the municipal band Councilman Austin and I recommended that we stick with the current schedule. You know, that's what we're hearing from the band, folks, in terms of what makes sense for them. If in fact, and I know Councilwoman Mango feels strongly about a different proposal, so I want her to have the opportunity to communicate that because again, this is just a recommendation and I'm open to any suggestions and would love to hear from my colleagues on it. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. We'll go back to Councilman Mongo who has the floor and and you're able to make your substitute if you'd like to now. Thank you.
Speaker 1: I'd like to start by asking the chief a question. Both chiefs are there. How great. Chief Terry, would you recommend that a city put something in place as important as a rescue if there's no plan to keep it in place long term?
Speaker 6: Mr. Mayor?
Speaker 12: Council members. Objection. Leading.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: I'm taking a note from my colleague. Two seats over. Oh, she actually gets argumentative.
Speaker 7: Okay, great. So we have a we have a question, so we're gonna get the question answered and then get back to the votes.
Speaker 6: Mr.. Mr. Mayor, council member, could you apologize? Could you ask the question again, please?
Speaker 1: Would you recommend that our city put something in place as important as a rescue if we do not have a plan or funding to keep it in place long term?
Speaker 6: Well, Councilmember, I. I think the city has established and we have done in the fire department a very good job over the years at putting things in place that have structural support behind them. I think we've seen things being put in place and then shortly thereafter, due to budget constraints, they get taken out again. I think it'd be very difficult for me to determine exactly what the future looks like at any given time, but I would only be supportive of restoring things if it was structurally restored.
Speaker 1: Thank you. In recommending in alignment with the Chief and the Budget Directors recommendations that we should structurally fund structural things, I'd like my colleagues to support a receive and file of this motion.
Speaker 7: Okay. So there is a substitute. Councilman. Yes. Okay. So there's a substitute motion to receive and file the B or C recommendations.
Speaker 12: That's not a motion.
Speaker 1: I move to receive and file the recommendation of the B or C.
Speaker 7: That's a motion.
Speaker 10: That's correct. It would it would in effect, there would be no recommendation from the EEOC to adopt on the budget.
Speaker 7: Okay. So the motion is a substitute motion. We're going to take a vote on this. I know there's.
Speaker 12: There's still public comment. There's comment from the other member. But.
Speaker 7: Councilman, I have the floor. So thank you. So unless Councilman Pearce, Councilmember Pearce or Vice Mayor Richardson want to speak to this motion, which I'm. No, no. Okay. So not now. You want to vote first on the substitute to receive and file?
Speaker 5: I have some questions on the substitute.
Speaker 7: Absolutely. So let me first just go through the other. So, Councilman Pearce, you removed yourself. So, Vice Mayor Richardson, I'm assuming then do you want to speak to the substitute or not? We're going to go back to the discussion now.
Speaker 0: I'm going to withdraw.
Speaker 7: Okay. So then please withdraw so I can do this in the right order. Now I have Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 5: Thank you. So I guess the question I have is. If we haven't already voted on the budget priorities for next year's measure funds and how do we know this isn't going to be structural?
Speaker 1: Well, currently the way that.
Speaker 5: I actually saw a couple among I was actually I probably should have said it better. I guess the question was for Leah Erikson, because we're talking about I mean, you're welcome to comment on it, too. But that was my question, was that if we haven't yet voted on how we're going to use Measure a funds next year , then how do we know this isn't going to be structural? I'm just confused about that.
Speaker 7: Vice Mayor No, actually, the question is to staff. So I'm going to I'm going to direct this question to staff. So Councilman Price has the floor and it's a question to staff.
Speaker 4: Mr. ERICSON Councilwoman Price of as I indicated in the Budget Oversight Committee earlier today, we have a three year outlook for our use of Measure A and are in our budget and in our three year outlook we included $150 million infrastructure spending plan with projects that are detailed and listed. In fact, in the budget book we have 17 projects listed and a list, tentative list for FY 18. And then we also have maintaining public safety services and restoration of of a fire engine eight and the South Police Division. With all of that, we have plans for the measure eight funds for the next three years. So any dollar taken away or any dollar added to expand public safety would need to come from a dollar that was previously planned for for infrastructure. So this motion currently identifies an offset for the 17 portion. And what we are doing is we're respectfully asking for direction from city council on what would not get funded for infrastructure in the next two years.
Speaker 5: So but the budget outlook that you're talking about, how would we go about amending that budget outlook? What would be the process for that?
Speaker 4: Councilwoman Pryce, you could direct that you do the restoration and then you would identify what infrastructure that. So you're basically giving us direction to fund public safety, additional public safety, and then you would identify what infrastructure you wouldn't want to that you would what category of infrastructure that you would decrease the funding from.
Speaker 5: Could we do would we have to identify that category tonight or could we have a date certain where we come back? Because if if each council member, for example, deferred $100,000 or $150,000 of projects for 2018, that would give us the money that we need to restore. Engine I'm sorry. Rescue 12.
Speaker 4: Councilwoman Price, you could you could come back. But just to note, we did have the Citizens Advisory Committee meet on this exact plan last, last week and approve it. So any changes to that plan would also need to go through the Citizens Oversight Committee, too, as well. And so you could come back at a future date.
Speaker 5: Okay. And that's just what I want. I mean, obviously, the Citizen Advisory Committee wants to make sure that we're spending the money on public safety and infrastructure, but we can still I mean, we're not tied for the next three years to every single project we can modify things. That was my understanding when we voted on it, that that we weren't tied to these projects for all time. I mean, things might come up that might necessitate us spending money in different areas. So I'm imagining that we can take a vote as a council on that, right?
Speaker 4: Councilman Price That is correct. It's just that normally when you when you it does involve tradeoffs. And so to be clear to the to everybody involved, this does require less infrastructure. And so the sooner that we have clear expectations from city council on what direction you want to take, the better it is for setting expectations. So, yes, you're correct. It could change later.
Speaker 5: So basically what this would mean is if we were to approve this recommendation tonight, the next year of the $47 million that we're going to get in 2018, we would have to find $1 million of that money that would go to rescue 12.
Speaker 4: Correct. And so that would mean 1 million less of infrastructure spending in 18. Right.
Speaker 5: 1 million. And what's the total infrastructure spending that we have scheduled for 18?
Speaker 3: When?
Speaker 4: One moment me grab that 37 million. It's $37.1 million. Is the tentative list for a fight 18.
Speaker 5: So instead of $37 million, we would spend $36 million and we'd be able to restore an engine in North Long Beach and increase response times for people that are in need of medical attention. I mean, to me, it seems like we could work together to come up with that million. You know what? What I would love to know is I know there's an alternative plan in place. I mean, I've definitely seen the movement that's going around the council chambers. I would love to know what it is so that I could decide how I want to vote on this motion, because maybe there's an alternative plan that's better . And so, you know, I would I would ask Chair Mango if maybe, you know, I don't know how this works kind of with the strategy, but I'd love to hear what alternatives are available before we vote, because I know she's been working very hard on this. So I guess that's a question not from us, Erikson, but for Ms.. Ms.. With chair. Chair. Mango.
Speaker 1: I'm unable to agree with anything that doesn't provide at least $3.3 million to restore rescue 12 for the full three years. And so with that, I'd like to vote on receiving and filing this and going to a balanced budget proposal, at which time I'm open to discussions of Rescue 12, again, like I asked for at Bossi. But unfortunately my colleagues did not give me that opportunity. So I just like to vote, to receive and file. And at that time we can get to a balanced budget.
Speaker 7: Okay. I'm going to go to Councilmember Austin unless Councilman Price's anything else.
Speaker 5: I don't have anything else.
Speaker 7: Okay. Thank you, Councilmember Austin.
Speaker 12: Okay. So I guess the question is for our financial management. Ms.. ERICKSEN. Um, the the restoration of engine eight. How is that different from what we're proposing to do to rescue 12?
Speaker 4: Council member Austin We programed the restoration for fire engine eight in all three years of our outlook and therefore it came off the top and therefore there was less money for the infrastructure spending in the plan. So so we did account for it every year of the three year outlook as a structural spending.
Speaker 12: But every year it still has to come before the city council for it to get approved. Is that correct?
Speaker 4: That is correct. And so if city council chose not to approve Rescue eight and 18, that there could be one or $2.3 million of additional funding for infrastructure or for other public safety purposes.
Speaker 12: So from the from the this Mungo's argument that the restoration of Rescue 12 is is somehow not structural. Would the same thing be said for engine eight?
Speaker 4: I'm sorry. Can you please repeat your question?
Speaker 12: The argument that the restoration of Rescue 12 not being structural, could the same thing be said for rescue for engine eight?
Speaker 4: Councilmember Austin, as I mentioned, we did structurally plan well.
Speaker 12: You planned it over a three year outlook, right? I mean, so I just don't understand how how restoring a rescue in this the using the theme park what might measure a is any different is particularly when we have to come here year after year after year to approve the budget. It's it's a shell game. And and for this council, it's about priorities. And so I don't have any further questions. I would just, again, ask that my my colleagues support the bill's recommendations and reject these receive a file.
Speaker 7: Okay. We're not going to go to a vote. There is a substitute motion by Councilman Bongo to receive and file this motion. So please, members. Gordon, cast your votes.
Speaker 3: Was.
Speaker 7: The motion to receive and file both these recommendations.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 7: Okay, motion carries. So the basic recommendations have failed. Now we're going back to Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 1: Thank you. I'd like to make a motion to amend Mayor Garcia's proposed budget recommendation and recommend the following changes to the City Council. If you were here for Budget Oversight Committee, you've heard this once before. There are very few adjustments. Motion to use one point. Actually, there are no adjustments. Motion to use 1.191 in general fund one time funding, including 600,000 in fiscal year 16 general funds available 70 in fiscal year 17 general funds temporary surplus and 521 from a relief of reserves for litigation liabilities that are no longer needed for their original purposes. This funding is to be appropriated as follows. 280,000 and Health and Human Services Department for Homeless. Rapid response in the Public Works Department for. Tree removal replacement. And and stamp removal 96,000 for the Parks and Recreation and Marine for the expansion of the Be Safe program 65,000 and Library Services Department for the expansion of Sunday library hours to a fourth Branch library to be determined by the Department 130 and Health and Human Services Department for the Public Health Professional two and the Office of Equity 220,000 and Financial Management Department for local investigations related to wage to 250,000 and capital infrastructure, economic development or existing city programs to be divided by nine for city council districts . And exceptions must go to the City Council for approval motion for contingent appropriation of fiscal year 16. General fund surplus in amount of 500,000, subject to the funding availability of capital, infrastructure, economic or existing city programs to be divided by nine for the City Council districts. Any exceptions must go to the City Council for approval motion to use beginning funds available to appropriate 20 50,000 in each of police and fire for a total of 500,000 for homeless. This rapid response motion to use the Special Advertising and Promotions Fund as AP Beginning Fund Balance Balance to appropriate $90,000 in Parks Recreation Marine for Municipal Band eight week alternative schedule motion to use Fiscal Year 17 Savings and Tidelands Debt Service to appropriate in 500,000 in the Public Works Department for Belmont Pool and Aquatic Center. Motion to make 80,000 of the 176 in the City Manager's proposed general fund strategic one time investment for B safe structural offset by the structural availability by Language Access Program, and it's merged into the Office of Equity Motion to designate 500,000 of the 2.2 million for police overtime in the city manager's proposed budget for strategic one time investments in the Neighborhood Safe Streets Initiative as directed by the police chief.
Speaker 7: Okay. There's emotion any second on the on the motion. I'm going to turn first over to Vice Mayor Richardson and then we'll go down the list.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I want I was silent on the last vote because I wanted the opportunity to put everything in context and not piecemeal out certain justifications here. And I'm going to end with a friendly amendment. So, number one, the Budget Oversight Committee does not have full control of the city council. And although we we do work to to sort of respect those recommendations when there are dramatic changes right before the vote, it makes me lose confidence in their ability to actually present something that the city councils can support. And the indication of that is when the chair votes against the product that comes directly out of their committee. As a chair of a committee. I would I would hope that, you know, if something comes out of the committee that the chair can't support, the city council would consider that this was a dramatic change, a completely dismantled wage theft, which was a very significant issue here in this city that we discussed. And we found a middle ground approach that respected business, and it addresses workers concerns and that was completely thrown to the side. And the excuse was a very insulting and insincere attempt to utilize or leverage a very real need for a rescue in North Long Beach for north Long Beach residents. And that's why right now I'm going to go through why this made absolutely no sense and why we need to have a better plan. And we're going to talk about that plan tonight. So, number one, the recommendations here, there are a lot of good things here. Number one, we we we supported one position to support equity in the health department, which has been a priority at city council. So that's a great thing. We should acknowledge there's, you know, homelessness, rapid response, a creative way to leverage police and fire and add additional positions to go out and respond immediately, immediately to the homelessness issues popping up citywide across our city. Next, there was I mean, you know, library hours are things we support. A lot of good things that have organically come up through the community and that that that I do want to support. So I'm glad that those things are in this motion. The the context about rescue 12, the recommendation I could not support for a couple of different reasons, but I want to kind of go through this exercise and better understand it. So so city attorney, the recommendation that came out of that came out of Boston on rescue 12. What was. Can you just restate that? So we know so we understand what that was and why this is very different. I'll explain the why, but you can just tell me what it is.
Speaker 10: Thank you. There was a motion that was adopted by the Bloc was to use $1,080,000 and measure a revenue taken, I think, from the Street Improvement Fund to fund the fire department or rescue 12. And it's offset by public works measure funds residential street repair an additional 30,000 is needed to fully fund the restoration and staff was directed to find funds available to make up that balance.
Speaker 0: So how long would that funding last? Like, how long will we actually have that rescue based on that allocation of funding?
Speaker 4: Vice mayor. This this identifies the basically the first full year of funding for the rescue. This was. About a year's worth of funding.
Speaker 0: Okay, so what would happen? So, number one, what is are we projecting a deficit next year or a surplus next year or the year after?
Speaker 4: Vice Mayor Richardson We are in fact projecting shortfalls in 18 that will need to be balanced in next year's budget.
Speaker 0: So in order to maintain that restoration, we would have to, as a council, either cut or identify new revenue, correct?
Speaker 4: That is correct.
Speaker 0: Okay. So there are I do appreciate admire all the ideas about, you know, being creative about infrastructure. And I personally know and I've been following and I know a great many of many people have been following other infrastructure revenue opportunities associated with infrastructure like L.A. County Measure M and and so have we taken a look at that as a city like what our potential impact might be? What are we if should voters make a decision to move forward with that?
Speaker 4: Vice Mayor Richardson Yes, we do. We do have estimated impacts. If it's passed based on the local return, that would come to the city of Long Beach.
Speaker 0: And do we have a rough number on what we think that is?
Speaker 6: Yes. It's approximately $7.
Speaker 0: Million. $7 million. So if the voters approved that in November, couldn't we reprioritize infrastructure funding in the general fund to support services instead, since we have an additional funding source, ongoing funding source for that.
Speaker 6: So if Measure M were to become available part of the $150 million plan, that was an infrastructure investment plan that could be funded by a number of different ways of money that would be coming in. So the council could take a look at that again. And if they wanted to use additional street money from Measure M or stick with what is currently planned.
Speaker 0: And when is that? When will we know whether that's on the table or not?
Speaker 6: November eight.
Speaker 0: So two months from now. Yeah. Okay. So are there other revenue opportunities? I know that the city council vote voted to place a cannabis item on the agenda for November. And have we done an analysis of the revenue impact from that source?
Speaker 6: We are. We have done an analysis of Measure M-A and it where it can vary pretty wildly. But what we're estimating is if recreational and medical marijuana use were allowed, it would generate about $13 million.
Speaker 0: $13 million structurally, and $7 million for infrastructure. Okay. So when in a question about Measure eight, when does Measure eight actually kick in? When do we start collecting?
Speaker 6: January one.
Speaker 0: But not at the beginning of this upcoming FY17 fiscal year.
Speaker 6: Correct. January one instead of October one.
Speaker 0: I understand. So the problem with the BMC BMC original recommendation is that it uses it uses it doesn't structurally fund restoration. This leads to could this have an impact on our credit score as the city.
Speaker 6: Ask Lee Erickson to answer that.
Speaker 4: I? Vice Mayor Richardson. Yes. One of the things that the credit rating agencies do look at is whether or not we follow our financial policies and strictly balance the budget every year. So it could potentially have an impact.
Speaker 0: Okay. So this puts in that recommendation could potentially lead to about a negative credit rating on the city, a potential of putting rescue 12 back in service just to pull it out at the next budget. Should new revenue not not be available and in frankly, it's too contingent on it's not a strong solid plan and it rolled the dice with lives and you can't do that. I agree. We have fought for six years to restore rescue 12 since my predecessor, Steve Neal, was in office. And we yes. Last budget, when R&D was eliminated, we did fight and we have continued to fight and organize in the communities to do this. I want to see this happen, but I personally feel North Long Beach and all the cities, all the residents our city deserve a real plan, a better plan, not, you know, not a half baked plan. And so what we know is that we have potentially two revenue sources that could or could not be available in just two months. We know that we have potentially improved revenue projections on the first responder fee, which is fairly new. We know that measure kicks in in January and that there may be an ability to leverage measure a improved projections from first responder fee potential, you know, potential revenue from measure made here in Long Beach and measure aim at the county. We know all those things. So I want to conduct I want to make a friendly amendment now to councilmember budget chair mongo that we conduct an analysis of all of these revenue opportunities that include measure em, Long Beach measure, L.A. County measure and Long Beach measure in May and the first responder fee. And we make a plan to restore additional apparatus three months from now in January. Once that has happened, three months from now, in January, once we know what our complete budget picture, picture, our pictures, our picture is, and once we understand what the what the voters are going to do. And just to make sure that we are you know, that this is important and the entire city council has expressed that maybe infrastructure might not be the top priority one. We want to make sure this is sincere and put some money aside right now to support that should it move forward. So to support this plan and if the other revenue doesn't doesn't cover it, then we this is what we can do to kind of support this. But we don't want to spin it because it's not structural. We want to just hold it to the side. So to support this plan, let's set aside $1 million and measure any funds from let's let's see. I think I see we have 500 from the each of the ranchos and reserve it to support these restorations until this plan has come forward and we have we have some clarity on our revenue picture. So that's my friendly amendment.
Speaker 1: I'd like to hear all friendlies before making any decisions.
Speaker 7: Okay. Thank you. Councilor Richardson, are you all done with your comments?
Speaker 0: I am for now.
Speaker 7: Okay. Councilmember Pierce and I know just real quick before Councilman Pacheco, I think there may be a problem with some folks screen. So just the order I have is councilmember pearce, councilman price, councilmember your ranga, councilman austin and councilmember super nice offer and then Councilman Gonzalez. So next up is I'm sorry, Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Mayor. I want to thank all the work that's been done by staff, by the council, by the mayor in preparing the budget and really trying to be thoughtful and measured with what kind of budget we passed today. And I'll echo the comments by my colleague, Vice Mayor Richardson. We've when it comes to wage theft, we've already been there. I think there was a commitment last week to make sure that money was there and that we table that for future discussion about how those dollars are spent. But want to make sure that that because we just did it last week, stays there. Second, I want to say, you know, I appreciate going back and funding some of our libraries and and parks. I think there's more that we can do and want to encourage us to kind of look at that and continue that conversation as we go forward about where some dollars might be found for that. But third, I have to say, guys, while I while we've been having this meeting, we've said a lot of things about public safety being a number one priority that, you know, we've people voted very highly for measure with the assumption that we were going to invest in public safety. We know through, you know, different conversations in our computer community budget process that public safety has been a number one priority. And while we're sitting here in our council meeting, there was a fight and shots fired in Alamitos Beach tonight. And so we have a marine area that has poor lighting, that doesn't have enough staff, that is consistently struggling to make sure that we have safe areas, whether that's around our restrooms, whether that's, you know, up against the seawall. And that when we're talking about what number one is important is safety. And we have consistently had community members come out and say that they do not want to invest in one time funds on things like pools. But we want to invest in public safety. I think we have to look at the dollars that we have here. And this year alone, we have $1.7 million allotted to a pool that doesn't have a plan to be built yet. While we all are in agreement that public safety is a priority. So while we have two 2 million, we've got 2 million this year allotted to that. And that is new money without a plan. So I have a question for our staff. How much would oil cost have to go up in order for us to reach a plan to see this pool being built at the $103 million mark ? That question makes.
Speaker 6: Sense. So that's a difficult question to answer, but I'll do my best in. I'll give an example. In 2015, when oil was at $100 a barrel, we were essentially going to be fully funded for $103 million, was going to bring in about $39 million. And that would have gone to fund the pool so oil could go back up. It would need picking an exact number is very difficult. There are other funding solutions that we're trying to work on, but if it was just relying on oil, it'd have to go up pretty high.
Speaker 4: And how much do construction costs go up each year that we wait?
Speaker 6: That's also a difficult question to answer. We've estimated in the past that it could go up about $4 million a year, about 4% if it's a $100 million plan and it's 4%. We have seen cost escalation go above that. It really is project specific. In some projects, in cost escalation is 10% and others it's, you know, 1 to 2%. So it can vary pretty wildly. But I'd say 4 to 5 million a year is a potential.
Speaker 4: 4 to 5 million a year. And this year we have 2 million slotted for it with no real idea about where we're going with other funding cost. I would like to also ask of our fire and police department how what's the increase in calls that we have annually that 2%, 5%?
Speaker 0: Councilwoman Pierce for the police department in 2015, we had a a little over a 10%.
Speaker 7: Increase in our call.
Speaker 0: For calls for service volume. And I want to say, year to date, the last time I looked at the numbers for 2016, we were up a little over 7%. So it is our workload is definitely increasing.
Speaker 6: Councilmember The fire department is much the same. We typically our 20 year historical average, we typically see a 3 to 5% call volume increase annually. This year, however, we're right at about 6% in total call volume.
Speaker 4: Wow. Thank you, guys. I mean, to me, I cannot. You know, with a full heart. Say that I want to fund something that doesn't have a pathway right now with Tidelands funds, which, you know, are only in two districts. I would want to see those Thailand funds used to offset public safety with shovel ready projects like lifeguards making sure that our lighting is there and ensuring that we have dollars there for overtime pay for our Marine patrol that we seem to be short on right now. And so I would like to make a friendly to the council member to a lot $31,000 or $31 million to public safety and shovel ready projects in the in the area.
Speaker 1: Wow. That's a price. That's a lot more than I thought you were going for when you started that speech. I'll start by saying that in a similar way that I don't believe in funding things that aren't having a path to funding like the engine. I feel the pool is different because it is money being set aside towards a one time, if that makes sense. And I would not be comfortable taking away funds that had already been allocated by prior councils at this time. Without a plan or a. I need something much more broad and. A much more specific and much less broad on money for the police department or something.
Speaker 4: But I do have an awesome list, I would say, of of fire department overtime at $2 million, beach lighting and public safety improvements at six. But I, I hear that when I started this, 31 million was not something that was on the table. Would you be willing to accept a friendly for this year's funding of one of 2 million?
Speaker 1: What would you use it for?
Speaker 4: We would use that form of marine patrol equipment and over time we would use that for beach lighting and safety improvements and fire department, tidelands, infrastructure. So all things that are one time fees.
Speaker 1: I'll take it under advisement. Thank you.
Speaker 6: And, Mr. Mayor, if I can add quickly, just a point of clarification. We believe what's in the budget for the 17 budget for the pool. If I can just clarify that there is $1 million out of Tidelands. And then there was in the city manager's proposed budget, $500,000 in a contingent appropriation in the general fund, which is , I understand the Bossi recommendations would swap that with Tidelands. So for a total really all told, if the Bossi recommendations go forward of 1.5 million and it's all tidelands, no general fund.
Speaker 1: So would the things she's asking for qualify are all of those things in the. I mean, I guess you'd have to. They're all in the title and they're.
Speaker 4: All in the title. Yes.
Speaker 1: Okay. I'm not accepting. Not an okay of accepting, but okay of understanding. Yes. Okay.
Speaker 4: To be clear, it is using those Thailand funds instead of using them for infrastructure of a pool, using them for safety along our Marine.
Speaker 1: It's just so hard for me to take money from an investment to move it into a safety idea, especially things like overtime in the such. But I will take it under advisement.
Speaker 3: What?
Speaker 7: Next up, we have Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 5: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Okay. So a few few thoughts here. I agree with Councilman Richardson's position that there were a lot of good points in this budget. I completely agree with that. I think there are a lot of great priorities in this budget. I don't necessarily follow the logic. Not that I not that it's wrong. It's just I don't follow it in regards to this idea that things are half baked because, you know, for example, he's asking about marijuana revenue. What? We have a two from four that staff wrote. And although he asked about the revenue, he didn't ask the follow up question of what the enforcement costs would be to the city and actually were projecting to go into a deficit as a result of that. So, you know, I think, yeah, it's absolutely the revenue is going to come in, but there is a cost to the city to enforce and police it. But so we have to factor that in. So we're basically relying on a projection and making financial plans based on a projection of what might happen. Measure A, you know, and I and I appreciate that. You know, we're we're all you know, Councilman Austin and I and many of my colleagues who even if they're not voting, weren't voting with the recommendations that came out of Bossie tonight. I think the one thing that I think is factual is those who are in favor of Rescue 12 fully and completely understand that it's going to benefit directly Councilman Richardson's residents. And that's okay. And that's great. It's a wonderful thing. And I find it ironic that in looking for the revenue to set aside, he's looking at facilities and other districts and not his own as a place to set aside the money. You know, for example, there's $4 million set aside for Highland Park. Certainly a million of that could be set aside. But in any event, in the spirit of what we promised the residents and what we promised the citizens in regards to measure A, we specifically made some commitments to them as to the ranchos. So I want to talk about that first. I can't speak for Rancho La Cerritos because I'm not as involved in their project as I am with Rancho Los Alamitos. But Rancho Los Alamitos, it's not getting a facelift and there's not going to be any sort of luxurious accommodations. It's getting a new roof, it's getting some seismic structural improvements made to it. And Long Beach Unified requires, as part of its curriculum that students every student in a certain grade go through Rancho Los Alamitos, which is a city facility. And I know any biotech is not here, and I don't know if there's anybody here who could speak to it. But the the seismic issues that Rancho Los Alamitos are actually very real. And again, this isn't a beautification project. It's a safety project. So in the whole spirit of, you know, we've promised we can't go into 27, 2018 because we have a budget outlook that includes information that we haven't yet committed to, but that residents might be looking forward to. I don't know how we would go into 2017 where we've already published the list of what's going to happen and take away from those projects. But so I would I would ask my colleagues not to support that. Setting aside that money, I think it's interesting. You know, Councilman Richardson, I would say to you, I'm here. I congratulated you heavily with the Michelle Obama library. I'm here supporting everything I can do for Rescue 12. I support what you've done in your district. And I would hope that we don't get to a place where we're where we're divisive. I understand some may be upset at my stance on the wage enforcement issue last week and the fact that I didn't think it was a prudent use of money. But in general, I support my colleagues use of money in their districts and use of building up the infrastructure and making the lives for the residents in their district better. And you'll never see me vote against a project that you have proposed for your district, ever. I just don't do that, and I wouldn't do that. But we're talking about citywide issues, I think about whether or not we have other priorities. And and so I would just hope that, you know, we can we can separate the issues from one week to the next and not hold grudges that result in things like taking money away from seismic facilities that seismic needs. And in regards to the pool, you know, I appreciate where Councilwoman Pierce is coming from. I think it will be interesting. And I, you know, definitely want to hear what the aquatics community thinks about this, because this is the first I've heard her want to take $30 million from the pool project. So it will me that's certainly not something I had heard in my. I am. I work with Councilwoman Pearce in advance of her being on council and the numerous discussions that we had. So it does take me by surprise a bit that she'd want to take $30 million from the pool. But but I do want to say a few things about the pool. Much has been made of the pool. Yes, the pool is an expensive facility. We have heard a lot of people say it's more expensive because of where it's located. That's actually not true. The place price per square foot of the pool is the same price per square foot as competitive aquatics facilities throughout the United States. In fact, we fall right in the middle range. The thing about the pool that's different is that we're going to be able to house and see competitions at the pool, which we haven't been able to do. We don't have any facility in the city of Long Beach that can house and see competitions. Why is that important? Because out of one of our local high schools alone, we have churned out more Olympians than any other city in this region. Wilson High School has churned out more Olympic athletes than any other high school in this region. So the aquatics lifestyle is a huge source of pride for the city. And, you know, long before Councilwoman Pierce or even I got onto this body, there were discussions about the plans for the pool. I stepped into this role, and I honored and respected the work of my predecessor with the aquatics community to get the project to the place that it was when I entered the scene. And we had a stakeholder committee with residents and aquatics professionals to talk about what the needs of the pool would be to try to make this a facility that could really be an iconic facility for the city of Long Beach. The money that's proposed right now is investment money to try to find a funding gap. We are not going to be able to fund the pool through tidelands money alone. And that's why we are going to be taking $500,000 and investing in future funding opportunities, whether that be grants or whether it be fund raising. We've already met. We're working very hard. Trust me, my colleagues, I'm not sitting here waiting to build the pool year by year at $500,000 a year allocations every year. We're working really hard. The mayor, I want to thank him. He's been incredibly helpful to me and the city manager and assistant city manager Tom Modica. And we're we're trying to find creative ways to fund the pool. We're working hard on that. We definitely are not going to be looking to the general fund to fund $44 million of the pool. We're talking about $500,000 to try to invest in funding opportunities for the city of Long Beach. A lot of fund raising companies require you to give money in order to be able to set up a fundraising plan. And if we're going to raise $40 million, we can't just do it based on amateur fund raising techniques. We're going to need to bring in a private company to help us figure out what our options are. So that's the story with the pool. And so I would urge my colleagues, you know, let's again, you have never seen me and nor will you ever see me vote against a project that's going to benefit your residents in your district. None of you. We may not see eye to eye on things, but I'm not going to punish your residents because you didn't like something I did the week before, and I'd ask you to please not do that to my residents either. We don't agree on wage enforcement. That's okay. But please, let's not carry that meeting after meeting because that's not fair to my residents and certainly not fair to the thousands of Long Beach Unified School students who go through the Rancho every year. So thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Next up, we have Councilmember Gringo.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mayor. You know, budget season is never easy. I go through a budget season every January with my wife. Talking about how we're going to spend our money for the year. Looking forward to April 15 to when we have to do our taxes. And then sometimes we come up with the budget surprises, making donations that I didn't know she made or me making a donation that she didn't expect that I made. So there's always these negotiations and these nuances with budgets that that are very difficult. And that's what we're dealing with right now. It's never easy. When I was I was looking at the at the EEOC meeting earlier today, and I was somewhat taken aback by some of the recommendations that were coming through, because I saw them as 11th hour type changes that I, I questioned because as far as I was already . Oriented, too. We made a commitment to the people through Marjorie that we were going to use those funds. As we said, we were infrastructure, public safety, and we were going to take care of all those issues that we needed to. Once those funds start kicking in in 2017, 2018. Including and that included, you know, monies towards reestablishing not only a south division for the police department, but also hiring new police department personnel and also reinstituting Engine eight and Rescue 12. It's all there. Why is it important for like at this point to do that? I would just taken aback by it. And it wasn't so much that that I was taken aback by. It was how we were going to fund them, you know, at the expense of of a minimum wage, at the expense of of the municipal band. We promised that we were going to give eight weeks back to six weeks. That's going backwards. We were also going to take money away from homelessness response. We're going to cut back on the safe program, some library hours. I mean, I just couldn't couldn't fathom why we were making those kinds of cuts when we have a plan. And the plan is already set. It's ready to go. We adopt this budget and we let the rest of it kick in when we get into our 2017 2018 budget with major funds coming in in January. So and then the final part, I guess the one that got to me was at the end, you know, there's the committee chair. Took issue with some of those cuts, and I could see why. I mean, it was it didn't make sense to me and it probably didn't make sense to her. So I'm glad that she has her alternate amendment to the motion. I agree with it. It's it's a structural plan. It's not one based on one type funding. It's structurally sound. And that's what we need. We want a balanced budget. And I think that that's what the proposal will do. And more than that, more than that, it's a responsible budget. It's one that we can all live with and knowing that there are going to be other measures out there in the very near future. Council Vice Mayor Richardson brought up Measure M. They're going to be coming up in November, which provides an additional source of funding that will just give us a bonus. But of course, we don't know that. We won't know until the day after the election, November 7th anyway. So I mean, I'm I'm supportive of the the motion presented by Councilmember Mongeau, and I hope that my colleagues do as well.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Next up, we have council member Austin.
Speaker 12: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I'm going to do my best to try not to sound half baked in my my response. But I think I need to address a few points here this evening. I was appointed to serve on the Budget Oversight Committee. And while I do and I did give great due respect and accolades to our budget chair, who has done a remarkable job and put a lot of time into developing this budget. And she's talked to every one of our council colleagues, clearly. But it is a committee and a committee and city council members are free to disagree. And we disagreed on probably 1% of this entire less than 1% of the entire budget. Right. Most of the budget recommendations put forth by the Budget Committee chairperson were agreed upon or agreed upon by the committee. Right. And most of what is being proposed, I want to be very clear, will probably be here for the next 3 hours talking about this, but will be agreed upon by the city council. We're talking about $1.1 million. We're talking about two weeks from the municipal bill. I really want to keep this conversation dignified and respectful, understanding that, you know, I'm not going to respond to childish at hominins or petty attacks against my district. Measure a. There were promises made in Missouri and the ranchos both Rancho, also Cerritos, Rancho Los Alamitos were included in that promise. And so to to come in and say we want to make a friendly amendment. That's nothing friendly about that. That's hostile. That's a hostile act for my district and people who are working hard to make that rancho and both ranchos treasures in our community. A lot has been said about speculative ink revenue. Measure M and we will have a study session next week which will be pretty robust and we'll have a full breakdown on what measure M does. But what it does is add a half cent sales tax to the residents of Long Beach. And that's a conversation we need to have. Right. But it's speculative and risky to just speculate a budget based on what the voters may or may not do. Measure M I would say the same thing about that, but there's also still Measure R that provides funding for streets and infrastructure projects in our in our community that was passed by voters in 2008. So so, Mr. Modica, I know you're a subject matter expert on all measures. How much do we get annually for Measure R.
Speaker 6: For.
Speaker 12: Streets?
Speaker 6: Mr. Chair and Councilmember Austin, if memory serves, it's about 5.7, $5.8 million from Measure R.
Speaker 12: And that is also included in our R, C, IP and streets budgets. Correct.
Speaker 6: Corrected funds, primarily residential streets.
Speaker 12: All right. I wanted to make sure that we understand it. And is there a sense that they don't measure R.
Speaker 6: I believe it's a 30 year sunset at this point.
Speaker 12: It's 2039. You all right? Yes, sir. You know, measure it in. By the way, as we will learn, next week has no sunset. That's correct. And so and I want to be very clear. My motion to restore Rescue 12 is certainly benefits. I think the entire city, as the chief mentioned, that, you know, it take strain off of the system. In my district, I have two fire stations, both our have rescues, rescue nine and rescue 11. And so my motion was not to benefit my district and it wasn't about me. Right. It wasn't a selfish emotion. It was it was a motion to actually, I believe, help and lend a helping hand to our residents in North Long Beach and particularly the council member in that district. So I want to move off of the the the measure. Because if the councilmember in the ninth District doesn't want rescue 12 right now and he doesn't think it's important enough to do that, then I will get off of that that flight back to the municipal band. There was an existing motion by Councilmember Mongeau. She has generously put together a plan that would expand the municipal band concerts from six weeks to eight weeks. Right. What we heard in Budget Oversight Committee to address Councilmember Yolanda's point, it wasn't a cut. It was to keep it what it it where the where it is. Because the folks who are operating the municipal band concerts the and I would invite them to come up and speak on this if not out of order. They recommended six weeks. They wanted six weeks. They don't think it's functional or or doable to do that. And that's what I heard from them. And so that was in my motion, original motion to restore it back to six weeks. And I can tell you that the residents who I know and as well as you, Mr. Councilmember Urunga, are very happy with six weeks of municipal ban. And if we break it up as being proposed in the two four from okay, we're going to skip a week and then come back a week. That just messes up the the the I would just call homeostasis of of a neighborhood. People get used to going to municipal band on Wednesday nights or Tuesday nights or Thursday nights. It's part of a tradition. And sort of to make it make it inconsistent I think would be a disservice to our residents. And so those are my comments. Like I said, I think we agree on most of this budget. I hope we can can get there again without the pettiness about without trying to throw digs at one another and do the right thing for the residents of the city of Long Beach, this city.
Speaker 1: So is that a friendly?
Speaker 12: The friendly would be, too. Yes, my friendly would be. Thank you, Chairman. Go would be to to keep the municipal ban schedule as as proposed in the mayor's budget.
Speaker 1: So I want to talk a little bit about that. I've worked closely with the Parks and Rec Department and one of the members of the Friends of Municipal Band. I'd asked for the cell phone number or contact information to get a hold of Mr. Curtis, but was unable to get a hold of him. And so I wasn't able to talk through all of the things that the community had talked to me about. So a couple of key points. I appreciate the employees of the municipal band. I love the municipal band. I've probably been to the most municipal band concerts of anyone here on on the on the dais. And Mr. Curtis is nodding that that's true and not always do I go up on stage, but sometimes I do. And I want the community to know that both the mayor and I care a lot about the municipal band. The community. Has shown us by the lack of attendance on Tuesdays that that is not a night that is convenient for them. Two council members have not been able to attend these municipal band activities and pull together the support on Tuesdays because they're here at council. Collections on Tuesdays are extremely low. And so in those things, when I hear that a colleague of mine would love to have a Friday night concert, I think that there's extreme value in that. I know what Friday night concerts in the park mean to my neighbors. We have the largest turnout of all the municipal band concerts in the city. And so when I looked at the schedule proposed by Parks and Rec and Marine, it wasn't as similar to the proposals that I had heard from neighbors that I'd communicated, because there were a couple of things different. One was that there would be eight separate shows, and I don't think that that was the intent. I think that in discussions with Councilmember Richardson and Councilmember Urunga, it would be neat if a show had a jazz theme, a show had a Latin theme, but within that, there would still only be five shows. Week one would be show one, week two would be show two, week three would still be show two, and it would rotate to a different set of parks. And then the Symbion symbiotic myth that Mr. Austin, the Blues Council member, also said, okay, well the symbiotic ness that Councilmember Austin referred to would be backfilled in the way that Councilmember Price and I backfill the end of the summer right now with local bands that are well known the Emperors, the Elm Street Band, Knight Rider, those groups. So there would still be eight consecutive weeks of concerts in Eldorado Park because I would put up my one time funds to support that and ensure that there was no decline. I would even go as far as to say that we would collect during those weeks and still donate all the money to the municipal band for weeks. They're not even playing, so they theoretically have collection two locations on the same night. And from what I understand, Eldorado Park has the most generous bucket collections within that. I talk about how I really care about the employees, and we as public servants are all here. For the neighbors, it's mostly about the neighbors. There are no additional general funds going. The original mayor's proposal was general funds of 60,000. My proposal is 90,000, but it's from special advertising and promotional fees. And the reason I feel that that is appropriate is because I believe that Sapp funds are appropriately used for the minivan because it is such a special citywide opportunity for people to engage, and it does fit the definition of special advertising and promotions. So just as I am going to listen to all my friend live, I will hold that friendly as well. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Councilmember Supernova.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I think I'd like to piggyback onto one of the friendlies, but I don't know which one, so bear with me here. What I'd like to talk about, you know, let's just just take the premise that Councilmember Austin has. And if we want to look forward to other revenue sources for restoring rescue 12, you want to look at a plan for, you know, a couple of months from now. I'd like to add engine 17 to that. And I've talked about this before, so please bear with me. We had back to back garage fires last night and a week ago Monday, and those were total losses of garages in very densely populated neighborhoods where the fire came in and confined it to one structure. So last night we had a garage fire in the in the heart of Los Altos. And the apparatus showing up would be engine five from the fifth District. That's in the Eldorado Park area. Engine 14 from the third district by the Colorado Lagoon. Engine 19 from the fifth District out on Clark, engine 22 from the third district. That's on Atherton and Palo Verde. Rescue eight from the third district. That's in Belmont. Sure. Arson one and arson six. So my question for Chief Terry is what was left on the east side of Long Beach? I think Engine four would have been did not respond to that. But basically, my point is it takes a lot of resources to respond to a structure fire. Okay. He's nodding for you. Okay, great. So I think that's just anecdotal, but it's an example of the need for a fire engine in my district. I have the only district without a fire engine. I'd like to thank Districts three and five for sending all that equipment out last night. And I would just like it included in the conversation when we're looking at restoring rescue 12. On another point, completely separate, but we are looking for alternative revenue sources. Thank you, Margaret, for speaking on the libraries. What I'd like to add to that conversation is that I don't think it's actually been decided, but we're looking to add Sandy hours to the libraries. I'm fortunate enough to have two libraries in my district, Los Altos and brew it, and neither one is is kind of in that conversation for adding sun hours. So I'd like to look at a revenue source and that is finds that our access to JetBlue airlines and it's a substantial number. Many of you may not know that those fine dollars go to the libraries. And for the past year, that is 12 months, the total is over half a million dollars. That's $538,200. So I would like the folks at the library just to consider those revenues for adding sun hours to Los Altos. And I say Los Altos because there's no other library in the city that is more impacted by the airport. These not only are they right in line with the approach, but they're at a point where the planes are just a few hundred feet above them. And so I think it's only fitting that they might be considered for sandy hours using these phones. Um, I think that's it. And to chair mongo, I'm not sure how that works out in a friendly I'd like to as I said, I'd like to piggyback on one of the others.
Speaker 1: Thank you.
Speaker 5: Yes. Thank you. So I'd like to just thank my colleagues for this great discussion. I think we have a lot of priorities, many of us. And I think we certainly have to look at these priorities holistically and what makes sense for us all. And for me, I would say, you know, stuff is an important issue. It's not just a.
Speaker 1: Prudent you know, we're talking about a prudent.
Speaker 5: Use of money, not money down the toilet. And I think we heard that earlier today, and I was very shocked when I heard that. And I would think that, you know, thousands of people missing out on their their livelihoods and making a means and a better life for themselves is very important. So I'll leave it at that. I hope that we can stick with keeping with that funding that we had allocated as of last week and sticking with that plan. Another big important thing, I think for my district, there are certainly parks and libraries that are very important perks that don't even have programing.
Speaker 4: At this point. So we don't even get anything. I mean, there's you know, I've spoken with our director.
Speaker 5: Marie, about this, and there's ways that we, you know, proactively go out and look for or when contractors proactively go out and look for park places. And, you know, a lot of the western side of the city, you know, sometimes there's not enough funding for parks. So I'd like us to look at five parks.
Speaker 4: These parks are as follows Craftsman Village.
Speaker 5: Which is between the first and second District. Peace Park between the first and sixth District. Drake Park. Chavez in Seaside.
Speaker 4: Park.
Speaker 5: All in the first District. I think those are very heavily used parks. Be safe.
Speaker 4: It are at a couple of those parks. But I think we.
Speaker 5: Have an amazing park staff that I know can come up with something if we just had the funding to be able to provide additional resources. And it also helps with public safety as well. I think it's very important that we activate these parks for kids at times, that they're out of school at times, that they are not in school in the summer and that they have something to do. And those are areas I feel that would be most impacted, impacted in a very positive way. And I believe the funding.
Speaker 1: The.
Speaker 5: The I'm sorry, the.
Speaker 4: The cost for each was.
Speaker 5: 26,000, I believe. For Saturday and Sunday too. To be able to.
Speaker 4: To fund them for 4 hours.
Speaker 5: So that's where I'm basing this off of. And then secondly, the main library I know that is in the second.
Speaker 4: District, but I've often spoken with.
Speaker 5: My colleague, Councilmember Pearce, about this. And we.
Speaker 4: Also.
Speaker 5: Have many residents who have asked about the main library and how very important it may be to extend hours. I know it's a very big library and I know adding Monday may be very costly.
Speaker 4: However, it would be great to.
Speaker 5: See additional hours at the main library, and I believe.
Speaker 4: That that is I don't know how many hours, but I've.
Speaker 5: Been I think we've been quoted about.
Speaker 4: $26,000 as well.
Speaker 5: To extend some hours. So I'd like to have us look in that direction. Also, I think it would.
Speaker 4: Be very fruitful for our.
Speaker 5: Residents to have additional hours to do homework.
Speaker 4: Tutoring, whatever we might need. So I think that gives us a total.
Speaker 1: Of about $156,000.
Speaker 5: Not asking for too much, but I think that these programs could certainly be used very positively in our districts, and I'm very excited to see homelessness move forward.
Speaker 4: I also.
Speaker 5: Think the municipal band being able to have more opportunities for growth and certainly Rescue 12 as well, I certainly believe in that and extending more public.
Speaker 1: Safety.
Speaker 4: Opportunities.
Speaker 5: So thank you very much.
Speaker 7: Next up is Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Mayor Garcia, and thank the council for so many thoughtful responses. Just, you know, following tracking this, you know, I, I don't have a $100 million pool in North Long Beach. I don't have a historic rancho. I don't have a municipal band. District nine does not have two rescues. Well, we do have is a 93 year old community center, a Highland Park. We have a brand new fire station with absolutely no rescue in it. And frankly, we have a plan for both because North Long Beach residents deserve both. And it's unfair it's an unfair proposition to make residents of North Long Beach or Central or West choose whether they should have a community center that doesn't have asbestos or a paramedic rescue unit. That's an unfair proposition. And when you make the council have a hard choice between a rancho and a paramedic, you see where values truly are. So there's no need to imply that someone doesn't care about their district or want to restore services in their district. The truth is, you know, we fought this fight for a long time when, you know, when the city council tried and rolled the dice on R&D and that pot, that pilot was eliminated. It was the rescue in North Long Beach that that suffered. And that was eliminated when the council made that choice. So what I'm saying is I don't want to roll the dice with our residents. I frankly think this is a bad it's a bad plan, and I'm proposing a better plan. And if North Lawn Beach has to, you know, look at these revenue sources and look at all of it to restore something structurally, that's great. Now, in terms of the funding for the for the ranchos. So number one in this budget has a restoration of engine eight in Belmont Shore, which is, you know, great helps the system . It has restoration of the downtown downtown division, which I'm completely supportive of. And, you know, and no one said anything about, hey, your district is winning or your area town is is winning. And I put forth you know, I had a conversation with Councilmember Pryce today, and she said, What do you think about. Well, I said, I'd love to have your support on my plan. I think, you know, I've been working for a long time, you know, what do you think about this? I'll think about it. I'll take it under advisement. And today, a completely different plan caught me blindsided on something I've worked on for six years. So, frankly, Northland Beach deserves a better plan. I don't have to be, you know, be petty about a rancho or not. My motion stays the same, but I'm going to withdraw the portion about the ranchos simply because, you know, it was interesting to see how people react when they have to make the choice that we make in North Long Beach every day. Thanks.
Speaker 1: You mean the friendly stays the same, right? You're not.
Speaker 0: The. Yeah, the friendly is going to stay the same. I'm going to withdraw the element about I mean, we're going to we still want to look at measure 8ammam first responder fee and Measure A, but I'm not going to specifically call out those ranchos. I think the point has been made here, but those are the sources we should look at. And just to be clear, we're not saying that those measures are going to pass. But we shouldn't necessarily be ready and have a plan. If on November 8th, if the voters decide to implement those, the residents know exactly what they get because the plan is put forth and has been transparent. If it fails, then we know we're left up to measure a and first responder fee one way or the other. We're in a position to talk about and discuss restorations on January 1st first, which is essentially three months from now with a better picture. So it's just more responsible to do things that way. Thanks.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Next up, we have Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 4: Thank you. So I want to state for the record that my comments in regards to the poor have been something long going and trying to decide how we prioritize equity in our city. That this is a conversation that I've had for several years and that I see the value of the pool. My daughter swims at the pool every week. It is a great asset to our community, but when we're talking about public safety, I have to put that into context. And so, you know, it's my obligation to prioritize funds for safety. I understand it's a lot of money. Right now, we have $58.8 million already allocated to the pool that can be used to help fundraise. And I would like to reach some beach safety priorities currently. So I would like to ask Mr. Modica, if you could share with us a list of shovel ready projects that would help improve public safety along our beaches right now.
Speaker 6: Well. So to just give us a sense of some of the projects that are that we are looking to have additional funding. There's a big list of projects all the way up and down the beach in you know, from we have a very large beach. We do have some needs in our marinas for sewage removal systems that it would be one of them. We also have beach maintenance needs up and down the beach in terms of our path. We have parking lots that need to be resurfaced and also could be brighter at 72nd place. And at Granada we have if I try to think of some others. We have other like deferred maintenance at the convention center in terms of lighting and safety, lighting and safety systems. There are a number of different projects up and down in the Tidelands that could use funding. And, you know, so hopefully that's somewhat of an illustrative list. If if the council really is interested in that, we could look at a more prioritized list of going back to our project needs. We wouldn't be prepared to do that today, but we could do that down the road.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Miss America. I went through the capital improvement list that you have there that include things like Marine patrol equipment, fire department, beach lighting, safety improvements and fire department, tidelands infrastructure, which are some things that I would like to see addressed quickly and and hopefully get us a path to do that. With the 1.7 or 2 million, I know there's a couple of numbers that are out there, as you know, and a quick turn around. And so I just wanted to make those last statements and definitely, you know, we look at our park programs and making sure that we don't have parks that are without park programing and fully supporting the extended library hours here at the main library. And I would also like to say that in addition to seeing those library hours extended, making sure that we have a quick turnaround on when our new main library is opened, that that library has full time hours, including Mondays and Sundays. And so that's not something that's urgent today, but want to make sure that we're working toward structurally supporting that. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Next up, we have Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 5: Thank you. I'm not sure if there's still a friendly out there regarding taking money away from the fool. But if there is, what I would request is that we would that certainly we can always take money away from the pool. So anytime you're mad at Councilwoman Price, you can always try to take money away from the pool. We don't have to do it tonight. The only thing I would ask is the aquatics community. I'm already getting emails from people who are watching this at home, so the aquatics community has a right to be here to be heard on that. So if you if you want to take money away from the pool, great. Let's go ahead and do that another time and not tonight so that they have an opportunity to be heard, because they've been working on this for a long time, too. I do want to publicly apologize to Councilwoman Gonzalez regarding my comment earlier at BMC regarding us flushing our money down the toilet, that that was a wrong comment. You know, I'm not human. I'm I mean, I am human. I'm not perfect. I'm only human. And there's been a few times when all of us have said things we regret. And certainly I'm there's I'm no exception. I am I am flawed in all the right ways and all the wrong ways. And if there's some and I have to say, I was very disappointed in how we voted last week, because I know what all these needs are. And I had come to the meeting last week and had articulated everything that I put on those two PowerPoint slides with one of my colleagues. And I was very, very upset and I just felt like was just very angry about how that vote went down. And so I apologize. That was absolutely the wrong use of the word. But I do believe it was a waste of taxpayer dollars simply because we don't even know how we're going to use the money and if we can use the money. And so, I mean, no, just and I've said repeatedly, of course, sometimes people forget that I said it last week and I said it earlier tonight. You know, we have this we have this thing in law under the evidence code. It's called evidence code 356 that says when you mention one part of a conversation, the other side has the right to come in and put it into context and talk about the totality. And I did refer to it as money going in the toilet, but I also, in the same breath said I am totally in favor of funding it at some level, just not at that $700,000 level. And and I hate when people repeat something that you said and don't repeat all of it because it takes it out of context. So I'm invoking evidence code 356 and saying I said more than just that. And what I said was I didn't think it was a bad idea. I just don't think we need to allocate 700,000 to it. So with that. You know, and the other thing, Councilman Richardson, you know, I. Sometimes I have conversations with colleagues and I feel like maybe we had completely different conversations. Oh, is it here? Yeah, he's here. I did talk to Councilman Richardson today, and I told him I had an idea for rescue. Honestly, if this isn't important to Councilman Richardson, I don't even know why I'm fighting this fight. I really thought this was important to him. And as a way of trying to reach out and extend that olive branch, I called him and I said, I'm willing to defer $150,000 of projects out of my budget, if you will. If you think that's a good idea, what do you think about that? Do you think that's something that we can do to to, you know, pull the money together? I shared the same thing with Council on Mango. I was just trying to find a way. And what I was trying to say to him is I'm willing to try to come up with the money, and I'm even willing to defer one of my own projects and take a hit for this for you. And he said, Well, I'm thinking about Measure M, but, you know, quite frankly, you can't accuse people of having half baked ideas when we're relying on a measure that hasn't even gone to the ballot yet. So I was just trying to bring that idea to fruition for him. So it's not that I didn't agree with his plan. I think if that county measure passes, yes, of course, that's an extra source of revenue for us that we can think about. But I was just trying to advance things because I thought it was important to him and I was I was trying to extend the olive branch and that was probably a mistake on my part because it didn't get accepted in the spirit that it was sent. Having said that, what I would like to do is from the $700,000 I'd like to make a friendly from the $700,000 that we approved last week, I would like to allocate $156,000 to the projects that Councilwoman Gonzalez wants, including the five parks and the extended hours at the main library. I'm completely supportive of the main library, extended hours. I would actually love to bring back the main library on a Sunday. I spoke with Glenda Williams today and Main provides a really unique opportunity for the city. The reason it's never considered as part of the Sunday library hours is because it's so large that the amount of money to staff it on a Sunday is really difficult to do. But they have a studio there with 3D printers that we don't have anywhere else. They have video editing software that we don't have in any other library. They have a Long Beach history collection, which is phenomenal. They have the Miller Room and Art Resource Center, which we don't have anywhere else. We have 70 public computers there, which we don't have. That's a lot of computers. We have a lot of wi fi, more access to wi fi. And we have an auditorium that houses 286 people there that we don't have anywhere else so I'm all for extending Sunday are the hours that main. I'd also like to take $65,000 from that $700,000 and allocate that to a. Fifth Sun Library. And that would be Los Altos to accommodate Councilman supervisor's request. I think he makes a very valid point. So for, you know. Right around that $200,000 range, we can accommodate Councilwoman Gonzalez's requests. The main library extended hours and open up another Sunday library hours. I would feel like that would be a really great accomplishment for us if we're able to do that tonight. And we'd still have 400,000, more than $400,000 for wage enforcement. And if we're able to do more, if we're able to do more with the state, then we can look at our budget and add to it next year . But this is our first year. We don't even know how we can spend that money yet. So why don't we start with 475 or whatever the case may be and we can always add to it next year if we find that there's a place for the city to actually enforce that money. I'm not against it. I just don't think 700,000 is reasonable. And then finally. I think that they're the I have a I, I appreciate the creativity that Councilwoman Mongo has put into the municipal band scheduling, but it was very difficult for even me to follow. So I just want to you know, I think we should stick with the six weeks and the and allow them to keep the schedule they've been doing. But again, I know they're here. They've been here through both meetings. I'd love to hear them talk about it if they if they would like to.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Next up is Councilman Andrews.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Mayor. Mm hmm. Just getting to that final hour. I just thought I would just sit here, just listen to all of this, because, again, this senior spokesman of the group, I just what I'll only think about. Are we really serious? Can't we just all get along? And it doesn't seem like that because we're talking about friendly motions. Friendly. Is it really friendly? You are not asking for very much because.
Speaker 9: I know my district is really there with me 100%.
Speaker 0: And the things that I.
Speaker 9: Hear in the budget and I want to commend, you know, Mrs. Mongeau and.
Speaker 0: Mrs. Price and also Mr. Austin. You guys have worked very hard, extremely hard with this budget situation. And we sit here and we're promising Young off a lot the money. We assume it is there. But I'm.
Speaker 9: Just sometimes I just wonder, do all of this that this bickering that we're going back and forth and see and I wish, you know, you're saying this is why is all of.
Speaker 0: That necessary? Because I think.
Speaker 9: At the end we will have a balanced budget and a lot of you may be happy, loud you.
Speaker 0: Want. But in the.
Speaker 9: End, we will have the I've been here for over ten years.
Speaker 0: We always balance the budget. But through this I don't think it's been this strenuous, you know, among the diocese, the way we've been going at it and the time of were taken.
Speaker 9: It's not all necessary. We'll get through this, you guys, so you can go home, go to sleep, do what you have to do this. I tell you, the budget.
Speaker 0: They will take care of this. I want to thank Mr. Super now. Well, then, you know, because I don't know what, if any, is the way the way they're talking. So possibly I'm glad we're going to be able to get mine, you know, especially especially for my part, you know, because the fact that that's what I need mostly in my district, you know, it's more time in the parks because that's what I use with my kids. I always told you I tired kid is a good kid. We're going to get money for that. You now is here really the my biggest thing it was for station 12 but I have a feeling that that's going to come to fruition also and I'm hoping that it will because the fact we had a terrible accident, you know, in my district and it had it I one of the you know, the other stations that it really caused maybe and I'm not saying that that was the biggest part of it. But still, we need all of our stations, you know, open. I just feel like we have to find money. But one of our basic things, you guys were doing all of this talking, but I hope we stay really, really compassionate about.
Speaker 9: That of homeless. You know, this is not a district problem. This is a national problem. And you guys take that under consideration. Open up your heart and soul to.
Speaker 0: Our homeless people out there. We're really trying to find a place to lay their heads in, food to eat.
Speaker 9: Thank you again. Yeah.
Speaker 7: Thank you, councilman. Next up is Councilmember Orengo.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mayor and councilman councilmember. The Andrews spoken like a true statesman in regards to the level of discussion we're having here. But, you know, I have to say that if you say it only when I heard just a little while ago explanations of discussions that took place between two individuals and, you know, some some backtracking on it, that that gives it more credibility and should than it deserves. It was said, move on. Let's continue on. A lot of this a lot of the the discussion that we have right now is based on what happened at the EOC. And there were some things that were presented at the B or C that were surprising to a lot of people to me. And I said that earlier and, you know, while I was maybe under my breath saying some unsavory comments, I didn't make them public. You know, I kept on to myself and I have to and you know, I've been an elected official now 16 years. I was first elected in 2000. In 2000. I've gone through many budgets. This is my second one in city council. But I've been through many budgets, including at the national level. And there's always, always a disagreement with where money should go and everybody always has a priority where to spend it. I have one too. I didn't mention it earlier because I thought, well, I didn't think we were in another discussion at that point. Now I'm at a discussion where I want to bring up an issue that's important to me, too. But what I'm trying to say here is that we are going to disagree and we always are going to have that that that differences in opinion. But we and we should and let's maintain that the collegiality of who and what we are. We are nine different individuals representing nine different. Council districts. But we are one city. And we have to keep that in mind always, because no matter what happens in District nine, in District one, District eight and District seven, six, whatever it all, it affects all of us. And I don't think that Councilmember Richardson, you know, Ed, besides what might be said and it was said that that he might not care about his. Unit 12 paramedic unit. Unit 12 being activated. He does? Of course he does. We all do. But, you know, saying that, you know, maybe we should withdraw from this fight. It's not a fight. It's a discussion. It's a it's a perhaps. And in fact, we all agree on it. We just don't agree on how we get there. Because we all do care about public safety. We all do care about lowering response times and the increased response time said having a lack of units available at any given time in any given day affects all of us because we know how important it is, especially when we're talking about protecting life and property. So having said all that, I have one one an item that I would like to see increased or at least worked on, is that my office has been working with the Arts Council and most recently my, my, my office sponsored a open conversations forum with the Arts Council and the Long Beach Unified School District, and their efforts to improve arts education in the schools and the Arts Council has about $50,000 is about $50,000 short of reaching a goal to improve opportunities for poor people in the arts to do outreach into the school. So there's there's an effort to get some a challenge grant out there for the Arts Council and I would strongly support that. We, we, the City Council support that. And, and I would like to also add a friendly that we moved to provide $50,000, $50,000 challenge grant to the Arts Council and to make sure that in FY17 that we we start looking at getting permanently and institutionalizing funding. For the Arts Council Arts. The Arts bring brings a lot of not only tourism to Long Beach, but it enhances our city as a whole. Mural projects getting getting the schools to participate in more arts functions. So I think we we need to look at the arts as well and financing them and providing them with a challenge. Grant would add that to that. So if, if it were to be amenable to the maker of the motion, I would appreciate an additional funding for the Arts Council through a challenge. Grant.
Speaker 1: Member Your anger. I'm sorry. What Council? Councilmember Your anger when you say challenge? Grant It would be that they would need to fund new fundraising of an equal amount to draw down the grant.
Speaker 2: Exactly.
Speaker 1: Okay. So it wouldn't be traditional. It would be not the traditional fundraising, but new fundraising. That would be. Gosh, great. I, I will ask. There's no Mr. Eriksen. Oh, there she is. I've always loved Eriksen. Miss Erickson, I know this is one of the things we've been talking about for several weeks, and we were trying to fund and I know one of the questions was whether or not the SEPP funds would qualify. And in all the hectic ness today of Rescue 12, I actually didn't ask you that. At B or C, would you be able to let the committee know that so that I could move forward with your answer?
Speaker 4: Chair Councilwoman. Mongo. So the. A special advertising promotion funds could be used for the Arts Council challenge grant.
Speaker 1: Wonderful. And that would have been a part of my earlier motion had I gotten to discuss it at BRC. So absolutely that I know I usually wait to accept all the friendlies, but in this case, this was something that I was very passionate about from the beginning. I know that many of us were. So as long as they are fundraising new money and it does not necessarily need to be for any services, I know we talked about what their original thoughts were and there was some duplication. We want to make sure there's no duplication and then they would be able to draw it down through a challenge. Grant So I think that would be wonderful. Thank you for bringing that back up.
Speaker 7: Thank you. And then I think also what I was just talking to Councilwoman Mungo. Once we get through all the friendlies, Mr. City Attorney, we're just going need to confer with you for a minute to make sure we have them all down. And we understand they're very clear so we could do these appropriately. Councilmember Austin.
Speaker 12: Thank you. And I'll do my best to be very, very brief. This is my fifth budget and I can tell you the very, very first budget that I came here, a lot of very tough decisions were made. We were looking at cutting just about everything. We were about 17 million, 17 and a half million dollars in the hole. And so the challenge was just before this council, I think, are the problems that we have are good problems because we're trying to figure out how to spend money and deliver services for our residents. I wanted it to go back to the municipal band issue because I think our black chair, Councilmember Mungo, eloquently laid out her intentions on what it meant to go from 6 to 8 weeks. I just want to just clarify, make to make sure that are we actually getting more concerts in eight weeks for the same amount of counts, concerts in eight weeks? Can anybody from staff answer that?
Speaker 6: So, Mr. Mayor, a members of the council essentially and the what we were asked to do is come back with a memo to say, could we reorganize the current six week session into eight weeks and eliminate Tuesdays, which is a low attendance day? And so we send a memo today. So the eight week season would essentially be the same amount of concerts, I believe it's 24 as in the six week season.
Speaker 12: So it's the same amount of concerts when you issued the memo and came up with that. Were you able to confer in any way with those who were in operations with the municipal band?
Speaker 6: Yes, we did spend the last week taking a look at what those costs would be and also working with the municipal band to see, you know, because they there are costs on the city side for providing rentals and equipment. And also there's the operational impact of the band. So it is possible and there are some complications and some challenges in doing that. And we've outlined the outline those in the memo, and it's a cost of about $30,000 to do the additional equipment rentals and to have extended time for the band to be able to play for eight weeks.
Speaker 12: So effective from Councilmember Yar'adua's friendly amendment were to be accepted and we were to do $50,000 and challenge grants using the same money that we would use to fund a couple of more weeks of municipal band at the same level of concerts. We could actually do that. So it looks like we're moving in the right direction. Well, Mr. Mayor, I would love to have the prerogative to just ask the minister, the representative from the municipal band, to come and answer a couple of questions.
Speaker 7: Let's let's get through those that are cued up and then we can go ahead and go there. I think I think I want to.
Speaker 12: This is germane to the topic that I'm dealing with right now.
Speaker 7: Okay. Well, we did public comment. I'm going to hopefully clear some stuff up here, but the miss will be on next, so. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Austin, are you older? Okay. So I want to. I want to touch. There's a lot obviously being discussed right now, and I might have some comments on some of the other proposals that are out there. But I want to just focus on two right now that are important and then we'll hear where other colleagues are on some of the other stuff. So I want to talk a little bit about Rescue 12, and I also want to talk about the municipal band here in just a minute as well. The first thing I just want to say, obviously been hearing a lot and including the PSC meeting and I just want to make sure that I'm clear as well that there's there's no one on this council that has advocated more for the restoration of that rescue than Vice Mayor Rex Richardson. In fact, I think on a weekly basis, he comes into my office and asked me about the plan to restore Rescue 12. So I want to thank him for his advocacy for that. And I want to thank him for being the biggest cheerleader and supporter of getting that rescue back in service that there is because of that advocacy. I know that Vice Mayor Vice Mayor Richardson has been working directly with the chief, has been working directly with the rank and file membership, has been working with City Manager West on looking at ways in the next few months of putting a plan together to restore Rescue 12 in a way that is long term, that doesn't take away from the infrastructure projects that are in the Missouri plan, but that is something that could provide consistent service and that we're not worried about whether or not it's going to be eliminated in the near future. In fact, I know that the vice mayor and I are committed to ensuring, just like a year or two ago when I said we would get Engine eight restored and put back in the budget. I'm I'm certain that we are going to work as hard on the next priority, which is getting a rescue 12 restored. And in fact, we are a few months away, I believe, from putting putting together a plan that is going to work on Rescue 12. And so I just want to thank Vice Mayor Richardson for his consistent advocacy and and being its rescued 12th strongest supporter. And I'm confident that we're going to get that and that rescue restored into fire service over the course of these next few months in a way that is long term, that can't be that can be supported . And where we don't dip into infrastructure, as I've always said, with infrastructure, it gets more expensive every year. So we don't fix the cost of something. Today is is will be more expensive next year. And so I appreciate the discussion around that. I also want to thank the the the men and women of the rank and file of the fire department because they've been a part of these discussions. I know as early as this morning, Vice Mayor, you've been meeting with the. Membership. And and they're on board with with this with this plan and moving forward. And so I want to I want to thank you for that. I also just want to just to mention and again, there might be other things I want to jump in on a little bit later. But I also want to just quickly mention the municipal band. So I think that and I know this that that councilmember Mongo is a huge supporter of the band because I've been to concerts with you. She wants nothing but to maximize the concerts. I think at this time. I'm hopeful that we can stick to the original schedule that we that was proposed initially, add the additional $60,000 to create permanently that six week. And then I think we're all open and I know that the band folks are open to having some conversations in the future about how we can make some some changes if there's interest from from the council. But I would like to just ask Councilman Mongo, and I think that that she she wants what's in the best interests of the band as well. If we could stick to the original schedule on the band that was presented and and go from there. So that's where I will leave that suggestion to the council, the councilwoman. At this time, it looks like there are there are not additional comments. So what I'd like to do is just take a 1 to 2 minute, not really a recess, but I just need a confer with the city attorney and and the chairwoman of the BFC to ensure that we have all the friendlies down exactly as they were said before we move on to actually discussing.
Speaker 10: This may or may be helpful if if myself and Lia could read them before we take.
Speaker 7: This break. That would be great.
Speaker 10: There were so many friendlies and that would be great. Okay. So as I understand, the motion on the floor is as written by the council person from the fifth District to move on 1,191,000 and general fund one time funding, including 600,000 and therefore 16 general funds available 70,000 in FY17, general fund, temporary surplus and 521,000 from a release of reserves for litigation. Liabilities are no longer needed for the original purposes. These funds are appropriated as follows 280,000 in Health and Human Services for Homeless Rapid Response. 150,000 in the Public Works Department for tree stump removal. 96,000 in Parks Rec and Marine Department for expansion of the Be Safe program to four additional locations to be determined by the Parks and Rec Department. $65,000 in library services for the expansion of Sunday library hours to a fourth location to be determined by Parks and Rec or by the library services. Sorry. 130,000 and Health and Human Services Department for Public Health Professional and the Office of Equity. 220,000 in Financial Management Department for local investigation related to wage enforcement and 250,000 for capital infrastructure, economic development or existing city programing to be divided by nine for the city council districts. Any exceptions must go to the city council. Motion for contingent appropriation of FAA 16 general funds surplus in an amount of 500,000, subject to funding availability for capital infrastructure, economic development or existing city programing to be divided by nine by the city council districts. Any exceptions to go to the City Council motion to use Proposition H beginning funds available to appropriate 250,000 each in the police department and fire department for homeless rapid response and in motion to use special advertising and promotion funds. Beginning funds available to appropriate $90,000 in the Parks and Rec and Marine for Municipal Band eight week alternative schedule. And emotion to use a FY17 savings entitlement to debt service to appropriate 500,000 in public works department for the Belmont Pool and Aquatic Center. Motion to make 80,000 of the 176,385 in the city. Managed proposed general fund strategic one time investment for be safe structural offset by a decrease in so in structural funding for the Language Access Program, which will instead be funded with one time in seven NY 17 and a motion to designate 500,000 of the 2.2 million for police overtime in the city manager's proposed general fund strategic one time investments to a Neighborhood Safe Streets Initiative to be directed at the discretion of the Chief of Police then. We had friendly amendments. First Friendly Amendment from CD nine was to report back in January on potential revenue based on the ballot measures for the purposes of adding back rescue 12. Then second a friendly by Council District two to reallocate $1.5 million from the Tidelands to Marine from the Tidelands Belmont Pool budget to Marine Safety. Three. Friendly amendment from CD8 to change the allocation for the municipal band to increase the funding by 60,000, not 90,000, and go from a eight week schedule to a six week schedule. Four friendly amendments from CDA four to review or approve reallocation of the fines from JetBlue and the airport two that go to the library to fund a Sunday programing at Los Alamitos. Also to look at a program or possibilities for funding. Fire Engine 17 for Long Beach Fire Department. Five. Friendly amendment from CD1 to allocate additional funds for park programing at five parks in the approximate amount of $160,000 and $26,000 for additional funding for hours at the main library. Friendly Amendment six from CD three to allocate $160,000 to fund CD one's friendly amendment for the park programing. And then the $65,000 to fund the additional hours that Los Altos library said for a friendly amendment. That money, as I understand it, would come from the 220,000 added for wage enforcement, leaving 475,000 the original wage enforcement funding. And then the seventh Friendly Amendment was by CD seven to add $50,000 challenge grant to be funded from the SRP, a special advertising and promotion fund. And then I believe that's all of the friendly members.
Speaker 7: It is a complex list. However, what I'm going to do I'm going to take just a minute. Mr. City Attorney, can you come over here with that list? And we're going to make sure that we're have the same thing here with the chair and we're not going to recess. But this is this might take us just a minute or two. Okay. Thank you. Okay. We're going to I think we have all the the motions. I'm going to ask. Mr. Eriksen, if you can just stay up here in case we get one of these. Incorrect. Okay. And then we're going to go and go through all the motions. Each. Each we have. We have the motion on the floor that we have. We're going to go to the friendlies. And then Councilman Mongo has, I think, an additional two at the end. Okay. Okay. Great. So I'm gonna turn this back off. I can have a council back. Okay. Councilman. Mango, you have the floor.
Speaker 1: Thank you. I have a list of friendlies that I'll be accepting. I will accept. So I'll read all the friendlies and then at the end I'll say which ones and accept it. And how's that? Item one is Council Member Richardson's plan of coming back in January with a review of the potential sources we discussed related to a plan to restore Rescue 12.
Speaker 0: It was to come up with a plan now, correct?
Speaker 1: To restore it by.
Speaker 0: Get restored in jail.
Speaker 1: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Yeah.
Speaker 1: You'd think I'd heard that from you so many times. I would have known it by heart by now. Item number two is the $1.5 million of shovel ready projects from Tidelands. Item three was a six week muni band. Item four is. $130,000 for. Parks programing in downtown and 24,000 for a additional evening hour on Thursdays at the main library and. It doesn't have a source. Am I able to add a source right now? Because I don't make okay. I'm just reading them. Next is the reallocation of wage enforcement funding to fund item four. Item six was a challenge grant for the arts out of South funds, but I'm sorry I added that, so I can't say that yet. A challenge grant for arts and then seven was the mayor's recommendation for the muni band at. Six. At 24 concerts and that they would work with parks and rec to. Figure out how to accommodate the community and it would likely be six weeks. Oh. In item five with wage theft, there was also 65 allocated for. Los Altos. Definitely not Los Alamitos. Los Altos Library. We are definitely not funding this library outside our city. Yes. Okay. So now for a point of order, what would you like me to do next?
Speaker 10: At some point, we're going to have to decide whether to accept the French.
Speaker 1: I'm going to do it right now.
Speaker 10: Okay.
Speaker 1: So I am going to accept Councilmember Richardson's friendly on Rescue 12. It's been a priority for a long time. We've been working on options for a long time. I'm really proud of him that he got this way. And I appreciate the work that he did. Item number four. I'm accepting the next item number four, which is 100. And stand by. I don't know, before which was 130,000 to park programing and 24,000 to. Thursday our I will accept it with a slight change that I would like to add an additional hundred and 34 central parks parks in the central part of the city . And I need to come up with a source, so I'm going to give you some revenue because I don't approve things that don't have a revenue source. I'm very consistent. If I can read this. Stand by. I'm going to fund that through contingent appropriations. And the reason I'm going to do that is because it's far enough away in the summer that we'll know by then if we have it, and I'm confident that we will. But we'll be sure by then. And if we don't have it at that time, I'd like it to come back to council to find another source. But I'm confident we will that. Okay, great. Next all except friendly number six, which is the arts. Challenge grant through set funds. And I'd like to make an additional amendment to my own motion. Related to the Los Altos. Los Altos. Library to add sun hours. But to study what's allowed for Sunday hours, as we know that there's some trickiness to those fines that Councilmember Superman mentioned. And so if the libraries could send back a two from four on that and let us know what's possible and try to work on making that a possibility, that would be great. Can I get a quick pause before we do anything else to confer with Miss Erickson to make sure that make any other mistakes.
Speaker 10: Or if we need decisions on the other friendlies that you have not discussed.
Speaker 1: I. Well, I don't plan to accept them, but I might make one more change to my own motion. Standby.
Speaker 7: Okay. I'm going to have two other suggestions to that. To the councilwoman.
Speaker 1: Were you ask if we got 134 Central Park program? I mean, they said that. Okay. Thanks.
Speaker 7: Well, I want to clear that up real quick before we move forward. So one thing is, is I just.
Speaker 10: 130 for the 134,000.
Speaker 7: Let me be clear, it's 130 for downtown park programs and an additional 134 Central Long Beach Park programs. Okay. So it's two separate 134 to the park programs. Just to be very clear.
Speaker 10: Plus the 24.
Speaker 7: Plus the addition of the extension for the library. Okay. I would also like to ask Councilwoman Mungo, I understand what's the conversation around around the pool? I think it's important that we that we fund the pool. I think it's important that we have the money to move forward on the pool. But I understand Councilman Pierce's asks and how important she believes the priority to move, particularly the lighting on on the on the beach as a priority. Since the last time we did the title and priority discussion, I know that Councilman Pierce was not here. I know that was done under Vice Mayor Lowenthal with Councilwoman Pryce. I'd like to ask Councilman Mongo, if we keep the pool funds in place, if we can have a dis a staff report for Mr. Modica and work with Councilman Pierce on re looking at that list so that we can set her priorities and that one around 1.5 million that is clearly in the area that she'd like to see done for this lighting project so that that can get moved up as soon as possible and we can get those projects done and so that she can be a part of that process. Can we do that?
Speaker 6: Yes. And just for clarification, we understood her motion to be public safety type projects rather than lighting projects. If that's something that we can look at, kind of public safety type project.
Speaker 7: I may have misunderstood. I thought it was I thought lighting was part of it, but maybe it wasn't.
Speaker 4: So part of the public safety was lighting. So part of it it's include I would include that into public safety.
Speaker 7: Okay, great. So then the motion would be for funding stays the same, but we do a review and we'd like to work to move this 1.5 up as as close as possible on the posture to meet Councilman Pierce's answer.
Speaker 4: And I would I would ask that when that comes back, that we ensure that where the funding source is coming from, I wouldn't want to take dollars out of other capital improvement projects that are already shovel ready.
Speaker 7: Absolutely. So that will rule review. So you get a chance to be part of that discussion. So, Councilman Mongo, can we be okay with that?
Speaker 1: I'm okay with that one. Okay.
Speaker 7: Thank you.
Speaker 1: And so just to clarify, the contingent preparation for the library hours and the two park distributions is to 84 and then to speak to. My agreement with Councilman Price on programing and setting aside funds. I know that we are probably expecting a two from four back from the city on wage enforcement. So I think that the specifics of what that is for, it might not be necessary at this time and so that it doesn't need to be spent and that we could set that aside until the two from four comes back on what those programs are and what that looks like.
Speaker 6: So if I understand that we would you would ask us to not spend the wage enforcement money until we have a chance to give the council an overview of what those moneys would be spent for. Did I get that correct?
Speaker 1: That's typically what you would do. Let the council know what you do before you spend it.
Speaker 6: So but you're asking us rather than included in the budget and it's just for the city manager to spend. You want us to come back with a report about how it would be spent? For the council to consider.
Speaker 1: It's in the budget and you will inform us of how it would be spent. Not necessarily in the same original. I know there's a lot of confusion last week and I just want to make sure that we have time to have a plan.
Speaker 6: Certainly we can certainly outline what that plan.
Speaker 7: Would be, but the money is as as is presented in the budget. Understood. All right. Okay. So I think that covers all the friendlies. We have a motion on the floor. I'm going to go to Councilmember Super, who's cued up and then we're going to go to a vote. And just to clarify, the municipal band proposal is for six weeks. And the $60,000 additional. That's what that was the. And to discuss with the community. Correct.
Speaker 1: 24 shows to discuss with the community.
Speaker 7: What we're doing that we're doing, the six weeks.
Speaker 1: They're going to discuss that with the community.
Speaker 6: But I think we need clarification on the budget. Is it 60,000 for the current six weeks and working on what we would then look for the next season or is it 90,000 for the eight weeks and do it now?
Speaker 1: So. I hear strongly from the community that they want the municipal band. And I have serious fears that when we did not fund the amount last year and when there are several council districts that don't have concerts and that there are still concerts happening on Tuesdays that have low attendance, that that is not in the best interest of the community or the band. And so I have tried to communicate this. I have worked hard. And I would like to set aside the 90 and a affirmed 24 concerts and leave it to the Parks and Rec directors discretion to work with the band to make sure that while the band is a priority, we as a council, our number one priority is the community. And we need to work together to make sure we find something that works for everyone. And I think that that is what makes the most sense. If there's underutilization of those funds, maybe it could go to help the lack of the hole that was left in the prior year. But there is 90 available from state funds today that we can put over to that cause, if that makes sense.
Speaker 7: Let me go to concern for supernova first.
Speaker 0: Okay. I think this is a friendly on the library finds for chair mongo. Okay. On the library finds. In place of a two from four from Glenda Williams. I would recommend first of all, there are a couple of entities here. The Long Beach Public Library Foundation actually receives the funds. Those are then passed on to the libraries. What I would ask is that we get a two from four from the city attorney's office on what the parameters are of this consent decree and where the monies can be spent.
Speaker 10: So we can certainly do that.
Speaker 0: Okay. So. So if Councilmember Mongo is agreeable to that, we're going to have the two from four be from the city attorney's office. He's agreed to that on the consent decree violations.
Speaker 1: Absolutely.
Speaker 0: Okay. The second piece is and I'll say it one more time, I, I totally support studying funding for Rescue 12. I would just like to add Engine 17 on to that study. Station 17 is unique in that it's its area abuts six different fire stations. So when you don't have 17 some place centrally, potentially six different fire stations are covering that area. I think it's well worth studying. And if we're going to study Rescue 12, I think Rescue 17 should come next in line and should be a part of that study. Councilmember maybe wasn't I wasn't clear, but it was basically the chief's order. So look at the revenue sources go as far as you can go on restoration. So so I would you know, that's the intent. So call out 17 as well. Okay. Thank you. So so that's agreeable to Councilmember Richardson, so. Absolutely. I mean, it's not just fires fire, it's PD. There's been conversation about gaming. And although you just have to talk with the Chiefs, they've both established priorities. The idea is a plan to get us to more restoration, a structural plan. So that could be, you know, rescue. Well, the chief stated tonight what his order is. So that doesn't change. The path to 17 is through rescue 12. And then on PD, you just have to talk with the chief as he was. Priorities are okay. I'm aware of his priorities. I just wanted us to mention that in in our in our amendment here. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Councilman Price.
Speaker 5: Thank you. I want to say that I want to thank Chair Mungo and the entire council. I think we've had a really great spirited discussion tonight where we're all advocating for different priorities to the city. And I appreciate the collegiality and the respect and make a commitment that I will always try to to honor those principles. I will say that I'm a little bit confused in regards to are we funding the Sunday Los Altos library hours? And then we're also going to look at the additional revenue source or are we not funding the Sunday Los Altos library hours? Because I really would like to try to fund the Sunday library hours. I know, I know. But I would ask for that too.
Speaker 1: I just don't have any more sources of funding. I've been tapped dry, I think Leah told me on, like, our fourth meeting. Stop turning me upside down and shaking me so. Money falls out of my pockets now.
Speaker 5: I just want to clarify or.
Speaker 1: I wish I did. I mean, I want to fund Los Altos. I would not if I wanted to fund the main library. It's just so expensive and there's just so much need in our community for things that I, I, I don't have a place for that.
Speaker 4: Leah Yeah, a point of clarification. So currently the motions do not have funding for a Sunday library, but I would like to point out that we have indicated that the Library Department can't continue to sustain and over time model for additional branches. They're really they're really strained with the three libraries they currently have. And they did identify a fourth library was funded that they could manage that. So we will study the fines issue and will study, you know, funding Los Altos. But I just I wanted to caution that it might not be sustainable or feasible to do an overtime model. So the cost may may be different than the $65,000.
Speaker 5: Okay. I appreciate that. Thank you very much. Okay. With that, again, I want to thank everybody. I think it was a successful night, even though it was painful at times. But it was good. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Okay. And then the mayor and I have discussed some options for the Muni band. I am very, very positive about them raising this money. And we have another fundraising option that might help fill that gap. So what I'm open to doing is another year of week, six or six weeks with Tuesdays. But if we are not able to correct the issues related to Tuesdays and the lack of attendance and lack of funding, we are going to have to have a very serious conversation next year because. The community deserves the band. And. And the only way that's possible is if we meet the fundraising goals. And you have to know I love, love the Muni band and I love a lot of things in life that I sacrifice personally because I never want to be in debt and I never want to own anyone. And where we are today is where the muni band is 30,000 behind. And that hurts my heart. I know that I've talked to Laura about a fundraiser on the 22nd that I want to help with or I'm sorry, in November that I want help with. I want you guys to get the money. And I really feel that if you're collecting a lot of money on Thursdays and Fridays, we need to look at where that is and where that gets the support. I know Laura brought up an idea of moving Wednesday through Saturday. There's lots of options. I just want to come up with options that get us to a point where we're getting the collections that we need. Because what we don't need is to come back every year begging for money. And I say this to anyone who comes to me for one time, if you talk to the Arts Council, they'll hear the same thing that I've said to you and to everyone else. I want to help us get to a place where we're doing fundraisers that have high ROIC. I have the partnership motion that Mary is working on, and those are all options. But I'm going to go with the six weeks. And if you come up with a plan to move to six weeks, it's more feasible in terms of fundraising. That'd be great. And if not, please, please work with us on what those things are, because that's a budget share. I can't recommend a program that's in the red every year. I can't and I don't want to be in this position again next year. So let's more work more closely together. So, yes, Mayor, I'll accept your friendly.
Speaker 7: Okay, thank you. And I'm going to and I'm we're going to work together and and figure that last piece out. Thank you, Councilwoman. So from there, we have the motion on the floor. So, members, we have the budget in front of you. Members is going to cast their votes.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 7: Thank you. We have a couple more budget votes and they're going to take a recess before the rest of the council meeting. So let's finish up the last few votes which are administrative here. Okay. Next vote. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to adopt the Budget Oversight Committee's proposed funding recommendations, as amended, to the FY 17 Proposed Budget. (A-11) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_09132016_16-0850 | Speaker 7: Okay. Next item is consent. Cut done.
Speaker 1: Item 1010 Communication from Councilwoman Price Council Member Super or not and Council Member Wodonga. Recommendation to request the City Manager to report back regarding social impact bonds.
Speaker 7: There's a motion and a second. Councilman Price.
Speaker 5: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I know it's late in the night, but this is kind of an exciting request for a report. And I just want to talk about some of the highlights with my colleagues. So I'm bringing this item forward because more and more governments are experiencing cash flow problems and they're unable to commit the necessary funds to pay for proposed solutions to urgent problems, problems such as homelessness or job placement or housing. The inability to find solutions leads oftentimes to stagnation in the way that we confront issues and limits our ability to try new ideas. Social impact bonds are pay for success type projects, and they represent one component of a rapidly growing field of innovative finance aimed at helping local governments fund critical social programs through a combination of government initiation, private investment, and a nonprofit implementation in the social impact bond model, the private sector works with governments and philanthropies to fund critical prevention focused social programs that help address some of the municipalities most pressing problems. They've had a wide range of possible applications and have been used for different issues throughout the country, such as prisoner reentry programs, pre-K services, feasibility analyzes, parenting support and substance abuse treatment for families involved in the child welfare system, supportive housing for chronically homeless individuals, and many other issues. Under these models, financial risks shift from the government payers to individuals and organizations willing to invest in scaling up a successful program to achieve greater social impacts with a willing coalition, which I believe we might have in Long Beach, the definitions and measuring success becomes critical components of making these initiatives work. I know that Kelly Colby from our health department. Oh, she's here, she's in the seat. Has done a lot of work on social impact bonds. She's actually worked with the professor at the Ah Nos, the professor at the Harvard Business, Harvard Kennedy School of Public Policy, where they have implemented social impact bonds in a number of municipalities in Boston and Denver. They've implemented ones for homelessness. And so I'm hoping that we can get a report from city staff on what these bonds are and how we might be able to use them in the city of Long Beach and partnering with some of our big corporations and businesses. I know it sounds a little bit abstract talking about it right now, but I want to convey to my colleagues that this is a real possibility for us to start thinking outside the box in terms of some ideas for funding these social problems that we have and helping come up with solutions. So I thank my colleagues who signed on to this item. I think it's a really great thing for us to look into.
Speaker 0: Okay, Councilmember, you bring.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Vice Mayor Richardson. When I first read this, it's it's an interesting concept, so I'd like to learn more about it. So I'm looking forward to getting back to report.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Is there any public comment on this item saying none, please cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Motion carries. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Manager to report back regarding Social Impact Bonds and provide recommendations to the City Council for the implementation of any policy reforms or additional programming that is consistent with the goals that this opportunity could provide. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_09132016_16-0825 | Speaker 7: And so she is someone that we will always miss very much. But I wanted to make sure I added to to that as well. So thank you. And our hearts are with the entire family at this time. With that, we're going to just jump back. We have the budget documents as prepared by directed by the counsel and prepared in front of us. So if we can please take the final motion. Mr. City Attorney, this would be number.
Speaker 10: Item 25.
Speaker 7: At 25, right? So, Madam Kirk, 25, please.
Speaker 1: Recommendation to declare the Appropriations Ordinance for fiscal year 17, creating and establishing the funds of the municipal government and appropriating money to and authorizing expenditures from said funds and for said fiscal year as an emergency ordinance. Red and adopted as red and lead over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for final reading.
Speaker 7: There's a motion. I mean, the second, please. Okay. And before we vote, this is the last vote, right, Mr. City Attorney?
Speaker 10: Yes. Yes, it is. Come back for second reading next week with this kind of.
Speaker 7: Great. Let me before we take the vote, I just want to just take this minute to thank the council, but I especially want to thank Councilwoman Mongeau, who chaired the BFC committee. This is her first year chairing the BFC committee. It's an incredible amount of work. It's an incredible amount of discussion with staff. I know the many hours that she spent with Ms.. Eriksson and with Mr. GROSS and staff to try to come up with something that would get adopted tonight by the body. But also that was a list that was inclusive of what she was hearing from her colleagues. And I think I know she had a chance to meet with everyone, have those discussions, and she put in a lot of work tonight and as well as throughout the whole process. So I want to personally thank Councilwoman Mongeau. I think you did a great job in this process and and look forward to your leadership in the years ahead as we do this process. And so thank you, Councilwoman. And again, thank you to the whole council. It's been a lot of work. It's been nine community meetings, dozens and dozens of online responses from from from the community. A lot of blood, sweat and tears from the other members of the city council. And also, most importantly, I want to thank the staff. Jon Leah, to you. You guys were phenomenal. As always. Thank you for always answering all the questions and working so hard from Pat all the way down. This is the most important thing we do every single year is pass this budget. And so thank you all for being a part of that, including everyone that's still here tonight. And so with that, we're going to go ahead and take we only public comment on this. Right, Mr. City attorney? We already did public comment. So with that, please cast your votes. I'm sorry, Councilman Gonzales.
Speaker 5: Yes. I just want to make sure, because as we're looking at this.
Speaker 4: The stuff.
Speaker 5: Education. Where is that located?
Speaker 4: Oh, Councilwoman Gonzales. That was in the existing city manager's proposed budget for at 475,000. It's not being changed with this motion. Okay, I just.
Speaker 5: Wanted to make sure, but thank you very.
Speaker 4: Much. Except for adding 220,000 for enforcement investigators. Wonderful.
Speaker 5: Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. With that members, please go ahead and cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 7: Okay. Thank you. Congratulations. We passed the budget. I think that is the last item. So is there any public second public comment period on non agenda items? Sing non. Thank you. Have a good night. | Emergency Ordinance | Recommendation to declare ordinance approving and adopting the official budget of the City of Long Beach for the fiscal year 2016-2017, creating and establishing the funds of the municipal government of the City of Long Beach and appropriating money to and authorizing expenditures from said funds for said fiscal year; declaring the urgency thereof, and providing that this ordinance shall take effect at 12:01 a.m. on October 1, 2016, read and adopted as read. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_09062016_16-0808 | Speaker 0: So that is the the order. It's going to be a longer night, but it's budget season and that's kind of how it goes sometimes. So let me start with the harbor presentation, which will take up immediately. So if there's no objection, I'm going to begin with that and let's turn our attention to our chief executive, Mr. John Slinger. Actually, let me say one thing, John, before you speak, Mr. Senator, it has to be at the study session as well. And so it may be that some of the questions or during the Q&A part, some of the staff might chime in if he's got to leave a little bit early. So we understand that.
Speaker 3: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Mayor, and city council members. Very good to be with you again. It's my third budget with you. And and it's as, as usual, an exhaustive effort just as the city budget process is this year. Before we get started, I want to introduce a couple of the folks that may be answering questions later. Steve Rubin is our managing director of finance and administration. Steve led this entire process. It's an excellent job this year as usual. Sad news is that Steve is retiring this year. So we're going to be missing Steve very, very much. Marina Lee is his number two. She's the director of finance. Will is here as well, along with Jason Brode. Jason is the manager of financial planning and analysis that put all all of the detail together. So let me start by saying that our proposed budget is really a very conservative budget. It reflects the financial challenges and the uncertainty that our entire industry is facing at the moment. The budget calls for modest increases in revenue while keeping our operating expenses and our headcount at bay. A few of the highlights and I'm going to go into greater detail later in the presentation. But the budget totals $774 million, which includes about $500 million in planned capital investments, representing about two thirds of our total budget. And this is not unusual. We also plan, as I said, for modest revenue growth. But that growth is subject to change given the conditions in the marketplace and the aggressive effort that our commercial teams are undertaking to bring business to the Port of Long Beach. We also have a $200 million in planned borrowing through bond issuance this coming fiscal year. And of course, we have our annual planned tidelands transfer, which we're estimating to be $17.8 million next year in fiscal 17. Now I mentioned. Investing in our capital programs. It is really about being big ship ready as you as you remember earlier this year. We we christened the ship that's on this screen here called the Benjamin Franklin, an 18,000 TEU vessel, the largest that serves in the maritime industry today. To give you a sense of this, we expect more than 20 of this size of vessel to be to be deployed over the next 15 to 20 months into the Trans-Pacific Trade Line. Most of these will be coming to San Pedro Bay. So we must be ready for these massive ships. And our investment strategy goes a long way towards achieving that end. We also are looking at often optimizing our terminal operations along with the entire supply chain. So we we have invested enormous amounts of time and effort to create the kinds of improvements in velocity and speed through our system that would be expected of a port of our caliber. And we'll continue to make those kinds of investments. One of the big capital projects is one you see going up every day. The Gerald Desmond Bridge replacement project. And this is going on schedule very, very well. It includes about $266 million in expenditures this coming fiscal year, which is more than half of our total budget. So it's a very big component and we're working very hard to complete that in 2018. The westbound traffic will be flowing across the bridge and then by 2018 both lanes will be open and the old bridge will start to come down. So we're really moving smartly forward on this project. And it's a is a critical, critical and and really urgent project for the for the city and for the port. Another key project, as you are well aware, is our Middle Harbor project going along very, very well. We released phase one of a multi-phase project in April of this year, and the results of this operation have been really breathtaking. They are they are progressing very rapidly against their goals. It is clearly the most advanced port technically in the world and the greenest. It's the world's first all electric cargo container handling facility. And it is one of a kind in the world. And everybody is looking to this terminal as the as really the the model for the future of terminal development. We expect this entire project, all four phases of it, to be completed by 2020. So it's moving along smartly for completion, by and large this decade. About 91, almost $100 million will be spent on this project in fiscal 17. We also have very, very critical plans to expand our on rail capabilities. And we're calling it America's Green Gateway, because it is we we are investing over the next few years more than $1,000,000,000 in expanding our rail operations. And why is this important? Well, first and foremost, it's the fastest pathway we have to going green or to reducing emissions. Just to give you a sense of it. One of these trains completed trains holds anywhere from the equivalent of 750 to 1000 truckloads. And so we eliminate 750 to 1000 trucks every time we build a full train and move it off of property. So it's very, very critical for us to expand that capability. We're currently at less than 30%. We expect to be over 50% with this America's Green Gateway Project. And we're and we're not stopping there. We expect to go beyond that if if at all possible, and moving as much truck traffic off the roads locally as possible. As you know, we're known as the Green Fort, and it's well-deserved. We are totally focused on environmental sustainability. Everything we do starts with the view that what can we do to improve our environment? And we've been very, very aggressively pushing this for some time for over 11 years now. And we've achieved remarkable things relative to emissions reductions. But, you know, the tough part is we've we've done the 80%. The real tough part is the next 20%. And that's what we're focused on with our cleaner action plan, version 3.0 that's going to be released in the next few months. And we are absolutely developing a pathway to getting as close to zero emission as possible technically. And this is and we won't rest until we achieve this. We also announced earlier, and most of you are aware of this, a $46 million community mitigation grant program, which goes above and beyond the mitigation programs we have with our big projects like Middle Harbor, like the Bridge. All of those come with a mitigation budget, but we're going beyond that with about a $4 million a year plan over the next ten years to reach out to the community at large and fund important mitigation programs around the environment. So we're very excited about the first such program in the world that we're aware of, and it's very consistent with our green strategy. Also to to focus on business continuity and and being a good neighbor. We continue to be the leader in C seaport, security and safety. Now, this is a picture of our latest addition called The Protector. It's the world's most advanced firefighting vessel. It's remarkable. It's the biggest, fastest, most technically advanced. And it's one of two that we have built and one, one, one now delivered and the second soon to be delivered. We are focused in 2017 on additional security projects and safety projects totaling almost $20 million in expenditures. Now when it gets down to the community level, we have really reached out and upped the ante here. You know, we partner with full hearts and tremendous, tremendous effort on the community in the city making Long Beach what it is the best place to work and live. One way we do this is through our community sponsorship program, and that's where we work with local groups to help reach residents and provide information that's critical for their knowledge of what we do at the port. This fiscal year, we received 273 sponsorship applications, the highest number in our history, and we awarded 161 of those sponsorships for a total of $745,000. In fiscal 2017, we increased that budget to $1,000,000 and our Board of Harbor Commissioners were adamant that this become a an ever strengthening program. And the first round of calls for this fiscal year is starting September one. So it is now actively engaged. Now what I want to do is talk for a moment, a little bit more about the details of the budget. This is a breakdown of our sources of fund. And as you can see, the first two lines are operating revenue and our non-operating revenue, which if you add those numbers out, they're basically slightly increasing revenue over what we actually achieved in fiscal 16 to what we're proposing in fiscal 17. We're also, as you can see, significantly increasing the amount of debt that we intend to bring online as as available for capital projects, as well as our fund project, our harbor fund balance. So we're that's which is reducing. So our total sources of funds for doing all that we do is going to increase by nearly $100 million that's represented in this chart, which shows you how this kind of breaks down. Operating revenue and non-operating revenue represents about two thirds of what we fund, and the rest comes from debt service, which is about 31% and some small amounts coming out of our treasury. Now on the expenditure side, our personal expenses are just slightly increasing to $62 million and our non-personal expenses are declining. So there's a net reduction by a small amount of our overall expenses related to operations at the port. The Tidelands transfer is is flat. The proposed amount will be 17.7 million. And the debt service, because of a tremendous paydown in our debt in the last year, reduces from $185 million down to $113 million. So a substantial improvement there. But where you see the big increase is in capital expenditures, you know, about $150 million in increased capital spend, which means jobs. And with our port wide play that we implemented earlier this year, that represents about 5500 new jobs through the life of that program. So we're very excited about it. And we're certainly primarily focused on the capital side, which is exactly what our core mission is. When you look at it from a from a graphic standpoint, you can see clearly that capital expenditures is our business. We build infrastructure. That's what we do. We serve the maritime industry by building the critical things, the critical infrastructure they need to do their jobs. So that's our primary mission and investing our revenue to increase the port's competitiveness and continually enhance our our commercial value proposition is what we're all about. So with that, I'm happy to answer any questions that you might have. We have I have a few minutes. I can get over to the other meeting.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And you, Mr. Schlanger, you know that I think that you're doing an excellent job, and we're very thankful for the work that you do, your leadership team and of course, the work that the commission does every single day, just to ensure that Long Beach continues to lead not just the nation but the country when it comes to a green port, being responsible, being good neighbors with the community and moving America's cargo. So thank you for all your work on that.
Speaker 3: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 5: Thank you. And I, too, want to thank you and your team for the excellent work and the presentation, and especially Steve Rubin and his team for putting together the budget briefings for the council members. I always find those to be very helpful. So a couple of things that I just wanted to highlight in the budget that that really stood out for me. And I think they're of very broad interest to the residents of Long Beach, given that we are in fact a port town. Is that obviously the partnership of the port with various community organizations and various community projects is huge. I think it's it's something that I agree with the harbor commissioner, something that that should continue because it shows our partnership in making the city better, making our community stronger and having reached the threshold of $1,000,000 in community sponsorships is something to really be proud of. And I want to thank you for investing in so many community programs that would not otherwise be able to get off the ground without the port support. So thank you for that. I also think, you know, you made a comment about getting big ship ready. And I think it's important to note that $500 million has been allocated in the budget to capital infrastructure projects, and that's more than any port in the U.S. And I think that's definitely worth noting. We're not just talking the talk about getting ready for the changes in the industry, but we're actually investing in that. And sometimes that investment process can be very painful because 65% of the budget is allocated to capital in infrastructure projects. So that can be a painful process, but I think it's worthwhile for the future. I also want to highlight the the port's consistent support in making sure the mitigation projects that the port participates in are those that benefit the community and the precious resources that we have in the community. The Colorado Lagoon, for example, is one of those resources. It's in my district. It's a it's a major asset to to the city of Long Beach as one of the few remaining areas of wetland habitation in the city. And the ports partnership in regards to the lagoon has made it possible for us to be able to restore it, and we continue to look forward to that partnership with the port. A couple of questions that I had regarding kind of where the industry is heading. So I know that in 2015 we had a relatively strong year and then 2016 it was kind of flat. What is what is the future look like? Can you can you tell I guess I should ask you what the price of oil is going to be in a few years, too, but to the best of your ability , what can you tell us about the future?
Speaker 3: Well, it's really a you know, a multifaceted answer. But the core issue is that the global economy. Particularly the consumer demand for goods has softened dramatically over the last 18 months. Now, we had we have had good years in spite of that, because the US is the only bright spot in the global economy in terms of consumer demand. So in reality, we continue to grow. We're seeing quite healthy growth through the port complex, keeping pace with the entire industry for imports and exports into and out of the United States. But the the struggle has been that when the industry came out of the Great Recession, the ocean carriers went on a spending spree, planning for tremendous growth going forward. All the forecasts were very robust. And so they started buying these massive ships and building, you know, spending billions and billions of dollars on on new new infrastructure in particularly these ships. And then suddenly, without real warning, the global economy led by Europe started melting down. And then, of course, followed by that would be Asia, led by China. And so in the throes of all that. The prices for the containers or the goods that are shipped by by across the ocean drop through the floor. We literally two years ago during the height we were seeing and it wasn't the highest prices ever, but we saw very high prices around 2000 to 20 $500 per container to move it from Asia to the west coast of the United States. That dropped to as low as $700 in just a few months. And at $700, you're losing tremendous amounts of money in the transport of those goods. And it stayed low and even got lower than that over the course of the last six months. So it's all about the problem of matching capacity to demand, which is an age old challenge for businesses. But this is on a mega scale, right? So you have these massive ships all coming online. They're all being delivered. In fact, 54% of all the ships that are being delivered for the rest of the decade are so big that they won't fit through the Panama Canal. They're massive ships. They're all coming this way. And so what do you do with that? Well, you have to figure out how to match your capacity to the softened demand, and that's what's happening. So we're seeing an advantage to us. We're seeing a tremendous disadvantage in the industry because the markets aren't demanding the goods. So I guess, long story short, I think it's pretty bright for us. I think it's tough for the industry. But the last couple of days as things started to stabilize and even with the changing situation that's been in the news, that's beginning to show some positive signs of resolution, even though, you know, Hanjin has a long ways to go. The good news is prices have been climbing like mad and with increased prices for the goods being shipped, they that will transform the industry in a matter of months. And that's where I see the great opportunity for the industry is in the pricing side. So I hope that gives you a sense of it.
Speaker 5: It does. It's it's fascinating. And I'm sure you can educate us a lot more about it because it's it's an area that we don't really talk about as much as we should, because it really is a fascinating dynamic for us to have right here in Long Beach.
Speaker 3: Hard to answer it in less than an hour.
Speaker 5: I understand. Thank you very much. I appreciate.
Speaker 3: It.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Seeing no other questions from the council. Let me just say, you know, John, to you and the whole team that's here. Thanks again for all the work that you do. And as a reminder to the community, one out of every eight jobs in the city of Long Beach, that's one out of every eight jobs, is somehow tied directly back to goods, movement, ports and trade that we do. So it's a huge it is the largest part of our local economy, the largest part of the local economy. And so we're very appreciative to the good stewardship over there. So thank you again. Thank you and appreciate it. Thank you. Let me also a couple of things I forgot to say also that the first item up right before a municipal band is going to be the commission appointments, then municipal band. And as we're going to get the commission appointments ready, let me also just do a quick announcement. We have just Romeo in the audience. I know for sure. Just stand up for a second. I want the council and the community theater to see you. You probably have heard that we have hired a new director of the Long Beach Airport. That's Mr. Jess Romo, who's standing there over here to my left. Mr. Romo is an accomplished aviation professional with 19 years of aviation experience. He went through a very long search, national search through our entire team here at the city for this election. He was the interim deputy executive director for the L.A. World Airports, overseeing the operations and emergency management sector at the L.A. International Airport since July. He was also director of airports and operations over at Ontario International and Van Nuys Airports. Mr. Romo holds a B.A. in psychology from U. C, UCI and M.A. in Industrial Psychology from Cal State, L.A. And he has all the appropriate airport accreditations. There's a lot here, so I won't read all of them, but becomes well qualified. We've heard nothing but great things about you from a variety of different folks in the in the aviation community. And so let's give Mr. Romo a big round of applause and welcome him to Long Beach. And as you've been probably been told, the airport is never a controversial issue in Long Beach. And so you have just great things to look forward to.
Speaker 2: As we start. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to receive and discuss an Overview of the Proposed Fiscal Year 2017 Budgets for the following Departments: Harbor, Water, and Civil Service; and | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_09062016_16-0835 | Speaker 0: Thank you. Of course, it's every item with any public comment on the appointments. Casey. No public comment on the appointments members. Joaquin Castro votes motion carries. Okay. Thank you. Congratulations, everyone. Madam Clerk, we will now hear the municipal band item.
Speaker 7: Adam 13.
Speaker 0: Yes. Item 13, please.
Speaker 1: Communication from Councilwoman Price, Councilwoman Gonzalez, Councilmember Muranga and Councilman Austin. Recommendation to request an update from Parks, Recreation and Marine regarding the success of their 107th season and their fundraising efforts this year.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I'm going to first begin by turning this over to Councilman Price will open up the motion and we'll go from there.
Speaker 5: Thank you. Many of us are fortunate to have had the opportunity to hear the municipal band, and we know that they are a major part of the Long Beach history and the Long Beach culture. And this year, the friends of the municipal band group that formulated this year has been incredibly successful in reviving the energy for the municipal band and getting the group the neighborhoods very excited about what the municipal band does and all the great positive benefit that they bring to our community. I'm incredibly proud to support this organization and are very, very proud of their fundraising efforts this year. Now, they were able to raise a great deal of money in light of the fact that there was a different fundraising structure that started this year in terms of the support we had placed on them, the burden of raising $30,000 towards a sixth week. And they met that fundraising goal. And although fundraising effort overall wasn't as good as we would have liked it to be, I think the fact that we had two different fundraising operations going on and definitely not always coordinated may have contributed to some of that. And I'm hoping that moving forward, we take advantage of the momentum that this group has started and work very closely with our Parks Rec and Marine Department to continue to grow this really this piece of Long Beach history that's so vital to so many, so many of our communities. And I'm not sure if Parks Rec and Marine has a report. Okay. So I think they do. But as they make their way up and the friends group makes their way up, I also want to thank them for including a new district as the six week this year. I think that was an incredible addition. And although we hope that the audience participation continues to grow every year, I think the the ability or the willingness to accommodate and try different venues says a lot for for the band as we take a piece of Long Beach history into the future. So with that, if we have a report, I'd love to hear it.
Speaker 3: I'd like to introduce Marie Knight, the director of our Parks, Recreation and Marine Department, and her number two, Steven Scott, who will give a report.
Speaker 8: Good evening, Mayor. Members of the council. It's my pleasure to give an update on the 2016 Municipal Band concert season. The long running.
Speaker 5: Tradition of the band continued.
Speaker 8: This year with its 107th summer concert series for residents and visitors. Over the years, the length of the concert season has expanded and contracted from a maximum of ten weeks to a minimum of five weeks, as was the case for last year and the 2015 season. Four concerts are offered each week during the season, and each week of concerts cost approximately $60,000 or 15,000 per concert. In recent years. The funding from the concerts comes from three sources. Sponsorships, such as our Long Beach Gas and Oil Department, Environmental Services, Division of the Public Works Department and the Port of Long Beach. City budgeted funds in the Tidelands. Funds and donations received through the very popular Passing the Bucket, as well as other fundraising endeavors by our partners of Parks. And those are intended to make up the fundraising shortfall between expenses and the funds raised through the sponsorships and city funds. It is important to note that there are no general fund resources budgeted to structurally support the band's activities. Funding for a five week season was proposed for 2016, but a six week was added during the last year's budget process. The funding for that sixth week was to be provided via $30,000 in additional fundraising by the Friends of the Long Beach Municipal Band and remaining 30,000 from one time resources in the General Fund provided as a match. The pass the bucket receipts and other fundraising conducted by the Partners of Parks and Friends of the Municipal Band were still needed for the structural deficit of the program. The Friends were very successful in their fundraising for the six week and are here, I believe tonight to provide one of those nice big checks for $30,000. Accordingly, the six week program of four concerts per week was provided this summer, and the concerts were performed at the following locations
Speaker 5: . On.
Speaker 8: Tuesdays. They were at Bluff Park, Whaley Park and Drake Park. Wednesdays was Low Cerritos Park, Thursdays, Marine Stadium and Fridays. El Dorado West. With the addition of the six week, we were able to.
Speaker 5: Expand the program to a new location this year, which was Drake Park. And it's important.
Speaker 8: To note that new locations often need time to grow in popularity, which is usually assisted by word of mouth from the community. Fundraising efforts are still ongoing, and some final donations are still coming in this year. The funds that were raised was $147,000 through sponsorships from Long Beach gas and oil, port of Long Beach and the Environmental Services Division. $65,000 from Tidelands Operation Funds. Just under $60,000 for our Pass the Bucket and Partners of Parks efforts. And then the.
Speaker 5: Money that the Friends of the Municipal van is bringing tonight.
Speaker 8: There was an overall funding shortfall of just over $27,000, but we have already started discussions with the friends and how to make that different next year and do more robust fundraising and do some different things with Pass the Bucket to hopefully fill that gap. So we appreciate the services of our conductor, Larry Curtis, and his great team and the friends of the municipal band, the musicians for a great summer and the community for their support. And that ends my report.
Speaker 0: Well, thank you. Thanks again, Ms.. Knight, for the report. I may turn this back over first to Councilwoman Pryce and go from there.
Speaker 5: Thank you. And I believe the Friends of Municipal Band Group is here. And would you do you have anything to say or you'd like to talk a little bit? Okay.
Speaker 7: Hi there. My name is Laura Espino and.
Speaker 1: I'm here with two.
Speaker 8: Others of our five team of five from the.
Speaker 1: Friends of Long Beach Municipal Band. And we are happy to report, as you know, that we.
Speaker 7: Did raise the $30,000 that we were asked to provide. And I'm also very proud that we were able to raise that between.
Speaker 1: February and June of this year and were able to actually.
Speaker 9: Secure the funds before the season.
Speaker 1: Started. So we felt very confident in in what we did. We are here tonight with our big giant check for.
Speaker 8: You and also donated.
Speaker 1: To the Department of Parks, Recreation and Marine in support of that six week. And we want to thank the city council, all of you, for your support in helping us also with with achieving the six week and.
Speaker 7: Partnering with us.
Speaker 1: And we also appreciate Mayor Garcia's proposal to continue the six week, hopefully for a next season as well.
Speaker 8: And so with that, I'd like to turn it over to Kay.
Speaker 1: Cofield, one of my colleagues.
Speaker 9: Good evening, friends of you of the municipal band. Also thanks the Long Beach Community Foundation for their support. By investing our funds with the Community Foundation, this partnership allowed us to promise our donors an efficient means to donate online and to receive prompt acknowledgment of their tax deductible donations. With the Community Foundation charging only one and one quarter percent in fees and paying interest annually on invested funds in their trust. This means that almost 100% of the funds donated support nothing but our municipal band.
Speaker 6: I'm Bill Thomas. I'd also like to add my thanks to all the donors and note that we got a slow start because of some confusion at the beginning. But from February, middle February to just before the band began, we managed to raise our $30,000.
Speaker 3: The majority of that was from new business donors that we.
Speaker 6: Were able to bring in. And we were also successful in bringing in quite a few new family and individual donors that, according to the records that were available to us, had not made any donation for quite some time.
Speaker 2: So I want to.
Speaker 6: Appreciate or thank the mayor for recommending support of additional 70,000 to include the sixth week and want to say that we appreciate everything that everybody has done from the city council to all the participants in.
Speaker 3: Assisting us in this. And we look forward and commit to.
Speaker 2: Continuing this.
Speaker 6: Process so that we can continue to support the band. Thank you.
Speaker 5: Bill, I think that was a little sneaky there at 60,000, not 70.
Speaker 3: I would have sworn I heard seven.
Speaker 8: And we'd love to take a picture and invite Marcel.
Speaker 7: Eppley.
Speaker 1: From the Community Foundation and our conductor, Larry Curtis, to come on down for a photo.
Speaker 4: Also. Oh, good. But.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Let me let me just say to to to Larry and of course, to the friends and to everyone involved. We have a we have a few folks are going to say a few things here from the council, and there's a lot of interest in support. I just wanted to let you all know that. And I think it's more for the community to know that Long Beach has a lot of arts groups. There's a lot of museums, a lot of organizations. But there are only two municipally funded organizations separate of the Arts Council that are actually performing groups that are actually performing or have some kind of art. It's the Beach Museum of Art, which is our municipal museum, and then it's the municipal band, which is our city band. Those are the two city arts organizations that are that are performing or doing shows within the city. And so a lot of you don't know that that the city has to. And of course, we also have the Arts Council, which is a little bit different of a role, but it's a big deal. The museum has been around for over 100 years. You guys provide incredible music and fun for a lot of people, and we're really proud to support all the work you guys do every year. So thank you to Larry and the team and the friends. Fantastic work. And so and I want to thank Councilman Price and the coauthors for bringing this forward as well. Councilman Price, did you have anything else, sir?
Speaker 5: No, thank you.
Speaker 0: Okay. Let me turn to the second of the motion, which was Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Many of you saw me out at Municipal Band this summer. It's a great asset in our community. I think that the structure of the program and their ability to bring costs down over the years has been significant in the city's ability to maintain the funds. It's definitely hard. When the city went through the downturn, the economy and to still have been able to fund arts is a remarkable thing for our city. And I think that their component of the 100 days of summer really are a city wide asset that we're able to advertise. I think that in our side of town for the first time, the council office worked hard to ensure that community members knew about 100 days of summer, and specifically the municipal band concerts. We used over $3,000 of district funds to send out a mailer to our residents to let them know about the municipal band and their playing in the community. Because when I knocked on doors throughout the district, many people didn't know about the amazing asset of concerts every Friday in Eldorado Park. And so this year I felt as though the community had grown, and I think that more were engaged in knowing of the opportunities. And I think that's a big part of the ability for the friends of the municipal band to continue to be successful. I want to thank the police department who stepped up the presence this summer at our concerts in the park. The larger our crowds go grow, the more important it is that we really protect public safety. I want to thank Marie for your diligent work with relation to growing a partnership directly with the Friends of the Municipal Band. I know that there's been changes through the years in that fundraising structure and whether it was through partners of Parks or the other organizations, I think that donors, knowing that 99.7 or 94, 98.75% of every donation goes directly to fund the municipal band is a big step in the right direction with all the accountability that we look at in our nonprofits these days and making sure admit as well. That being said, I appreciate that the friends are already working with Parks and Rec and looking at how to fill that $27,000 shortfall. I think it's important that we continue to work towards figuring out a long term strategy of filling that every year, because it's important that as we grow other types of concerts to fill in the gap, whether it's the community band or symphonic winds or other groups that come to us as a council and ask for funding, that we also realize that a lot of their ability to play in the parks is based on the generation of activity and support that starts with the launch of the municipal band there where where the crowds start. And then they continue that tradition throughout the summer, no matter who picks up those additional weeks. So thank you for what you do and thank you for the other arts programs that really get to take advantage of the work in publicity and marketing and partnership that you do. I know that my neighbor is 94 years old and she used to be a bucket collector for the municipal band and she still talks about that. And it's a good sense of pride for her. And she did it every single concert for years. And so I hope that we can get that structure back in place. She knew the people. She knew who to go to. She made sure that at the end of the summer they had a little receipt that said that they donated for their their tax I.D. purposes, even though they gave cash. And so I appreciate the work that's been done to really further that effort. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 5: I just wanted to thank the municipal band for being at Drake Park. I think that was such a although we were here at council, I remember a lot of our residents had just really been very thrilled to have the municipal band there. And it was just a different mood and it was just a. Beautiful night from what all the pictures showed me and from all of their emails and just contact with us. So thank you very much for all your work and we look forward to many wonderful events coming up.
Speaker 0: Councilmember Everingham.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mayor. I do want to express my congratulations to them, this woman, for another wonderful season. I share Lost Eurydice Park with District eight, my colleague. And it was always a wonderful time to to see you on Wednesday nights playing at the concerts. But most importantly, it was a great night out for me and my wife to enjoy your music. So thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember Superman.
Speaker 6: Thank you. I just have a question for staff, and it's kind of a follow up to what my colleague from the first District said. We have two concerts a year in Whaley Park. We're not getting any additional. And they are on Tuesday night. So one is a council meeting night and the other is our dark night. But that's when I hold my community meeting. It wasn't a problem this past year because my residents preferred going to the concert than my community meeting. But I would just like to ask staff if we can have an adjusted adjustment to that moving forward.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember Austin.
Speaker 10: Thank you. And I want to thank the friends. I want to thank Marcel and the the foundation for your your assistance in making this tradition ongoing. Obviously, in the Los Cerritos Park, we enjoy the municipal band. It signifies the fact that we are the summer season has has is upon us when when whenever two minute municipal band is playing on Wednesday nights, it draws several hundred or even probably a couple thousand people every every Wednesday night. And the community has in kind of supported that with additional concerts with the live bands. There's nothing that can replace our municipal band and the great professionalism and the sweet sounds that come from that. But also, I think more importantly, as my my colleague Ms.. Mongeau mentioned, when you knock on doors, people are connected to you that if they live in a in a community that actually is fortunate enough to have the municipal band in, and I know there are other areas of the city that don't have that. And I would like to see that happen so that everybody actually feels that that essence of Long Beach. And so, you know, there's a there's a song This is Summertime in the LBC, the middle. Also, the municipal band signifies summertime in LBC in a big way. And so thank you for all you doing. We'll continue to support you.
Speaker 1: Councilman Mongo to follow up to Councilmember Supernovas question. Marie, would you know what the collections are like from night to night? What our strongest nights are for the bucket collection and what hour are more weeknights are end? And does that correlate with crowd size? I mean, is it that so many people are watching council meetings on Tuesdays that they just can't make it to the municipal event?
Speaker 8: Yes, as you said earlier, I'm all about the data. And the data would suggest that more people are watching your meetings.
Speaker 5: On Tuesday nights. I'm just kidding. Actually, traditionally, our Tuesday night attendance.
Speaker 8: As well as our obviously then bucket collections are the lowest evening. Tuesday nights are about or the Wednesday Thursday concerts are running about three times the attendance as our Tuesday nights.
Speaker 1: Would there be a possibility if we are able to fund the six week through the Budget Oversight Committee as a recommendation to this full body? Instead of six weeks that four nights a week, which would be 24 concerts, we would be able to do three nights a week at eight, eight weeks that we would be able to go to a full eight weeks of a summer again. Is that a possibility that could be explored?
Speaker 8: It's certainly something we can explore. We can talk with the band to see how logistically that would work and we would have to work out.
Speaker 5: Somewhat of a schedule to bring back then to the council. Because when you take the Tuesday nights away, do we, Adam, at the end.
Speaker 8: Of the first six weeks at those locations.
Speaker 1: So we would come back with some options. So coming from the regiment of a high school where music is expensive and those kinds of things, one of the things we'd have to consider are of course working in so that the Drake Park, the Whaley Park, the Bluff Park would actually get a Friday night. And so there wouldn't be any additional music costs. It would just be really a shift so that the whole city would have the access and opportunity and then hopefully that would be able to fill the gap of that $27,000 shortfall. If there was significantly higher attendance, maybe that would be an option. But of course, again, this body can only think of things. And again, our two council members weren't able to attend those. But I hope that we can find a way where structurally the donations and the attendance. I think that the number one priority is that more people get to experience the municipal band. And so in no way would I ever expect all eight weeks of Friday nights to be in Eldorado Park. I don't I think that'll be very selfish, but that we would hope that the other side of town I know David mentioned to me sixth district still doesn't have a concert. What does that look like? And I think that that would be helpful. I know a week is a short turnaround, but we are going to talk about Parks and Rec at Budget Oversight next week and would love some input because I think that at least from the colleagues, the comments I've heard from my colleagues were very supportive of the mayor's recommendation to ensure that an additional 60,000 is put in that direction. Or, as Bill said, maybe we'll make a mistake and do 70,000. We'll see.
Speaker 5: We will come back with something for next week.
Speaker 8: Thank you.
Speaker 6: Thank you, Councilwoman Mongo. And I would just say I agree wholeheartedly with those points. Looking forward to seeing ways that we can, you know, make sure that everyone can experience our official city municipal band. Councilman Andrews.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Mrs. Mongo, for speaking up on me. But maybe that 10,000 that we made a mistake on, we could probably use that, and we could get one in 63. So we're going to get it. It's coming. Thank you.
Speaker 1: I need 19. You got nine to put up. We'll discuss next week.
Speaker 3: I'm pretty sure we do. Okay. Take all my one time.
Speaker 6: Spending money for a concert in the park. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. Let's go ahead and take public comment on this item. Do we already have that? Let's take public comment on this item.
Speaker 5: Hi Karen.
Speaker 1: Reside. I'm speaking tonight as a resident of this city and someone who went to my first municipal band concert when they played on Sundays and Bixby Park, Bandshell when I was a child, my grandmother lived on first and Gaby Ohta. My family was a musical family. My dad, my uncles and my grandfather were in a municipal band in Chicago. I have great love for the municipal band. I've also volunteered at most of the concerts and a couple of things that haven't been mentioned. This is the oldest operating continuously band in the United States, and I know it's been under threat a number of times, and it warms my heart to see the support tonight for this institution within our city. That really is the cultural piece and the 107 years that they've been in operation. They've always service the community as a child. There was music everywhere and I just love going. It helped develop my love of music. The other thing that's really a benefit from the concerts that I've seen by attending so many is the community feeling that.
Speaker 5: It creates.
Speaker 1: And all the people that end up talking to each other and the connections that have been made. You just can't know how much that impacts our community. So thank you all for supporting the municipal band.
Speaker 6: Thank you. Next speaker, please. John Dietz. Good evening. Vice Mayor and council members want to thank you for the additional concerts that we got this year, the welcome addition. But above me on that, I want to thank the friendly municipal band Bill Thomas, whose acquaintance I only made a couple of years ago. But most importantly, Laura Espino, who has been at the concerts at Los Rios Park for just about as long as I can remember. She has really done yeoman's work in doing a lot of coordination there and fundraising, and I took direction for her this year with where I directed my personal donations because she did not want to see the partners of Parks collections diminished. In favor of the friends of the missile band, so I want the writing to check. The bigger one went to Partners of Parks, which made sense to me, but Laura said it was the right thing to do. And I don't think anybody in this room can thank Laura enough for what she's done for all those years. Thank you, Laura. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 7: Carolyn Burns. I'd like to thank my fellow citizens, Kay Caufield and Bill Thomas and his wife Shirley, for being such adamant supporters of the municipal ban. I think music is really important, and I echo the words of a woman who just spoke with regards to the sense of community. There are so many bad things happening around us and around the entire United States with neighbors and violence. But I think this is an incredibly positive thing that we need to strongly foster and grow. The mention earlier of when going door to door knocking that people aren't aware of the municipal band and its activities. I think that this is an opportunity to grow that awareness and I know that one of the most potent tools in my neighborhood and I know the city utilizes it is next door. And this is a wonderful organ from which to project information about activities in the community. And I would strongly encourage the city to allow access for the people from the municipal band to announce their performances in advance and to make a written statement in their announcement that there is a contribution that is optional such that this contribution level can increase to continue to support the band. Thank you for all of your support.
Speaker 6: Thank you. Final speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Very good. One of the ideas I've always toyed around with and that what might help the financial situation but also bring the band to more people. And these next two or three years are going to be an excellent opportunity to try. This is put the band on a barge in the Marine Stadium, which we could pack on both sides with spectators. Now, because of the work that's being done around our waterfronts in various parts, we will have a number of those barges that I think we can negotiate with the owners to for the day of the park, day of the band, put that puppy, put the band on that puppy. And it can slowly move up and down the northern half of the stadium with people on both sides.
Speaker 6: Thank you. So let's go ahead and say no more no further public comment. Let's go ahead and ballot. And I mean. Yes. It's the same thing.
Speaker 7: Motion carries.
Speaker 6: Thank you. Let's go ahead and take our public comment for the night. I have eight speakers here speak. Steve Updike. Diana Liggins. John Dietz. Larry Goodhue. Linda montgomery, Malcolm Bennett. Keith Kennedy. Alex Belanger. And we'll begin with let's have the first three up. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request an update from Parks, Recreation and Marine regarding the success of their 107th season and their fundraising efforts this year. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_09062016_16-0796 | Speaker 0: agenda at this at this point. And so, Madam Clerk, if we can please here, I believe it's item ten.
Speaker 3: That's just a continuation.
Speaker 1: Communication from City Attorney. Recommendation to review draft ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code all relating to a Long Beach minimum wage ordinance and provide for the direction citywide.
Speaker 6: Thank you. Councilwoman Mongo.
Speaker 1: I think it's important that we hear from the community. I'd be encouraging a public comment. Start us off.
Speaker 6: Let's see if staff has a report before we go to public comment thing. Staff Report.
Speaker 7: Vice Mayor Richardson, Members of the City Council, as you know, this item has been in front of you before. As the clerk indicated, we are requesting further direction on three specific items if you would prefer a more detailed staff report. Amy Webber of our office, who has been working on this for a number of months now, is ready to provide a more detailed report to you, should you want that?
Speaker 6: Thank you. Let's go ahead and begin with public comment. 3 minutes with the speaker's pretty please a line at the front and give us your name and your give us your name and we'll get started. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Go ahead. Hi.
Speaker 1: Good evening, Mayor and city council members. My name is Nicole Taylor and I'm community organizer at Building Healthy Communities Long Beach. I'm here tonight to speak in favor of a comprehensive minimum wage increase and strong wage enforcement. I'm going to focus my comments on one aspect of the minimum wage discussion tonight outreach and education around wage enforcement . It's important that outreach and education on wage and force enforcement be focused on low wage workers who are who are most likely to experience wage theft. Funds allocated for wage enforcement education need to be dedicated to culturally appropriate outreach for workers building healthy communities. Long Beach requests that the strategy around this be to invest in community contracts with organizations who have a track record of working with low income workers and families. There are many such organizations in the Building Healthy Communities Network, such as the Filipino Migrant Center and the Long Beach Immigrant Rights Coalition. Looking at unemployment in poverty rates in our city, we see that although unemployment rates fell by five percentage points from 2010 to 2014, poverty stayed fairly consistent and even increased slightly. It's not enough to add more jobs. We must ensure that we are promoting living wages. There is a strong connection between poverty and the health of our city. We see a seven year life expectancy gap in Long Beach. That leaves low income people of color dying seven years sooner on average, than others in our community. In order to address this inequity, we need to reach the people most impacted by it. Which is why building healthy community Long Beach supports community contracts for organizations that serve these populations. Thank you for your consideration.
Speaker 6: Thank you. Next. Hello. Good evening, Vice Mayor, Council Staff Jeremy Harris, senior vice president, Long Beach Area Chamber of Commerce here tonight on behalf of the chamber, our leadership, the business community, and also on behalf of the representative, the Long Beach Council business associations, also known as COBR. Here tonight, I respectfully request that Long Beach adopt what the state has already accomplished. Simply mirror the current state law and do not decide to augment or carve out a local policy. It's been a few months since we've been here last discussing this issue. Allow me to talk about Cobas process and the proposal for the original minimum wage, minimum wage ordinance and policy. This included an extended business outreach done in concert with the mayor's initiated public outreach program. The City Council approved report and the study that was prepared by L.A. EDC. It was critical for COBA to do its due diligence for its members and nonmember members. This includes the business community and oftentimes, which oftentimes is goes under represented in a process such as this. It was data driven and testimony was captured from those who bear the burden of such an ordinance. If it were to go in effect. Well, no process is perfect. It's it's important to take into account the process. I'm trying to provide an economical answer to an otherwise very political and at times very emotional issue. We understood there was a number of factors to consider, which you all did earlier this year. Now, we've gone through the process here locally, only to be outdone by the state, and that's the critical juncture we're at now. Long Beach based business owners need a chance. 2016 has seen the minimum wage already increase a dollar. Regardless of what we do tonight, business will see another increase. In 2017, business owners saw a 1% sales tax increase here locally within their countywide measure potentially being considered in November. And let's not forget the countless state regulations that are updated and added each year, such as paid sick leave, worker's comp, insurance rate increases and the like . Coming down from Sacramento, business in Long Beach needs a chance to compete with neighboring cities such as Lakewood, SEAL Beach, Cypress, Los Alamitos, Torrance, Carson and the many others that currently have no plans to adopt a local minimum wage increase and deviate from the state. Allow our business community to compete locally by adopting the statewide minimum wage policy. Long Beach needs to keep our momentum going. As we all know, great businesses have come to Long Beach and will continue to come. Now let's take care of the businesses that are already here. We respectfully ask that Long Beach adopt the statewide policy. Thank you for the opportunity to address you tonight. Thank you. Next.
Speaker 5: Hello again. My name is Paula Abad.
Speaker 1: A resident of the second District and the chairperson of Unagi and Lombard, a progressive Filipino youth and student organization working to educate, organize and mobilize the community to address issues that affect us locally, such as wage theft. Our community here is strong and vibrant, with over 30,000 Filipinos primarily residing in West Long Beach and nearly 2000 Filipino students at Cal State Long Beach. We sit at the crux of two identities being children, of immigrants and being young workers. When an immigrant youth takes up a job, they're usually juggling, juggling classes, family responsibilities, as well as navigating issues that affect our daily lives, like getting access to affordable housing and health services. When it comes to finding good quality work, most of us are in love with many options. So we either join the military or drop out of school. For those of us lucky enough to get into college, not only do we have to struggle getting by on minimum wage jobs, but we do so while costs for everything increase from tuition to rent to books and even meals. I'm deeply concerned with the conditions of effecting affecting youth and students today when food pantries are being installed at the university to keep people from starving during classes. But even more angered when I realize that the city does not address the root issues.
Speaker 8: That are worsening our lives.
Speaker 1: When we talk about wage theft, where workers aren't being paid the full amount for the hours that they worked, we're talking about our parents who take up under the table caregiving jobs. We talk about our uncles who get engineering degrees back in the motherland, but only get hired here as shipyard workers. We talk about our friends who want to afford their own apartments but can't because all they can find a short term, low wage jobs. We can't keep postponing hearings for wage enforcement and upping the minimum wage. We cannot pass this training wage. Businesses want to save costs, but people want to be able to live. Let that sink in. When you talk about earning 85% of your wages, your first six months at a new job, you're talking about my peers, my family, my community. You'd be taking away so much from us when we already contribute so much to the city. Without input from us, we will just be another. This will just be another anti-people policy, giving lip service to the low income residents of the city, but only keeping money in the pockets of wealthy business owners whose basic needs are already met. What we're fighting for isn't new. It's not complicated. It won't even be hard to implement, but it will change the lives of so many people in this city. All we want is a wage enforcement policy and office that will one collect back wages. Auto workers whose wages were stolen by their employers to protect workers from backlash when they file wage claims against their employers. And three, enforce the new wage raise. Each year it goes up so wages will catch up to the rising cost of the standard of living. That's all we want. If you want to come out and support all of the people in your districts, the workers who make the city of unemployed, please pass this wage enforcement policy. Keep the city's path to 13 $15 by 2021 so we can be at the same level as Los Angeles, Santa monica and Pasadena. Serve the people. Thank you.
Speaker 6: Thank you. Next up, please.
Speaker 3: Good evening, Vice Mayor and honorable council members. My name is Vincent Passing ADC, and I'm the owner of Santa Fe Importers. We're a local company that has been in business here in Long Beach since 1947.
Speaker 2: We employ almost 70.
Speaker 3: Employees here in the area. I would implore you to please adopt the state regulation for minimum wage and not to carve out a local ordinance just for the city of Long Beach. I think it makes perfect sense to just go with the state. It makes local businesses more competitive. We have to.
Speaker 2: Compete not only with cities in the area, but with.
Speaker 3: Other businesses in the state of California and also other businesses in other states around around the country.
Speaker 2: To adopt a local ordinance.
Speaker 3: I think is just caving to special interests. I think it's in the interest of the community and businesses and the residents to just go ahead and adopt the.
Speaker 2: The state regulation. Thank you very much. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Next up. Good evening. I'm Jack Smith. I live at 240 Chestnut Avenue. That's in Plymouth West in the first District. You know, you're not here tonight to figure out if you're going to do a minimum wage that's already been done by the state. The governor signed that law in April. You're here to decide how Long Beach is going to fit into that law. I suggest that you abandon any effort in a city ordinance and live by the state law. The state law addresses all of the issues that you keep hearing about.
Speaker 0: That might be in.
Speaker 3: A city ordinance. It's accomplishing all of the goals you keep being asked for here by proponents of minimum wage. Everything is in the state law, including the issue of wage theft. Wage theft is handled very effectively by the State Labor Commission and they happen to have an office almost right across the street from us here at Ocean Gate. Perhaps our state representatives need to have that agency do a better job of outreach to our residents who are having problems with wage theft. Wage theft is a state issue. It is not a city issue. The state law now does what you folks wanted the city ordinance to do. Forget the city ordinance. Abide by the state law and save the millions of dollars. I believe the number I saw in the TFF was $1.3 million per year. It would take the city of Long Beach to enforce a local ordinance. Say that money. Get some more police. Live by the state law, make it level for all the cities around us and abandoned a city.
Speaker 6: Ordinance for minimum wage. Thanks. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hi. My name is Jordan Meters. I'm a student.
Speaker 3: And.
Speaker 6: I'm a college student and a worker at Little Caesars. After graduating high school, I had the opportunity to partake in a four year university. But I could not because of the. Because I can not make with my family enough to. Going to the school. I come from a mixed families household, so it is very hard to make ends meet, which is why I'm here asking for city council to continue to have a minimum wage to 15 the Long Beach Way. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next, meet the police.
Speaker 8: Hi. My name is Mary.
Speaker 4: I'll fix this.
Speaker 5: My name is Man Chicago. So I'm a researcher.
Speaker 8: At Cal State Long.
Speaker 5: Beach, where I study health among our working class families here.
Speaker 8: In Long Beach.
Speaker 5: I'm no longer a therapist, but thank you for allowing me the opportunity to serve as a commissioner on the Board of.
Speaker 8: Health and Human Services. I'm here to urge City Council.
Speaker 5: To raise the minimum wage as soon as possible. I'm sure many of us know that one's economic income correlates with one's health status. For example, obesity is a huge issue in our nation. We live in a nation.
Speaker 8: Where fast foods are more accessible and affordable.
Speaker 5: Than healthy foods, and the consequences of this can be very dangerous and expensive. A higher minimum wage in Long Beach could potentially uplift our health status across our communities. In fact, a national study found that for every dollar increase in the minimum wage, there is a 6% decrease in body mass index. And that was a study done by the National Bureau of Economic Research that looked at.
Speaker 8: Data across the country that said declining or.
Speaker 5: Stagnant minimum wage rates may be contributing to the rise of obesity. In Long Beach, where 31% of adults and.
Speaker 8: 40% of 2 to.
Speaker 5: 5 year olds are considered obese. Personally, I have a father who is prediabetic, and I've seen how time consuming and expensive it is to manage his.
Speaker 8: Diet in order to avoid diabetes.
Speaker 5: And for families who are constantly working to make ends meet, I can only imagine that it's harder to.
Speaker 8: Practice this kind of preventive health care. As a city.
Speaker 5: We have the opportunity to bring one solution among many solutions to the table. We are a strong city full of creative, innovative and hardworking people, and right now we have the opportunity to pave and what is inevitable. So I urge you to raise the minimum wage and implement wage enforcement as soon as possible, because each minute that we wait to take action is is an opportunity to improve the well-being of our city. Thank you.
Speaker 6: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Good evening, members of the Council. My name is Joanna Concepcion, director of the Filipino Migrant Center. Our organization, together with other organizations of the Coalition to End Wage Theft in Long Beach, have been to every meeting, every hearing related to this issue and every meeting we have brought residents and workers and they have testified how wage theft has affected their families, personal testimonies of how they have become victims of wage theft. It's just wanted to.
Speaker 8: Remind folks here in.
Speaker 1: This room that.
Speaker 5: Wage theft is a city issue and not just a state issue.
Speaker 3: Right.
Speaker 5: So existing state wage and our laws, our organization has been for many years have been helping workers file wage claims in the state State Department, existing state wage, state wage. And our laws that are meant to protect workers are being circumvented and ignored by many employers. Everyday violating employers are not afraid to break these laws because of a lack of strong mechanisms to hold them accountable. And thousands of workers are not receiving proper education about these laws, which is why we want to re-emphasize to you today the importance of strong local wage enforcement and push you to adequately invest in community partnerships. Because community organizations are critical to make enforcement work. Local community groups are already doing the work on the ground and ready to work with you to ensure that hard working families secure all of their hard earned wages. We need properly funded community contracts to identify wage theft cases. Community organizations are already trusted in the community and are important partnered to help low wage workers combat their fear of coming forward. They provide services in workers native language and are the frontline experts in industry wage and hour loss community organizations outreach to educate workers in the community. Prepare evidence for investigations that are fact intensive. Fact intensive, and community organizations can assist with evidence gathering to ensure that claims are valid. Local community organizations are usually the ones hard at work, making sure that local, state and national laws which serve to improve the lives of thousands of working families are enforced and that these same families understand how to advocate for their rights. We strongly urge you to invest in well-funded community contracts and follow the Long Beach way of ensuring that $15 an hour by 2021. Thank you for your time.
Speaker 6: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 0: Hi. My name is Rabbi Jonathan Klein. I'm the.
Speaker 3: Director of Clergy and Laity United for Economic Justice. And you've seen our people here at many council meetings before this. And I want to say we've been involved in pushing for minimum wage increase and wage enforcement all over Los Angeles County and even down in Irvine, where we were pushing back against a wage decrease that happened there earlier last year. Look, it's very simple. It says in in the book of Xs, it says by smite Hashem Naka Tom, God heard their groaning. God heard the sound of people who were being mistreated and jumped into action. You, as a council have heard of mistreatment of workers over and over again in this city of Long Beach. And by the way, that's a local conversation. And the hope is that you can be in the imitative day tradition of imitating God, in the sense of responding to that call, and very smart in ikotun hearing.
Speaker 0: The groaning of workers in this.
Speaker 3: Community who have been mistreated by their employers. It's actually in the best interests of business to to make sure that a wage enforcement policy is established that's funded, that ensures that community groups who know.
Speaker 0: Where the mistreatment is happening can.
Speaker 3: Be engaged.
Speaker 0: In the conversation because to do so means that you.
Speaker 3: Actually are pursuing justice, which, of course, is what we hear in the book of Deuteronomy. Justice. Justice, shall you pursue?
Speaker 0: It's not enough to passively.
Speaker 3: Wait for the justice to come. It doesn't always come that way. We know that over and over again that it's about enforcement. It's about ensuring that we have not just good laws on.
Speaker 0: The books, on the.
Speaker 3: Outside, but that we engage in pursuing at that more justice system for all. And I would like to just also add that it says and also in the book of Leviticus, it says Low TimeCode Aldama I do not stand idly by the blood of your neighbor. Well, this is a community. This is an ecosystem that's very much what we're trying to create in Long Beach is a community sense, a sense of connectedness between people. How can we do that unless we take the struggles and the pain and the invisible suffering that we see that undermines the health of our community if we take that for granted. So I implore you, from the deepest place of my commitment as a rabbi, as a representative with many other religious leaders who I work with, I ask you to make sure that you move forward.
Speaker 0: With the minimum wage.
Speaker 3: Increase at the rate that this city has already made a great commitment to do. Just to stand with that commitment to keep going. Enforce the laws through the support of the community groups that know where to go. And I thank you very much.
Speaker 6: Thank you, Rabbi. Next speaker, please. 1859, huh? I want to thank you guys, actually, for one, just give give your name for the record. Well, first, my name is Anthony Velasco. I'm here with my son, Grant Senior.
Speaker 3: Well, right here. This is the future right here. This is what you see here.
Speaker 6: And he's and the future I see in his future is actually a struggle. Unfortunately, if we don't get this wage enforcement as well as the policy of, you know, not only locally wage enforcement, but in really enforcing it, because that's a struggle that we have to even go by. The state is it's a hassle just alone. And to be able to, you know, go through that hassle every single time, it's a struggle for our coworkers and my coworkers, especially. And this is a this is a time where you guys have the opportunity to make a positive impact and a positive change, not only for us, but for my son and for the future as well. And so I hope you guys really do pay attention and understand the struggle that we are in every single day fighting these battles against not only wrongful employers. But there are good employers, don't get me wrong. But I'm hoping that you guys will understand what we're struggling every single day. Thank you for your time and your patience, which I know you guys are here every single night with us. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Next, meet the police.
Speaker 8: Good evening, Vice Mayor and Council. I'm Stephanie Howard. I am a business owner on Fourth Street and also on the board of directors for the Business Association down there. I just want to encourage the Council to take this.
Speaker 5: Policy.
Speaker 1: And use the funds.
Speaker 8: That it would save from developing a local policy and direct that towards wage.
Speaker 1: Theft abatement and enforcement. Thanks.
Speaker 6: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Good evening. My name is Johanna Cunningham.
Speaker 7: I'm the executive the executive director for the Apartment Association, California Southern Cities. And I'm here simply just to address the city council and ask that you support the minimum wage law that has already been approved by the state. Thank you.
Speaker 6: Thank you. Next week, please.
Speaker 3: My name is Steve Askin. I'm a longtime.
Speaker 6: Resident of our Rose Park neighborhood, and I'm a corporate financial analyst working for the Service Employees Union. I hadn't planned to say anything tonight, but there was one statement from where the speakers, which I think merits.
Speaker 3: Correction on the facts. One of the speakers.
Speaker 2: Said that state.
Speaker 6: Wage theft enforcement is adequate. In point of fact, what we know, what we know from a study done by UCLA a few years ago is that in Los Angeles County alone, a quarter million people are victims of wage theft every year. What we also know from a recent report.
Speaker 3: In the L.A. Times is that.
Speaker 6: In any given year, only 5000 people file wage theft complaints with the state.
Speaker 3: And only 17% of those claims are actually completed. So what we're talking about is a problem on.
Speaker 6: Which fewer than 1% of our people get redress. So what I'd like to suggest to our city council is in the interest both of workers and also of the many honest business people in our community, the majority who pay fair wages, that we have robust.
Speaker 3: Long Beach enforcement.
Speaker 6: On wage theft, partnering with the community organizations that know where the problems exist. I think that would be a great thing, not just for workers.
Speaker 2: But especially.
Speaker 6: For the many members of our.
Speaker 2: Business community who do not want to have to compete with somebody who's.
Speaker 6: Undercutting them by cheating on wages. Thank you. The next speaker, please.
Speaker 0: Hello. My name is Steve Gillan and I am a fifth district homeowner and fourth district business owner. And hopefully future next business.
Speaker 3: Is the first district. So I am a.
Speaker 0: Business owner and I grew up locally, you know, from from Downey. Paramount was born in East Los Angeles. I grew up in the neighborhood of Lakewood and Rosecrans. And for all the people here that are about wage theft, if there are employers that are stealing your wages, that is a problem. And we don't believe in that.
Speaker 3: The local businesses that are here today.
Speaker 0: Okay. But it sounds like from the majority of the people that are here that.
Speaker 3: It's wage theft.
Speaker 0: That is a problem and not the timeline. Of whether or not minimum minimum wage needs to be implemented. So I would urge the Council to please vote unanimously. To follow the state's guideline and focus more energy so that people that the people that come work for us and others are not getting their wages stolen from them. And. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: Good evening, Mr. Mayor. My name is John Sagmeister and members of the council. Thank you for your time this evening. It's a pleasure to be here and it's a pleasure to be part of Long Beach. I was married here 21 years ago, and in another life I had the privilege of serving on our Economic Development Committee as well as our downtown Long Beach business associates. My last two years as chair, I employ 150 people in the city, and I'm thrilled to say that many of them have been with me since before we opened our doors over 12 years ago. I would encourage you to adopt the state standards and maintain a competitive stance with our neighboring cities. I own four businesses in San Diego as well, and I will tell you that announcer in north San Diego County and I will tell you that we and what I've witnessed and I care. Deeply about the economic vitality of our city. But we have become a flyover community for economic investment and opportunity. And we have districts that desperately need jobs. And at this level. We're business owners will make decisions between technology and labor. And I'm sorry to say that and that and the economic realities, we must remain competitive with our neighboring cities. And those are difficult decisions to make. And it's not a decision that I would like to make. I encourage you to keep Long Beach strong. Keep us active and help develop more jobs in the city because desperately we have communities that need more and more jobs, not just increase in labor, but better employment numbers. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, John. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: Joshua Beadle, business owner in the second district. I'm just a man of few words. I'd like to just recommend that we keep with the states increases.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Next speaker, please, Mr. Brock.
Speaker 3: Good evening, Mayor.
Speaker 6: Vice Mayor and council members and staff. I'm Brock Howard. I'm with the downtown Long Beach Associates and I'm here tonight on behalf of Adobe and its stakeholders, as well as a member of the Council of Business Associations to strongly encourage you to vote in support of aligning.
Speaker 2: With the statewide minimum wage.
Speaker 6: In doing so, you will place the thousands of small business owners and medium sized business business owners in Long Beach on a level playing field with surrounding cities, and provide a greater level of predictability for them in years four and five. And both of these elements will improve our chances of retaining existing jobs. Not to mention those businesses finally emerging from what has been a historic recession past. This last point has an even greater consequence when one considers that many of our small business owners are also residents of our city. Thank you for your time and your consideration.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker.
Speaker 2: Good evening, Mayor. Vice Mayor. Council community workers. Familiar, Mr. Henty. My name is Nestor Rochat, and I am one of the steering committee members of the Coalition to End Wage Theft, as well as a community organizer with Lane with the Hope the Clean and Safe Ports Project. I'm taking it back today by the numerous presents and voices that have been sharing their very deep personal connection to what it means to be stolen their wages. What it means to have their minimum wage being raised and what that means to a young student like Joel Rose, who you heard just a few minutes ago talk about the difference of being able to go to a community college or attend a four year university because he had to make the choice. To help his family out. And I want to make sure that you are very mindful that the stories that you hear today or that you have actually heard are very interconnected with this city. Wage theft and raising the minimum wage. Although it is a numbers game, it is also a game to save our community residents and our folks to be able to lift their spirits and reach their highest potential. And so when you have cases like in the port trucking industry. That since 2011, 705 port truck drivers have filed wage and hour claims and the upwards of, let's see, $2 million just in waiting of those determinations. We're not just talking about millions of dollars that are being taken away from businesses or what have you. But we're talking about these millions of dollars that are going not to the families that need it the most. And so I want to make sure and that you all understand that this is definitely something that's an issue that affects our city. It is not a state issue. These port trucking companies operate in our ports. These men and women live in our neighborhoods, most of which are in the seventh, sixth and ninth District. So we're not talking about foreign folks, people that come from other places. We're talking about folks here. So as the coalition, we're asking for three very simple things that you align yourself to what you all promised, which was a Long Beach timeline. Number two, that you enforce that timeline. Wage enforcement needs to be in the city. You have community that is willing and ready to support you with that. And number three, for those young workers that they deserve the chance to get their equal pay for the equal amount of work that they do. Consider local timeline, wage enforcement and eliminate the learner's wage gap.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I have just just to clarify, also have two final speakers. It looks like on this issue, Tom, it closes speaker speaker's list here. Last call speaker's list will now be closed. I'm fortunate. But you're the last one. So last speaker. And then the speaker's list is now closed. Please.
Speaker 8: Good evening.
Speaker 7: Council members. Mr. Mayor. Mr. Deputy Mayor. I am a Long Beach resident and I believe I'm in Councilwoman Mango's district. I don't know for sure. I have not gotten active in city politics before. I am also a member of Clue. I'm a retired federal employee and by the grace of God and a good job and good wages, I am able to live and the city of Long Beach in a city that I graduated high school from and a city that I have come and known to love for many years. My children were born and raised in this community. And what I am concerned with is this council made a commitment on a wage. And now there's discussions of backing out from your own commitments. And you know, I found it interesting. I read this article here which says Long Beach is booming. Mr. Mayor, thank you for that comment. It is. And, you know, the interesting part about it is the business owners want to stay current. They want to be able to stay competitive with the rest of the communities. Business owners cannot stay competitive if they don't have competitive wages for their employees, if they are not offering a better wage. They cannot pull in better employees. They cannot pull in the kind of caliber of employee that wants to commit to the city of Long Beach, that wants to commit to the loyalty of their companies, that want to stay with small business, large business, it doesn't matter. But employee wages are a part of the loyalty and part of the commitment that the owner and the company makes with that employee. The employee will suit up and show up and do just about everything you want them to do when they're getting a fair and equitable wage . I am imploring you to stay with your own commitment and consider the fact that Long Beach needs to be a standout in this state, not a stand aside. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: My name is George Sebag. I'm a current small business owner in Long Beach. A few months ago, the city of Long Beach paid a large amount of money for a study to determine the pluses and minuses of.
Speaker 11: A minimum wage increase.
Speaker 3: One of the major things that came out of the study that I think everybody has forgotten is that 60% of the people that work in Long Beach don't live in Long Beach. That means those wages that are going to be increased in the city of Long Beach don't get to be spent in Long Beach and they don't get to be spent by Long Beach residents. The point of this to make it to you is that the state minimum wage requirement is going to affect all of the cities in the area, not just the city of Long Beach. That means that that will put Long Beach on an equal footing with all the other cities in the area as opposed to now. We are exporting 60% of our wages to other cities that are more competitive than we are because they don't have to suffer through this artificial minimum wage. The point I'm trying to make is that we should go along with the state requirement up in the minimum wage so that everybody is put on an equal footing. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Next speaker. Final speaker.
Speaker 11: Good evening, counsel. I'm here. Robert Molino, representing Rock Sans Lounge in the seventh District. I reside I live in the fifth district. And it is true there is a struggle with a lot of businesses that aren't being fair. And I think that is should be looked after as a city. But to represent the businesses. Being a small owner, small business owner, it is not easy. It is difficult being a small owner business. But I think it is better to be with the state. Coming from parents that came from Central America, from El Salvador, going through school is something that entry level jobs, it it's just an entry level job. If you want to look for careers, look for careers. But if we put ourselves in a position as a Long Beach to make businesses or allow businesses not to be attractive, we're not going to be in a good situation. Short words. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. You can turn this over to Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 1: I want to thank everyone for coming out today. I know that over the last several months we have held not most recently, but before that held many public comment meetings where the community came out. And I think that it's important to have our voices heard. And I think that the voices of Long Beach were heard not just in Long Beach, but more importantly in Sacramento. And I really feel passionately that Long Beach ended up being a leader at the state level. And many businesses who came to our meetings felt strongly that making sure that we were on an even even playing field with our neighboring cities was important. So with that, I'd like to make the motion to follow SB three.
Speaker 0: Just for clarification. Also, SB three for those that are in the audience essentially is the state mandated weight schedule. Okay. That's just for. Just just to clarify for that, Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 5: Yes. I, too, want to thank everybody for being here and speaking today. I had the last course of many months researching all of the ideas, listening to everybody's feedback, having meetings with labor and business and everybody in between to ensure that we got this right. And so I have a few things that I'd like to add. I, too, would like to also follow SB three and make sure that we align with the state. I think that's the most appropriate thing to do at this point. In addition, I'd like to offer a friendly amendment that would include a strong to ensure that we're developing a strong, weak wage enforcement program. So there's a few things that we've done already when we were looking at the economic impacts of a minimum wage, minimum wage ordinance, when we were looking at that. And so it did include $475,000, so $475,000. First, I'd like to ensure that we dedicate to supporting to the support and outreach, working with local community groups to ensure that the public is truly informed about wage theft. Two I'd like to, in addition to the $475,000, I'd like to add to wage enforcement investigators to ensure that we are have something on the city side to complement that outreach and support. And three, we do have a local Department of Industrial Relations office that Jack had mentioned to me about last last week. And so I think that it's important that we have a Department of industrial relations here locally, because we may be able to leverage funds , the funds that we're putting together, the $475,000 funds that they might have to be able to work with them. But that's just in addition to what we're going to do here as a city. So, again, $475,000 dedicated to wage enforcement investigators on top of that funding, and then also finding additional avenues, additional ways to enforce wage theft . So that is my friendly amendment. I hope you'll accept I will also support your your motion to ensure that we're aligning with the state.
Speaker 1: Will you accept? I will take those under consideration. And I'd like to hear from my colleagues. Great.
Speaker 0: Councilman Orson.
Speaker 10: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This has been a long road. And I want to, first of all, thank the many advocates who have spent many, many nights with us. Many public comments and many public hearings on this issue over the past year and a half. I want to just say that I've been inspired by many of the young people, the advocates who have really worked hard to change the landscape for workers in L.A. County, the city of L.A., and here in Long Beach, and ultimately statewide. You have really made a difference in our state, and millions of workers in the state are going to benefit from your actions and your activism. And so you should be saluted for that. It hasn't been an easy conversation because people feel strongly on both sides of this. But this city did take an affirmative stand several months ago to help force legislation in Sacramento, and I think we were all successful in doing so. We now have a statewide minimum wage and I will be in support of that part of the motion also. I just want to just say that I think it's very, very important that that we find balance in policy. And I got to tell you, making policy is not easy. It's not an easy effort, particularly when you have people on both sides of an issue that make them feel so strongly. Many of our small business owners are not wealthy people. They are their middle class folks who live in our neighborhoods who are struggling to make ends meet. Just like everybody else today, we have an opportunity to, I think, do something significant. I'm going to support I thank you, Councilmember Gonzalez, for for bringing forward the wage enforcement component, because I think that's important. You know, I think it's important because it's been very it's been articulated very, very clearly that we have some challenges in our city that we need to address and perhaps we can assist the state. I was on the state of California's website the other day, and I noticed they're actually hiring people with the Department of Labor Standards in enforcement right here in Long Beach, which is, I think, good news in a positive direction. And so perhaps we will see some assistance along the way. I like the idea of doing community outreach and education and you know, and in going into community contracts, obviously, there are people on the ground who have been working for several months who have identified the need and know where the say the bones are buried, so to speak. And so with that, we will be able to, I think, assist with with education, which I think is most important in wage enforcement. Oftentimes, workers don't know what their rights are, even though every employer is supposed to post with the minimum wages, every employer is supposed to have OSHA standards and things of that nature. Oftentimes, people are just going to work to make, make, make ends meet, and they don't pay attention to that piece. And so to have some enforcement and some some oversight, I think is is very, very important. I've also heard over the past several weeks about concerns over this training wage. And I've heard you loud and clear. I was the person that originally brought that forward. And so I'd like to make it a friendly amendment because, you know, at the end of the day, the minimum wage is the minimum wage. And you've heard me say that over and over again. My position has been consistent. Six months ago, a year ago, I told you I support a statewide minimum wage. And we were we achieved that. And so with that, I'd like to add a friendly amendment to remove the training wage component of this this ordinance, if that would be acceptable. Because I think the speakers have made it very clear. I mean, when I was 16 years old, I made the minimum wage and it wasn't any different then than the wage for for four for anyone else. And so that's a component that I'd like to remove from this this ordinance.
Speaker 1: I will be assured that there are no variances and no training wage, and my motion. Is that clear? Mr. Bass.
Speaker 7: As I understand it, we would be following the state S.B. three all the way, which does have a a provision that allows for 160 hours of pay at 85%, as opposed to what was proposed earlier in the city's ordinance, which was 480 hours at 85%. So the state the state would if we follow the state, as was suggested, someone would be able to employ a new entrant into the job market for that 120 hour period at 85%.
Speaker 10: Thank you for that clarification and I'd be fine with that.
Speaker 1: Thank you.
Speaker 10: I just think, you know, the role of local government is in particularly in this on this particular issue is is is is being challenged, is changing. And I appreciate the fact that that so many people have feel so strongly about this. Generally, the wage enforcement component is something that would be done by the state and has traditionally been done by the state. But I think the workers here have made their point, and I think that there is a will from the council to to move in that direction. So I'll support that.
Speaker 1: Thank you. And I also want to thank you. I know that the wage dialog throughout the weeks has been complicated, and I feel that you've been very thoughtful and really looking to examples across the state, and I appreciate you being a leader on that. And of course, I would take that recommendation. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Councilman Pearce. I'm sorry. It's Pierce. Councilwoman Pierce is next after Councilman Price and Mary Richardson. So I'm looking at the wrong thing here. Councilman Price.
Speaker 5: No problem. So I have a few questions for. So, first of all, I support the motion to. Adopt the state's minimum wage policy. I definitely think one of the biggest issues that was raised through the discussion with our business community in advance of the vote last time was making sure that our business community is on a level playing field with nearby cities. And I think that's hugely important. And as some of the people in this room know, I'm grateful that I'm able to be part of this discussion, because the last time this issue came to a vote, I actually received a phone call in the middle of public comment from Chief Terry because my kids had called 911. My husband had been taken to the hospital. So I had a very legitimate reason for not being here. And I was texting my colleagues from the E.R. and I'm grateful for the council colleagues who voted last week to allow me to be part of this conversation, because it's very important to my district and to the city as a whole. So thank you for allowing me to do that. The few questions that I have really have to do with the ways wage enforcement piece, and there's a few things I want to talk about and then I want to hear what my my colleagues have to say regarding some of the concerns that I have. So I'm going to go through a little bit of data on some research that I, I did along with my staff in preparation for tonight's meeting. But just preliminarily, before we get into the slides. Mr. Mayes, can the city actually enforce a state ordinance?
Speaker 7: If the state ordinance specifically gives this city to have the authority to do that, it can. And we will go back and review SB three thoroughly to see if there is that authority to do that.
Speaker 5: So sitting here today, we don't even know if the city has the authority to enforce a state ordinance.
Speaker 7: This particular state ordinance? That's correct.
Speaker 5: So we would be voting on something that we don't even know that we have the authority to do.
Speaker 7: Well, basically, as I understand what you would be voting on if the motion stays as it currently is with the two friendly amendments that were accepted, we would see.
Speaker 1: Only the second friendly line as it's still pending.
Speaker 7: Oh, I'm sorry. Sorry, sir. With the second friendly amendment that was made, there wouldn't necessarily be a need to bring back a city ordinance. We would simply follow the state regulations, but add the component, which would basically be budget adjustments to hire additional city staff who would assist in community outreach and waive wage theft investigation.
Speaker 5: Okay. And I shared with a few of my colleagues that I have some data that I wanted to share with this group tonight. And so I put it into a PowerPoint just a little bit ago just to make it so that we all kind of follow along on it. But my question is this the friendly that's proposed asked for $475,000 in addition to two investigators. How much would those investigators cost?
Speaker 8: Councilman Price. We are estimating that with salary benefits and some materials and supplies and in some vehicles that it would be about $220,000 for for two positions.
Speaker 5: So we're talking about about $700,000 total.
Speaker 8: Correct, for the first year.
Speaker 5: Okay. And then how much would and this I'm assuming if we're going to set up a wage enforcement department in the city, it's some if if the amendment was approved. What's the problem?
Speaker 1: I think there's a misunderstanding. There was no department set up in the friendly. Unless I misheard the price.
Speaker 5: Oh, okay. Let me.
Speaker 1: Gonzales.
Speaker 5: Let me. Let me rephrase. If we set aside $475,000 for wage enforcement and added to investigators, I'm assuming that the employees who want to see wage enforcement in the city of Long Beach would want that to be an ongoing thing, not a one time thing. Is that an assumption that we're making?
Speaker 1: Do we? Yeah.
Speaker 5: Do we know? I have. We. Have we? Is this going to be a one time fund or is this something that we hope to do on an ongoing basis?
Speaker 8: So, Councilwoman Pryce, my understanding for the original city manager's proposal, we did use one time funds for the for 75. And we will work to to look at how much it actually cost to run a program on an ongoing basis. That could be less than that amount, or it could be more depending on the actual case loads.
Speaker 5: But what I'm saying is we wouldn't be able to use one time funds for an ongoing program.
Speaker 8: We would at some point when we have an ongoing program, would want to build it into the budget structurally per our financial policies.
Speaker 5: Okay. So in regards to this 700,000 or so, more than 700,000, what enforcement mechanisms do we expect the investigators to be able to do? Have we thought about what they would be able to do that doesn't already exist through the state?
Speaker 8: Councilwoman Price, we we were planning to enforce the local minimum wage now that we have an ordinance now that we're following the state's ordinance. We would be looking at following all types of minimum wage and wage theft items. So that would include we would like more direction, you know, exactly on that. But that would include overtime issues and wage lost wage items issues. Okay. So.
Speaker 5: Can the city adjudicate a wage theft claim that's made in the city? But that's against a state ordinance.
Speaker 7: Councilwoman Pryce, as I indicated, will be reviewing SB three thoroughly to see if they did delegate any authority to local municipalities to do that. If if they didn't specifically do that, the answer would be no. So it would be more if the motion passed, as it's currently phrased, it would be more gathering information, taking complaints, perhaps working together with the local state agencies to provide them information about our investigations, those those sorts of things. And we'd outreach, obviously, to the local DA to see what assistance we could be.
Speaker 5: Okay. So the friendly that I would like to make and I'd like Councilmember Mongo to consider it is setting aside the money, but allowing our city to work with the Department of Labor to I'm sorry, the Department of Industrial Relations to determine how exactly the city could work with the state. First of all, we need to review the state ordinance to make sure that the city has the power to get involved in its own enforcement, to assuming that we do. I'd like us to work with them to find out how exactly we could augment their services. Because based on my conversation with them and I spoke with the Labor Commissioner's office, they are under the umbrella of the State Department of Finance. They're currently funding numerous new positions for this coming fiscal year in order to deal with wage enforcement and wage theft specifically. And one of the areas where there's been a lot of progress statewide is the mere idea of calling it wage theft like that. Calling it what it is alone has resulted in the claims being treated differently. And that's really only happened with Governor Brown's administration. And one of the things that we had a very long conversation that we've been talking for a while with my staff and today I personally spoke with them. I'm calling it what it is has resulted in a very different focus from the statewide level to the issue of wage enforcement. So they are funding a whole new crop of positions for this fiscal year, including positions in the Long Beach office. The majority of the new positions are going to go into the retaliation team because that's an area where they found people are hesitant to file wage theft claims because of retaliation issues. Their field office in Long Beach is very active and will be receiving both field investigators and folks to work in retaliation statewide. They actually received in this past year 32,000 claims that they forwarded to their adjudication office. It's my understanding that even with our own wage enforcement arm, the city of Long Beach could not assist in the adjudication of claims. We could not we would need to work with the state in order to be able to adjudicate claims. So we would be we would not be able to advance or move along or are fast track any of these claims because we would still be on a state timeline for adjudication. The field office last year in Long Beach received 2500 claims. That's how many claims were filed in that office. The claims were handled. The L.A. Office received 3100 claims. The claims are handled anywhere from a few days to up to a year if the process is actually going to go to an adjudication hearing. But every claim that was filed was resolved in some capacity. Only a third of the claims actually went to adjudication. So two thirds of the claims were actually processed by the state's wage theft enforcement team. To me, that sounds very effective. What they said is they work routinely with community groups in order to enhance their outreach efforts. They have a budget already for outreach and marketing. They have a field investigator team for field enforcement team. They have retaliation services. That's a very robust team that, again, they're adding to. They have an adjudication legal team. What the labor commissioner told me today is that if the city were going to adopt something like this, we would absolutely need because we'd want to do it right. We wouldn't just want to say we did it so that we can, you know, get a headline or to get a win. We would want to do it right, because that's what the workers deserve. The workers deserve a team that is actually committed and has the subject matter expertize we would need. In-house labor attorneys like the State Department of Industrial Relations has they have a whole team of attorneys there. We would not be able to afford that with the $700,000 that we're planning to put into outreach. They also do outreach and marketing that's pretty robust. They have news radio ads. They advertise on Spanish radio as well as Spanish TV. They have bus ads. I shared this with one of my colleagues today, and we both agreed that this was a really great thing that we didn't know about. I told her I was going to mention it tonight. They have fliers that they pass out. They have TV ads that they do on Spanish TV as well as regular TV. And they also have a video on the process that they show. They have a video that they show people on what the process is, how you can apply for a wage theft claim. When you go in to make a wage theft claim, they talk about what the process is to make sure that your wage theft claim is adjudicated, who you can contact through the process. These are all things that they offer and they do offer at the Long Beach office. They also have a public works team that specially enforces prevailing wage claims. So they work directly with prevailing wage claims. They were very, very open to coming to the city of Long Beach, coming to council for a study session. If we were interested and talking to us about if we wanted to augment our enforcement somehow, how we could do that so that it best aligns with the state. They also talked about and some of the other states that we researched have done consequences for wage theft violators. So wage theft claims can serve as a basis for rescinding or refusing to enter into a contract with violators. Wage theft claims can be the basis for denial of a permit or a license, and the requirement that a business post a notice when they are the subject of a wage theft investigation are all different methodologies that other states have used and other states have utilized very effectively to address wage theft issues. So these are all options that I would like us to consider and so that we can formulate if we want to do wage enforcement. And we feel like there's something that we can do to augment what the state is already doing, then I think we should move forward with a plan. So right now we're allocating, we're proposing and I know the friendly hasn't been accepted, but over $700,000 to something that one we don't know if we can enforce yet. And two, we don't know how we would go about enforcing it. My recommendation would be I'm not opposed to having some sort of an enforcement arm in the in the city of Long Beach. I actually think it's a great idea. I just don't want to duplicate what the state is already doing. And I also don't want to take money that we could be using for other things if we're talking about a structural budget. We could be talking about additional police officers, which is what we need more than anything right now. So I would rather say let's take a look at what the state is already doing and how they think we might be able to augment their services to really neat meet the needs of our city. And if we're able to do that, then I think we might be able to come in with a number that's less than $700,000, which really would be a service to our constituents. So that's just a friendly that I want to propose and, you know, put out there. And I would love to hear from the rest of my colleagues. I'm open on this, but that's just given the data. I don't want us to be paying to duplicate something that's already being done.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilman, are you going to keep going on the speaker's list or are we back to you?
Speaker 1: I'd like to take that under advisement along with Lena's motion at the same time, I'll keep those in the list.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 6: Thank you, Mayor Garcia. And thank you. Maker of the motion councilmember mongo and Seconder Gonzalez. And I love the tenor from the entire council about compromise and having, you know, been a part of this debate for more than a year. Hearing hours of testimony from the community, from business, from workers. I am proud that Long Beach did lead and encouraged the state to go ahead and take action. And we did it what we considered the Long Beach way. We said when we passed this, it was the Long Beach way. But when we passed the Long Beach way, we didn't necessarily know that the state was going to go ahead and pass as well. And that sort of, in my opinion, before the idea was you get to 2019 and you hear, you know, you do a study and see what those impacts are and then you make decisions based on that. And the floor at that point was nine or $10. But that's changed. The floor has changed. We know that the fight for 15 is one on the state level. People are going to get the $15. The question now is when do they get to $15? And the question now is, what do we consider the Long Beach way? Well, the process that we've gone through over the course of the last few last year has highlighted a number of issues. Workers have come forward and said very clearly that Long Beach need someone said it's night. Long Beach needs to stand out and not stand aside and protect workers and make sure that workers can can have their forces, their wages enforced. We've heard from businesses that they want a stable environment to run their business. We've heard that tonight. I think I'm here to speak in the spirit of compromise here. Gandhi said all compromise is based on give and take, but there can be no give and take on fundamentals. Any compromise on mere fundamentals is a surrender, for it is all give and no take. So what are the fundamentals for me? I believe that in order to find a middle ground, we have to make sure that everybody who came here understand. I have to value, you know, the opinions of everybody here. And if anybody leaves without necessarily getting their way, I understand. But you need to value their their point of view and the perspective. And I've heard a bunch of testimony tonight specifically about wage theft and balancing out the interests of business with aligning so. So, that said, if we're going to lead, I need my support. Tonight, I want to be able to support and be in consensus. But it is contingent it is entirely contingent on the acceptance of the very first friendly made by Councilmember Gonzalez, because there's no path for me to support this. And I would encourage the whole council to say no if there isn't a balanced a balanced approach here that talks about not just meeting the needs of business, we support that, but we need to acknowledge the fact that people have come here time after time and highlighted that the state is not cutting it. So without that, I can't move forward. So I'm going to ask, what is the motion on the floor right now?
Speaker 0: Okay. Let me repeat that. The motion on the floor. There's a motion on the floor in two friendlies that neither of which have been accepted yet by the maker of the motion, which is Councilman Bongo. Currently, the motion on the floor is to, one, align the wage schedule to follow the Senate bill, a state program. That's the motion on the floor then. Then there's two friendlies, one which was made by Councilwoman Gonzalez, which included a a strong wage enforcement and kind of wage theft investigation policy with the addition of investigators to the already budgeted amount. And there was also a friendly by Councilman Price, which was to add, if I get it wrong, Councilman Price it just to do more research and to how we could work close closer with the state and other agencies to find ways of doing wage theft in that direction and not necessarily allocating the amount of money that was put forward tonight.
Speaker 5: Well, actually, what's that? We come we do we meet with the Department of Industrial Relations and come up with a better estimate of how much we think it's going to cost the state to not duplicate their efforts and have an effective enforcement team. Because right now there's nothing our investigators could do to adjudicate the process faster than it's already being adjudicated.
Speaker 0: Thank you. So so back to you.
Speaker 6: Vice Mayor Richardson, thank you. So. Well, first point of order, can we even have a debate on friendlies that haven't been accepted?
Speaker 7: It would be better if the friendlies were accepted and debated. Yes.
Speaker 6: Thank you. So I would love to support. I know how much work Councilmember Mongeau has done on this. I know how much work Councilmember Gonzalez has done on this. But. If I don't hear an acceptance, then while I have the floor, I have no choice but to offer a substitute. So I would like to hear which of those are you going to. I don't want to debate or speak to something that's not on the floor.
Speaker 1: I respect that. And I would appreciate if before you make a substitute, I have the opportunity to hear from Pierce and your anger. It's only fair that I know that the order of which people queue up has some advantages, but I think that they've also been major players in this. And so I just want to hear their perspective before knowing where I stand.
Speaker 6: Okay, so and I'm fine with that.
Speaker 1: I'll be ready for your substitute in case.
Speaker 6: Thank you. So here's what I'll say. And I. And this is out of order. I prefer not to do it this way, but this is the option that the Council is putting in front of me. The on the first substitute, I agree on the set. I mean, on the first friendly. I agree on the second friendly. I agree there are certain certain questions that need to be answered. But this debate has linger for too long and frankly, we can move forward with the city staff has already put forth a plan and really it's a question on whether we legally can enforce it or and then what can we integrate from the state level. And that's not something I feel like needs to be debate. That level of detail needs to be debated at council. I think we can move forward tonight with staff's plan and if anything needs to be adjusted based on anything we learn, then there are ways to do that. And we do that all the time. We learn something that happens, you know, through the state and but, you know, through the state. And we need to make adjustments. But tonight, we need to set aside if we're going to if we're going align with the state, we need to set aside the funding tonight to make sure that we are we are one of the best in Fort. We've done it the Long Beach Way, which is now going to be defined as, you know, a city that takes its workers seriously. And we don't wait on the state to make sure everyone's paid a fair wage. So that that would be what I have to say. And I look forward to seeing what the final motion is. Thanks.
Speaker 0: Councilman Mongo. And then we're going to go into Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 1: That's chair of Budget Oversight. I will state that over the last several weeks I've had more meetings than I can possibly count, both by phone and in person with the budget officer of our city. Erickson I think she has done a phenomenal job. I think that within the 475. There's a lot of components that are not. Restricted. I think that what Vice Mayor Richardson is saying is really a testament to how the city staff had worked with putting together their budget. And then additionally, the mayor's recommendation. So I definitely see your perspective and I appreciate that you're going to wait to hear from our other colleagues before making a substitute, because I appreciate that you're allowing me to maintain the floor. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 8: Thank you. And. Thank you, everybody, that's done so much work leading up to this point, to the small businesses that got activated and got engaged. I think you guys took a lesson out of the organizing handbook. Job well done. I really applaud you guys for that work. It would be a surprise to anybody if I said I wasn't in support of increasing the minimum wage. I have sat in too many living rooms talking to workers. Many of them, yes, they deserve a wage increase. And yes, the state has done that. But many of them have said shown me paychecks where they're not making what they're worth and what they have been committed to make. And so the conversation around wage theft is a real win for us. And Long Beach and one that I know from watching procedures. I know from having workers go through the process that, yes, there is things that the state and the county can do, but nobody can ensure that workers in our city are making sure that they're getting the wages they deserve, that they're getting their meal breaks that they deserve, their 15 minute breaks and all those things that wage self includes like those in Long Beach. And so my my very first question is to be clear that this would say that we are following the state level, we're following the state level on wage timeline, but that there would be a wage enforcement ordinance around wage theft . Is that what you're proposing?
Speaker 1: Council Member So I think that in my discussions with Mr. Mays and with Councilmember Gonzalez that we are not clear yet. There are instances in the state of California like a sworn law enforcement officer such as myself, that we can't enforce state laws and ordinances. Today I met with someone from the federal level of the federal executive board, and there are things that a city is able to do. And so before we bring anything like that back, I would say that that would maybe perhaps be something that Councilwoman Gonzalez, this committee could look into and discuss before we get ahead of ourselves . I think that leading and making the Long Beach way a part of the discussion and figuring out what the right fit is, I think also needs some process and some voice. And so I would like to empower Councilmember Gonzalez when we know what that looks like to meet with city staff, to meet with the community and figure out. And that committee would potentially long term, if we felt it necessary, which it might not be, bring something to the council if we find it necessary. Is that make sense?
Speaker 8: Yes. I just wanted to be very clear that it's not just about staffing, not one person, but that we're saying we support going on the state timeline, but recognizing and empowering us as a city to enforce locally because we have local small businesses, we've got big business here. But while the state, they just don't have the resources, they're understaffed even with looking at new staffing that that's very clear.
Speaker 1: And I'll say again and I can't say the year for certain because it's been so long, but. When I worked at a factory, I took a claim to the Labor Board and so in discussions with my colleagues, including you, we kind of talked about that. I went through the process, but one of the reasons that I was able to help several other workers at my office is because of outreach efforts and those other components that are built into the 475. And so again, it takes it takes dialog to get there. And oftentimes those those crucial moments in your life, you don't remember all the components that that really weighed in. So I appreciate your in my dialog on those matters. And I think that those are the components that are really going to make a difference for the Long Beach Way.
Speaker 8: Great. And so thank you for that very much. Councilmember Mongeau going on that. I think the other important part that's that's really important is the cultural competency and making sure that we have people that live in neighborhoods going meeting with workers that they have community with. And that, again, is another reason why I would support Councilmember Gonzalez's motion to have two compliance officers. I'll go so far to say, and I don't want to complicate things too much, but even those two compliance officers, while they will be helpful, I still in my heart feel like that's not enough. And so I say that today by saying that supporting this motion with the friendly amendment is still so much less than I think that our workers deserve and want to make sure that we are just moving forward with the proposal on the table. But recognizing that. As much as we can advocate to have more funds, go to those community groups that are able to outreach to workers. The more worker outreach we have, the more turnaround we'll have and the more funds will come back to the city based on how many bad actors there are. And so I. I'm not going to make a friendly I'm not going to make a emotion for the sake of making sure that we move on today, but that I would fully expect for us to make a a full office of enforcement down the road that we continue to support not only the funds that are here, but the two compliance officers that are here as well on the table. And so. I'll leave it there for now.
Speaker 0: Calcium for your ring. Thank you.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mayor. This has been a long discussion tonight. Also, it's been actually a long discussion for the last two years. I recall when we first when I was first running for council, this was an important issue to the public. Wage theft was huge. Also, minimum wage. We're there now. We're here at that point where we're actually ready to take a vote on this issue. I'm somewhat disappointed and I want to be clear on that, that, you know, we didn't really or we are not moving away from the ordinance that we had that we adopted a few weeks back, a few months ago in terms of doing it the Long Beach way. It was a very aggressive methodology that we were going to use. And I think because we were that aggressive, I think we actually led the field and let the state to also get aggressive and get ahead ahead of us by adopting a minimum wage that led to a path to $15. So, you know, I think that the city council needs to take a lot of that credit because of its aggressiveness in pushing $15 a year before the state. So I'm really pleased with that, the fact that we're now moving towards in another direction in adopting the state's plan. Okay. So, I mean, we're going to be moving towards the end and it's not it's not bad. However, the other part of it, in terms of the enforcement aspects of of wage theft is and always has been a very important, important component in this path to $15 an hour. And and I'm very pleased with with the motion that that is being that is setting the table now in my I would think are beginning to set a pattern here that, you know, enough of studies, enough of investigating this or investigating that. Let's be aggressive, which we are. Let's adopt this proposal of a path to 15. Let's get two enforcement officers there, which would be awesome and let's fund it. I mean, there's nothing that says more about who we are as a city council and as a city than to put money where our mouth is. Let's fund it. Let's stop it. Let's get it together so that when we are encountering these issues of wage theft. An iPad 215 that we're going to be aggressively investigating it now if we're not allowed to do that, because our city attorney has decided that maybe we're in conflict with the state, so be it. So we are we save some money with the state, takes it over, not a problem. But the fact that we have aggressively invested with that, we are going to aggressively investigate it ourselves. I think speaks volumes for us in terms of the city and what we want to do and how we really, really want to support our employees and our our workers and anybody who works within the boundaries of the city of Long Beach, I think that speaks volumes about what we are and how we feel about our community. So I'm really I'm going to be very supportive of the the motion. I have one question. However, Councilmember Mongo, you mentioned a committee that Mr. Gonzalez is in charge of. What committee is it?
Speaker 5: Our Burntisland harbor.
Speaker 2: Entitlements that were the that this would relate.
Speaker 1: No, it was just an idea that should the city attorney find the need to look at wage theft, that is a particular committee that has some expertize on it that might be helpful in that the wage theft community that it's come forward most strongly has been specifically in the trucking industry. And so we're we're not sure we need anything additional. We think we are fine. I think we're fine where we are. And I think that we'll cross that bridge when we come to it. But I agree with Vice Mayor Richardson. We need to make a decision tonight what that decision is. I have one more councilmember to listen to and then I'd like to figure out where I am.
Speaker 2: Okay. I appreciate that. And again, I will re-emphasize my support for the motion by Gonzales. I mean, excuse me to the amendment that includes Gonzalez is perfect.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember Supernanny.
Speaker 6: Thank you. I do not have a friendly. I just have a couple of questions, and I just want to. Clarify what Councilmember Turanga just said, that we need to send a strong message, but we also have to be efficient with our funds and that's our fiduciary responsibility to the taxpayers. I had a question also about the line that we need to set aside funding tonight. I guess this is for Mr. Mays. Could city council come back at a later date after we study the issue and and come up with some funding at that time? Yes. Okay. I'd also like to just. This is an emotional issue, so I'd like to just provide an analogy. My council district, part of our northern border, is the four or five freeway, which is the state agency Caltrans. Right through the heart of my district is PCH and the traffic circle. And both of those are controlled by Caltrans. The local agencies here working with the state agency in those cases is not a model of efficiency. So I think I'd like to recommend that we we look at in detail what is required for enforcement and study the issues a little longer before we move forward. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman. Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 8: Yeah. Yeah. Oh, my God. Okay.
Speaker 5: Thank you. I just. I appreciate the discussion. I, too, am I'm just very I'm going to just reiterate that I think that the the funds need to be set aside today. You know, this has gone on for way too long. I think a lot of us thinking that we had originally gone with the Long Beach way. We've now moved to going with the state alignment and we believe in that. And I think that, you know, there's a seems like the council's headed in that direction, but I think that the wage theft component is.
Speaker 8: Very, very important.
Speaker 5: It's extremely important. And we may think that it's not a big deal. And of course, we don't know exactly what this is.
Speaker 8: Going to look like. There's still a lot.
Speaker 5: Of ideas and details to flesh out. We hope that maybe down the road this could possibly be an ordinance we're looking into that what we do have the luxury of having next to us is the city of L.A. that is already enacted. And so there's a lot to learn from that. There's a lot to learn in this next year as we are still in alignment with the state. But I think setting aside this money now specifically for wage theft, education and outreach, all of this money will go towards that to ensure that we were we are truly doing what we can to inform the public of their rights and what they can do and how adding an extra layer of fear of local enforcement. So again, we're going to have to hopefully with this friendly amendment, if it is accepted that to wage the investigators, wage investigators, and then in addition, the $475,000. And then, of course, as Councilwoman Pryce mentioned, we'd love to work with the Department of Industrial Relations to see what other methods that we can do to leverage additional resources with this local office. So I just wanted to reiterate that point. I think a lot of people have spoken. I appreciate everybody's ideas. We're certainly open to more ideas.
Speaker 8: As this.
Speaker 5: Evolves and gets, you know, bigger and better and who knows what happens. So thanks again.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 5: Thank you. So is it possible for us and maybe this is something for Councilwoman Mango to think about, to set aside the money, which is 770,000 or whatever the case may be, set aside that money and have staff come back with a report back to us on one whether we can even I mean, we're setting aside money for something we don't even know that we have the power to enforce. So can we set aside the money and then have staff come back and tell us, can the city even enforce this? And to if we can, what would be the plan of how we're going to use the money? Because I don't even know what I'm what we're voting on right now. I mean, we're voting on two investigators and $475,000 to do outreach. I mean, I don't even what kind of outreach are we going to do for $475,000? So what I'd like to do is, is get us in a position where we know what our city dollars are going to. I mean, I, along with a lot of my colleagues, have to we all have to report back to our constituents on where we're spending our money and why. So, you know, a wage theft, there's no doubt about it. And I know there's, you know, heckling and stuff going on. Wage theft is an important issue. Just because someone doesn't vote the way you want, just because they don't give the amount of money that you want doesn't mean it's not an important issue and it doesn't mean they don't care about it. And that's just the reality. So let's just stop being divisive and saying, just because you don't give me exactly what I want, you don't care about it. What I'm saying is, can't we educate ourselves a little bit more about I mean, when else have we voted blindly to allocate a certain amount of money to something that we don't even know how much it's going to cost? So my recommendation would be, I'm okay if we want to set the money aside, encumber it, don't use it, set it aside. I know that they had 475 listed in the proposed budget, so we're going to have to come up with another 222,000 from somewhere. So can we set that aside? Don't touch it. Don't encumber it. Leave it there. It's safe. But we don't actually allocated to enforcement until staff comes back and tells us one we can enforce. There's no prohibition against it in the statute, in the state statute. And to this is how we would enforce because I'm not clear right now, we're voting on positions that I don't really know what they would do or how they would fit with the state. It's like it's like hiring some traffic and engineers to monitor the portion of PCH that Caltrans currently oversees. What exactly are they going to do? Because they can't change signal timing. They can't repave the road. There's nothing they can do. They have to work with the state. So I'm not really clear the that of what we're voting on. So I understand. We want we want everybody to get a win. And I get that. Let's keep the money. Let's not spend it. Let's keep it encumbered. Let's keep it safe. We won't touch it. But let's find out exactly how we're going to use it before we vote on it. So I would like to actually bifurcate the two issues because that that would to me be the simplest way to to go forward with the vote, because I do want to support us going with the state minimum wage.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman Pierce.
Speaker 8: Thank you. I. Want to first say that, you know, that this is about compromise, that we're making a lot of compromise today. Whenever everybody in this room, business, community Workers Council, the mayor, I've worked for a long time to do the Long Beach Way and have a Long Beach ordinance so that the wage enforcement part is so critical and so important, and that the money that was identified, this 475 was money that we already talked to our budget committee. We already talked to city manager. We already had briefings to figure out what that money would be spent on. And the majority of that money was earmarked for outreach. Yes, because outreach and making sure that workers are making a fair wage is in getting the money that they deserve is more important to me than spending money on a fountain, which I know city staff is tired of hearing me complain about spending $700,000 on a fountain. If we can do that, we can spend money and make sure that enforcement locally is being done. And so I had a question for Councilmember. Could we make it? Are we looking to make it a specific ordinance for wage enforcement? Would that be that might be a city attorney question. Right.
Speaker 1: So just to repeat where we are, the current motion on the floor is to follow SB three, which is the state regulations and escalation and all the avenues that have options related to the governors changes and things like that, so that we as a city are following the state. One state with relation to the for 75, you are correct that was budgeted and just and we have as a council had I guess eight weeks of meetings related to the budget where those questions could be asked. It actually is a bit more I know that you definitely keyed in on the outreach component. The 475 is more than just outreach. It's actually some staff in the city attorney's office that are necessary for a couple of things and then outreach as well for CBOs and a few other things. So it's a it's a comprehensive plan. And to be fair to all of us, I know that I've had 40 budget meetings between staff and constituents and all the different matters. So I, I have notes in this big pile right here of what the specifics are. But when I discussed it and I believed in it, those were things that keyed up to you. And for me, the staffing in the city attorney's office is key, because one of the components of this is we do not know if we need an additional ordinance or not, but that stuff would be available in the city's attorney's office to do that research and that look. And we would not need to make those decisions tonight. We are completely capable to set aside and follow the recommended budget of the city manager and the mayor's proposal, along with the potential. Should I accept Councilmember Gonzalez's motion a friendly which I'm inclined to do at this point? It sounds like that would be the compromise that would really move us towards following SB three, which has been my priority, and I know it's also been Councilmember Austin's priority since the beginning. So to do that, we would have to and I know you said the word compliance officers, but I will hope you take the clarification. It's going to be investigators, which are actually a compliance is a reactive versus an investigator, which is a proactive. And I knew that that was really important in discussions with the community. And so I hope that that clarifies and unites us as a council. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And finally of Councilmember Austin.
Speaker 10: Thank you. And I promise not to make any friendly amendments. Just want to get some clarification.
Speaker 4: Thank you.
Speaker 10: Because I did not hear much about well, what I did here is Councilmember Elina Gonzalez is a friendly amendment, which I support. I just want to get some clarification because I am on the Budget Oversight Committee and we have been kind of massaging our budget for FY17 over the last several weeks. Is the intent to make the for 75 one time or structural? It's currently one time okay. And I think that's good because entering into the community contracts. I would hope that there is a mechanism to to a support for accountability and real deliverables. My hope is that, you know, this wage enforcement thing is not something that is necessary. You know, five, ten years out, maybe we can jump in, get into it immediately, address some issues and really, really work hard to educate and do the outreach and education of the community where it may not be necessary as part of, you know, just what is what is day to day operations for the city, particularly. And then these community organizations then become somewhat employees of the state of the city. Correct. So I want to make sure that that that there is some mechanism in place to make sure that there is accountability for the outreach and education and that we we can have some report backs on deliverables, as we would any other city department that we tasked to do do a a function. So it takes.
Speaker 0: Okay. See no other council comment. Thank you, Councilmember. I'm going to turn this back over to Councilman Mongo to take action on the friendlies in front of her. And then we're going to go to a vote. And I want to just also make a couple clarifications we think are important. The first is just as a as a reminder. I know it's in the budget. The 475 that is in the budget as presented is for a couple of different things. Part of that money is set aside for the attorney. So we actually bring in an attorney to look at the labor issues, to look at wage issues. That's dedicated to enforcement. The attorney also has support staff as part of this budget for the Force 75. That, as we know, is one time this year, but certainly could could continue on in in years as we go forward. There's also probably $100,000 of that for 75 or maybe 150. Correct me if I'm wrong, Leah, that's dedicated to education and also work with community groups to ensure that there's actually education happening about wage enforcement and about wage laws. And I think, at least in my opinion, that it's been presented that regardless of whether the council was going to go and align with the state or not, that those resources are still needed so that we can do education regardless of that decision. At least that's been my impression of the of the conversation. And so that's where I think that 475 is, is going it's attorney enforcement, it's education, it's working with community groups. And and then the friendly motion that's being done by Councilwoman Gonzalez is to add two investigators to the already budgeted for 75, which, in my opinion, is the beginning and really the creation of a pretty strong wage enforcement and a a this and somebody to address the conversation about wage theft which had been going on in this community for a very long time. And so to the community that's here and I know that there's a difference of opinion on on on a variety of things being discussed. But we are going from having essentially no dollars at the city dedicated to wage theft and enforcement to a pretty significant program if the motion and friendly is accepted tonight. So I, I strongly support Councilman Gonzalez's friendly motion to Councilman Mango Councilwoman Price, and then we'll, as anybody else, will go to a vote.
Speaker 5: So it's since we're voting on two different things. One is whether we have our own city ordinance and another is creating basically a new. Enforcement piece. Can we bifurcate this vote?
Speaker 7: Councilwoman Price, you would have to make a substitute motion to divide the question, and then we would if there was support for dividing the question, we could do that and we would take two separate votes. But you'd need a motion to to divide the question first.
Speaker 5: Okay. Well, I would make a substitute to divide the motion so that those of us who don't agree on the friendly can have the option to vote, you know, in the way that we believe on the first part.
Speaker 7: So as I understand, if the so the substitute would be to divide the question to in the first instance, vote to follow the the the schedules and so forth set forth by the state and S.B. three. That would be the first question that would be voted on. And the second would be whether or not to accept the two friendly amendments as stated, provided that Councilwoman Mongo eventually accepts those friendlies.
Speaker 5: Yes, I mean, that just would allow all of us to be able to lodge a vote and be able to, you know, voice our our our our vote and still have things go the way they're going to go. But it would allow everybody to be able to vote the way they want.
Speaker 0: Case. Was that a substitute motion?
Speaker 4: Was that funny?
Speaker 0: And is that a substitute motion or no?
Speaker 5: Yes. Yes.
Speaker 0: I was there a second on that motion. Casey no second on that motion. The motion doesn't have a second. So back to the original motion, which is Councilwoman Stacy Mango's motion and what have you. What have you decided on the friendlies?
Speaker 1: I will accept Councilman Lina Gonzalez's friendly amendment to add. And I think, Leah correct me, I can add them tonight, even though we haven't passed the whole budget, it would just be a supplement.
Speaker 8: Councilwoman Mango, we would you would direct us to Adam, and we would need to work to find an offset or a source of funding.
Speaker 1: Within the next week. Wonderful. We'll work on that. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Okay. So there is now a motion and a second on the floor to go with the state schedule and to create a strong wage enforcement and wage theft component within the city budget. Please cast your votes, members. Sorry. Vice Mayor Richardson jetting off to say.
Speaker 3: Okay.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Okay. The motion carries. Thank you very much. We were going to go take a one minute recess and we'll begin with the rest of the council meeting. I can go in and get all the council members back so we can start the meeting.
Speaker 3: You don't.
Speaker 6: Always get.
Speaker 4: Oh, I suppose. Your.
Speaker 0: Okay. Madam Clerk, if you can, please do the roll call.
Speaker 1: Councilwoman Gonzalez. Councilmember Pearce. Councilwoman Price. Councilmember Superman here. Councilwoman Mongo. Councilman Andrews. Councilmember Otunga. Councilman Austin. Vice Mayor Richardson. Mayor Garcia. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to review draft ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by adding Part IV to Title 5; and by adding Section 5.06.020.A.7, all relating to a Long Beach Minimum Wage Ordinance, and provide further direction. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_09062016_16-0809 | Speaker 1: Councilwoman Gonzalez. Councilmember Pearce. Councilwoman Price. Councilmember Superman here. Councilwoman Mongo. Councilman Andrews. Councilmember Otunga. Councilman Austin. Vice Mayor Richardson. Mayor Garcia.
Speaker 0: I'm here. Thank you. We're going to go ahead and do the budget items that are the leftover voter budget items that Councilman Mongo is going to walk us through. So I turn this over to her and I believe there's probably five or six items that we need to vote on. So. Councilwoman Mongo.
Speaker 1: So today at our Budget Oversight Committee, we were looking to pull push through, not push through remote up from the Budget Oversight Committee, several budgets. Lia has the specific item numbers, but it is water, gas and oil, the port and the fee schedule with the exception of one fee schedule item that will be set aside to be further discussed at next week's Budget Oversight Committee for a decision recommendation to the city. I hope that we have your support.
Speaker 0: Thank you. STEM.
Speaker 8: Hey, Mr. Mayor and members of Council. So we are asking for four passages, items 1.1, which is the the Board of Harbor Commissioners budget, and that's $774 million items 1.5, which is the master fee and set charges schedule with the exception of pirate fees. Items 1.7, which is the Long Beach Community Investment Company budget of $11.4 million. I had a 1.8, which is a motion to approve the transfer from a $17.8 million from the Harbor Revenue Fund and then items 1.9, which is the recommendation to adopt a resolution establishing the Gann appropriations limit. And you will need to take votes on each item and I can answer any questions on each item as they come forward.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 1: I think that the committee and the department heads, along with the city staff, have looked at this thoroughly and we are recommending them as originally proposed.
Speaker 0: We have a. Are you going to walk us through through each one separately? How are we going to do it?
Speaker 1: So since there are no adjustments from the original presentations that this body saw, we thought that any of those questions would have previously been answered at those budget presentations. If the council is comfortable with that.
Speaker 0: Actually, Mr. Mays, I think we have to take each one individually.
Speaker 7: Correct. We do have to take each motion individually because some of them entail adopting ordinances, some of them until we just.
Speaker 1: Don't need a staff report on each of them.
Speaker 7: Correct? Oh, that's correct.
Speaker 1: Okay. Just checking.
Speaker 0: Okay. But we do need to do we do need to do public comment on each one.
Speaker 7: We do have to take public comment on each one. That's correct. We could do that all at once.
Speaker 0: I'd rather do that. Okay. So let's we'll do public comment on the first item and then we'll just we'll close that for for the rest. So let's begin with the first one. Are is staff going to read them or is Councilman Mongo going to read each one?
Speaker 1: Leo Will. Okay. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing and take the actions necessary to adopt the Fiscal Year 2017 budget as listed in Attachment A. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_09062016_16-0818 | Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Next item, please.
Speaker 8: Item 16 Dash 818 Recommendation to adopt resolution establishing the Gann appropriations limit for FY 17 pursuant to Article 13 B of the California Constitution.
Speaker 0: Can I get a motion, please? In a second. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 7: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Okay. I think. Were those all the items? My section was the one more.
Speaker 8: No, that is. That is the items. I just wanted to clarify that. My understanding is the prep fees would be taken up next week.
Speaker 0: That's right. Okay. Thank you. Thank you again to Councilwoman Mongeau and Councilmembers Price and Austin for the BRC work. I know we have a series of other votes and discussions that will happen next week when we have a majority of the debate around the budget. | Resolution | Recommendation to adopt resolution establishing the "Gann Appropriations Limit" (Limit) for FY 17 pursuant to Article XIII (B) of the California Constitution. (A-9) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_09062016_16-0851 | Speaker 4: Councilman Austin.
Speaker 0: Item 17 motion.
Speaker 1: Carries. Communication from Councilwoman Mongeau, Mayor Garcia, Councilwoman Gonzalez, Councilwoman Price and Councilmember Suranga recommendation to request the city manager to report on the city of Long Beach is efforts around civic engagement through volunteerism.
Speaker 0: Councilman Go.
Speaker 1: Thank you. I think that this is an important effort. As we know, our budget dollars are stretched further than they've ever been because there are so many priorities of so many groups that when neighbors can come together and roll up their sleeves and make a big impact on our city, I think it's a time that we embrace that. So I appreciate the mayor in taking what was a fifth District, Long Beach volunteer day and elevating it citywide. I think Councilman Price for having done her own service day in the third district so that we have infrastructure at least across the city, to start and grow this into something that could really become a Long Beach tradition of everyone rolling up their sleeves and ensuring that our community is the best it can be. I see that one of our partners for this project is here and I also want to thank them for their efforts. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. There's a motion and a second. Is there any public comment? Seeing none. Please cast your votes. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Manager to report on the City of Long Beach's efforts around civic engagement through volunteerism including the 9/11 Day of Service and Remembrance inspiring a month of community and neighborhood service projects culminating on Saturday, October 22nd Make a Difference Day. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_08232016_16-0796 | Speaker 0: Thank you. Next up is Kathy Lynn, please. It's Kathy here. Kathi Lynn. Okay. We're moving on to item 18. Madam Clerk, please. Well, wait. I'm sorry. We're moving to automate. So let me before we go there, I actually need a motion. There's been a a request by Councilwoman Pryce, who is not is not able to be here tonight to postpone this to the next item. So if someone would like to make that motion, there is a motion any second to postpone this item to the next meeting, which is there's no meeting next week, so it actually be two weeks. So that's the motion on the floor. Is there any public comment on the motion to postpone? Yes, there there is. Please come forward. And please, this is only so if you're going to speak to this, only speak to the postponement, not to the issue. Thank you.
Speaker 6: Hello, fellow council members.
Speaker 2: My name is Joshua Jimenez. I'm a member of On a Bay, Long Beach and the Filipino Migrant Center. I was born and.
Speaker 6: Raised, is still living in the second district.
Speaker 2: Of Long Beach. I'm a native, born and bred on this Long Beach soil, and I went to lobby's poly high of 23 years old. So I'm a Jaguar Ibiza. I'm 23 years old and I currently work in retail sales at a shoe store as a cashier and have been part of my company for.
Speaker 6: Two years and I support.
Speaker 2: Passing a minimum wage policy. The Lowndes Way meeting a city led $15 local minimum wage, a strong wage enforcement policy. I support this because I work directly with high school youth who are brand new to the job market. The cost of living is rising, so the youth bear the brunt of the lack of economic opportunities for their loved ones. A learner's wage for youth is an inequality. For new youth workers, their hours are already so low for the first couple of months. On top of that, do we really think it's fair to only pay them 85% of the minimum wage?
Speaker 0: Okay, just just cause I know that the city attorney is looking at me right here as well. We have to speak only to moving this item. The motion is not on the minimum wage. The motion is on whether or not to postpone the discussion for two weeks so you can make an argument for or against postponing the discussion. That's what the that's what the public comments for.
Speaker 2: Okay. Well, I think it's it's not the postponing. It is just making it it's a bureaucratic process. And I'm seeing what's going on in this city. You know, people like me, I work hard. I take my time off. It's my day off today. And I'm going straight back to work for the next week for the back to school season. Kids are going back to school, are going back to shopping for shoes, backpacks, what have you. But me coming here, taking my sweet time, taking my day off. I'm here because I'm in support of it, but I'm definitely not in support of keep in on pushing back this date of this ordinance. It needs to be talked about. It needs to be addressed because I'm tired of coming to these meetings and definitely all the workers of the city of Long Beach, they need you guys, the city council members. We put you in these seats. You should be able to represent the urgent needs of the working class people of this city as a youth, as a person of color. I feel like we need to be heard, but you guys are not responding back with the proper way. So I think that you guys need to really respond to the needs of the working class lives of this city, because this is the we are the ones that put you in the in these seats. So you guys should be responding and really taking actually the standard with us. You know, I'm coming here. Ever since January, I've been coming here speaking to you guys about this issue. So why need to push it back more, be more bureaucratic about this process? It's only it's only right. It's only fair. We need to be transparent about this issue. I'm talking to my fellow coworkers. I'm talking to, you know, other workers that I work with. And we're just going to keep coming. If you guys keep pushing this bag, we're going to keep really putting our voice out there in support. But I'm definitely not a.
Speaker 6: Supporter pushing this back.
Speaker 2: We need to make the decision now. And you guys already heard the testimonies and the stories and my story as a worker. So I think that you need to stand with us. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Our next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: I don't agree with the postponement. So my name is Frank Trejo. I'm a fast food worker at McDonald's. I started working for McDonald's three years ago. I started working there because of the difficult financial situation my family was in. If I didn't get a job quickly, we would have been we will probably be homeless. I have three sisters and six brothers. My family counts on me to make to be able to make ends meet. I've been with five for 15 for a year because as a young worker, we deserve to be treated with respect and dignity , just like any other worker. I joined the fight when I when I saw how many of my closest friends and family were living in poverty. And I saw how fighting in $15 can help. Everyone should be. Everyone should be making livable wages, including students who have to pay for classes, books, transportation to go to school, work and home while still supporting their families. Things are expensive nowadays. And in order to make in order to care for myself, I have to work. I work. I work to sustain myself and my family. I work to survive. Not for fun. Young workers like myself should be should be compensated just like any other workers in the city. We deserve to be paid 100% for all the work that we do. The learners wage is just another loophole for wage theft to occur. The learners wage is wasted at. Raising and enforcing the wage raising and enforcing wage in Long Beach way will help workers like myself recover stolen wages. I support raising and forcing the wage and the wage in Long Beach way. The learner's wage needs to be stricken, stricken out. We need to. In the wage lift now.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please. And again, just if we can try to just to stick to the issue of moving or not moving the the agenda item, that's what's on the table. Thank you. Next speaker.
Speaker 1: Hi. My name is Gabrielle Sabol. I live in the seventh district of Long Beach and I am against postponing this agenda item. I'm here today as a member of Gabrielle in Los Angeles and as an organization that advocates for the rights and welfare of Filipina women and their families. We think that this minimum wage policy needs to happen now, $15. Now, with strong wage enforcement, there are over 30,000 Filipinos living in Long Beach, and we shouldn't have to make them wait for this to happen. Gabriela Ella actually partnered with the Filipino Migrant Center to knock on 110 doors on the West Side in order to get to know Filipinos. Their stories and why 96% of them were in support of raising the minimum wage. They told us that many of them had earned college degrees and worked as professionals in the Philippines. The problem is that when they got here, their credentials in transfer over. So we have doctors working as nurses, teachers working as daycare personnel, engineers working as mechanics. Why the downgrade? Why do they choose to work laborious jobs with long hours and low wages? The overwhelming response was that they wanted a better life, not even for themselves, but for their children. It's no wonder that they want to raise the wage now. In addition, these workers, as they wait, are being exposed to exploitative working conditions. 62% of those surveyed experienced at least one form of wage theft, being underpaid, denied breaks, working unpaid overtime. And it wasn't those we spoke to either. Just. It wasn't just them. 41% of them said they knew someone else who had experienced wage theft, too. And this so-called learners wage that's being proposed would just contribute to the prevalence of wage theft in the workplace. This is not right. And it's not just and it's not just to postpone this issue. If people are doing their work, shouldn't they be able to collect the wages that they've rightfully earned if their labor is being exploited? Shouldn't workers be able to voice these concerns without fear of losing their jobs? A higher minimum wage today could radically change the lives of these workers. Now, parents would be able to see their children more often if they didn't have to work two jobs to make ends meet. That could happen today. Women trapped in abusive relationships due to lack of economic means could escape to safety with her children soon. Today, if this discussion were to continue, the bottom line is that workers need this money now. Their bills are coming now. Their children are growing now. And food needs to be on the table now. Why make them wait when we could do this? The Long Beach way? Rejecting this wage theft trust up as a learner's wage and $15 now with funding for a robust wage enforcement bureau and workers protections. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Q Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Hello. So I'm here tonight with two hats on one. I'm a member of Black Lives Matter, Long Beach chapter. And two, we are a member of this coalition around wage theft to to to increase the minimum wage and to protect and collect and enforce wages for workers here in Long Beach, because we all know good jobs are important to all of our folks. And so we are against and I am against pushing back this item once again. What it feels like is the tone is being set of disregarding certain types of people in our city. Right. So people have been waiting for their wage increases since January of this year. And those impacted by wage theft have been fighting for and waiting for. Each of you are two pathways enforcement policies like collections of their stolen wages for at least about two years. Now, the tone being said is a projection or an image or a culture of not caring about or not prioritize certain groups of people who you are representing, who placed you in these seats. It's it's inconsiderate, frankly, Ryan, it feels pretty disrespectful as apparent attempts are being made to continue to kick people's economic and financial livelihoods, which are right now in your hands, further down the road or to the state to address what you can address today. We are Long Beach residents, many of whom are impacted by Long Beach employers, shortening wages so that we so we Long Beach need to protect, collect and enforce and not just rely on the state to do the jobs that we all you all can do here today, though, one of the last time I was here was to talk about the impacts in our communities from police violence. As I mentioned, on With Black Lives Matter. Right, and the harassment and murder committed by Long Beach police, specifically around cases like Tyler Woods, who was shot in his back 19 times where the officer reloaded his clip, where he was witnessed stating that niggers should not have moved. Right. So when we were here talking about those issues around Hector Morricone and Dante Jordan and Lionel Gibson, to name a few hours, were being spent giving accommodations and a lot of space for someone who could have received those accommodations that they're going away party afterwards. But then when some wanted to very quickly cut off some speakers who were conveying concerns for black lives being taken, not as much love or consideration was given. It was the prioritization of a different group of folks. They felt like, So you say you want the community to be civically engaged and part of the decision making processes. And so they prepared to do that, arrange to leave work early, arrange to pay extra childcare, to be here tonight in the evening, prepared to overcome their fears of retaliation for publicly sharing about the ways their wages are being shortened and stolen. And then again with what's being protected is a culture of disregard. And so you wonder why people are being forced to resort to very different tactics and approaches to get to to get you to take care of people who are hurting like victims of police violence or people who are waiting for you to help them get their stolen wages back more seriously.
Speaker 0: Thank you, ma'am. Appreciate that. And see no other I don't I don't think I see any other public comment. I a sure.
Speaker 1: I have.
Speaker 0: No problem.
Speaker 7: I'd approach the bench.
Speaker 0: But actually just. Yeah. Just just go and present that will present it after we'll give it to the clerk.
Speaker 1: All right.
Speaker 7: So I'm just very quickly, I want to address everyone. My council member isn't here, but I wrote her directly. The hallmark of any honorable representative of any district in Long Beach should have a record of challenging ideas.
Speaker 0: Could you. Would you mind speaking to the mike?
Speaker 7: Can you hear me say. Hi. Hi. The hallmark of any honorable representative of any district of Long Beach should have a record of challenging desk ideas act informed instead of not. You got it. Okay. We also expect our representatives to be an independent voice in local affairs. You must be familiar with proven design methods of citizen participation and also the identifiers when citizen participation is limited. There isn't that much dissent allowed. I have a question for my council member. Usually what made her leave the lucrative career of a legal practitioner to serve the public, usually private interests or their aims devoted after a legal , successful career as a district attorney and not a position of city council member because they don't wield that much power. Historically, the local arena is where many areas of concern are to be addressed in that act of ignorance. So just really quickly.
Speaker 0: Well, it just has to be on the agenda item, which is whether.
Speaker 7: Or not to pay. What about I question what local legislative service y'all wish to provide your constituents if you are complicit in violence against residents of Long Beach? You're helping protect this house.
Speaker 0: This house?
Speaker 7: Wait.
Speaker 0: Yeah, man, this has to be on the agenda item, which is on whether or not complex.
Speaker 7: Are you guys talking about complexes? This isn't a complex issue. What about your path? Your path of willful ignorance will not continue to alienate people from their services.
Speaker 0: This is not on the item we.
Speaker 7: Have standing.
Speaker 0: Here. We can only here on the item in front of us, which is not by that darky. So you can provide the.
Speaker 7: Document civil rights era. And I am wondering where the maturation of that is.
Speaker 0: Ma'am, this is this is not the item.
Speaker 7: And of course, Black Lives Matter. I was like.
Speaker 2: There.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. So with that, we've closed public comment on and the item in front of us. There's a motion there's a motion by Councilman Andrews and a second by Councilmember Austin, which is to move the item two weeks. Councilman Andrews, you want to speak to this motion? Okay. Councilman Austin, you wanna speak to your motion?
Speaker 2: Yeah, sure.
Speaker 8: I join with Councilmember Andrews in.
Speaker 2: And in support of Susie Price's request that this be held over. I think there is a precedence on this council that has been actually established, particularly when we have large citywide, major citywide issues. We're not going into effect until January one, 2017. And so there is time to 2 to 2 to allow for the council to weigh in on this in a in a manner that that would be.
Speaker 8: Inclusive of us all.
Speaker 2: And so I second a motion.
Speaker 0: Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 6: Thank you, Mayor Garcia. So I just wanted to chime in and acknowledge all of the community members who have come out today and have come out at the last point that we were going to take this up and just acknowledge and encourage you to continue to, you know, fight the good fight. Sometimes these things happen. And, you know, I think it was articulated well just a moment ago that it's sometimes it's okay to take your time and get it right and make sure everybody has a chance to weigh in on it so that, you know, when there's some finality to it, when it when it does happen. I do want to ask a question of city staff. Just could you just clarify whether pushing it back two weeks would delay or affect or impact the timeline whatsoever?
Speaker 2: It will not.
Speaker 6: So so that said, I totally understand the frustration when you come back, but we want to make sure that this is you know, this is something that we can all be proud of and that we did it the right way. So I'd rather take a much slower win then than a rushed, a rushed experience here. So those are my comments. I'm going to support the motion.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 9: Thank you, everybody. I wanted to also recognize the time that you guys took away from your family, from work, to come out tonight and really recognize that your engagement in this process is not. You know, it's a big deal to sacrifice all of that. And I you know, this is my first time with minimum wage and there's been a lot of work that was done prior to and recognize that in the future, we want to make sure that should we have a request to move something, that that request be done with enough time so that we can engage residents, so that we can make sure that those stakeholders that want to be a part of the process have enough time to make adjustments. And so recognizing, you know, as our city attorney has said, that it wouldn't affect implementation, that I encourage you guys to, no matter what happens with the vote tonight, to continue to be engaged as much as possible. Thank you, guys, for your sacrifices.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Ringo.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mayor. You know, when we put something on the agenda, it's our responsibility to read it. To look at it to determine its implications and to determine whether or not we want to be here. I see a lot of people here who are ready to discuss this issue, who have taken time off from their jobs, taking time off from their families, taking time off from their personal time to be here, coming to council meetings isn't isn't fun. You know, you have to sit here two or 3 hours at a time listening to boring council members who have opinions about nearly everything and sometimes saying a lot with saying absolutely nothing. So in that respect, I know there are there are people on both sides of this issue. Employees as well as employers who are ready to talk about this and have taken the time from their calendars to be here tonight. So in acknowledgment of that, I'm not going to be I'm not in favor of postponing this discussion because I think people are here ready to talk about it. And I think that we need to hear it. So I'm not a I'm not here to be supporting this motion.
Speaker 0: Councilwoman Mongo.
Speaker 1: I'd like to make a friendly that boring council members only get to speak on items for 30 seconds.
Speaker 2: A second that.
Speaker 0: There's a I think everyone's made their comments there's been a motion and a second the motion is to postpone for two weeks and please cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Okay. Motion carries. I will be able. We'll be back to discuss that. Let me go ahead and take item 21. We take a couple of items before we do the budget. So we're going to take item 21, please, Madam Kirk. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to review draft ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by adding Part IV to Title 5; and by adding Section 5.06.020.A.7, all relating to a Long Beach Minimum Wage Ordinance, and provide further direction. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_08232016_16-0801 | Speaker 0: Okay. Motion carries. I will be able. We'll be back to discuss that. Let me go ahead and take item 21. We take a couple of items before we do the budget. So we're going to take item 21, please, Madam Kirk.
Speaker 1: Communication from Mayor Garcia, Councilwoman Gonzalez and Councilmember Pearce. Recommendation to direct staff to work with the city attorney and the Planning Commission to review the implementation of the recently adopted Alcohol Beverage Manufacturing Ordinance and provide a written report on the progress of permitting breweries and brewpubs under the terms of the ordinance.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Back. Back when I was on the City Council, I had authored legislation to facilitate the opening of craft breweries of brewpubs of that type of establishment in the city and that kind of grow the local beer economy, which has been doing so well in other parts of of the country and in California since since then and because of efforts of our incredible staff and really the the groups like the Deal IPA and groups like the the Belmont Shore Residents Business Association and others, we've seen a dramatic increase of these establishments. We want to continue to to promote more. There's some coming, exciting things happening in North Long Beach, as you probably heard, with some of these some of these as well. And so this is a request that we work with through staff. Staff wants the ability to kind of look at the ordinance and even make it even better. So we continue to recruit these fine establishments and support their work throughout the city of Long Beach. And so this is the it gives the ability to staff to do that. And one, I also think Councilmember Gonzalez and Councilman Pearce fought so that we can take a look at tweaking this and making it even stronger. Councilwoman Gonzales.
Speaker 7: Yes. Agreed on all levels. I know there's been an increased interest in breweries coming to the downtown area and just in in general and in the city. And so it's exciting to know that this investment will will continue to grow. Is there a quick staff report on this? I know we're looking will be coming back in 90 days, but I'd like to know if there's more information we can hear. Certainly.
Speaker 2: We can have our development services director, Amy Bodak respond to that.
Speaker 10: Mayor, members of the city council. Thank you. As mayor said, this is an item that was new to planning when we brought this forward a year ago. And we do have a number of applicants that are in process and we have discovered that we'd like to be a little bit more flexible than we currently are. And so this would allow us to take a second look at some of the restrictions and requirements that are in place to make sure that they they still meet the intent and spirit of what the original ordinance was meant to do.
Speaker 7: Okay. Great. And the timeline right now we have is 90 days. Is that possible? Is it possible to speed up that process or are we looking.
Speaker 10: You're going to do the best we can to to meet that deadline.
Speaker 7: Okay. Wonderful. Thank you very much, sir.
Speaker 0: And I imagine that the the the brewpubs that are out there that are trying to go through the process currently will be aware that we're trying to work out any other issues in the future.
Speaker 10: We actually have two in process that are already cleared through the ordinance and we have another one that we're working on right now. So we we do think that we'll make those folks aware of it as well.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Pierce.
Speaker 9: Yes. I want to thank the mayor and Councilmember Gonzalez for bringing this issue forward. I think we've seen a lot of great development happen in our downtowns and in our business corridors and seeing something like this where we can be a little bit more flexible. And we can also make sure that we're engaging our local business owners and people that are a part. We have a local brewers organization here that has over 100 local homebrewers that are the ones that are starting to open up some of these brewpubs. And so a great opportunity to support local businesses and thriving. Really looking forward to your report.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 6: Thank you, Mayor Garcia. I want to I want to just ask a question. Do we have any distilleries in Long Beach? And do we have an ordinance that that talks about the distilleries.
Speaker 10: The alcoholic Beverage Manufacturing Ordinance actually covers distilleries as well. That's why we specifically did not distinguish between beer versus any other kind of alcohol. So we do have the opportunity to bring a distillery in. To my knowledge, we do not have one in the city right now.
Speaker 6: So I needed to hear.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Councilmember Herring.
Speaker 2: Maybe not now, but one is coming. And I totally support this ordinance that we have some that are looking at the distilleries and manufacturers in the seventh District to hopefully support this item.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And Councilman Andrews.
Speaker 3: Yes, thank you, Vice Mayor. I like also thank our two woman, Gonzalez. And I am here because the fact that, you know, alcohol beverage manufacturers are becoming a booming industry in what is. I'd like to congratulate all of those who are being to bring this issue up for discussion and special consideration. You know, but I know realize in this state that there's a current bill advocating for alcohol consumption and at least in places such as beauty barbershops. And it goes to show that the change is happening, as is happening in society. So we're certainly moving along with charters that I, you know, hope that we can review a newly adopt ordinance and we'll look in special use it, such as warehousing and beer distribution. And I want to thank both of you guys again for bringing this issue to the diocese.
Speaker 0: Great. Thank you. Any public comment on this? I actually know. Is there any public comment on this. Ah, this ordinance saying non members please go and cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. We are going to hear now. On second. Item number 13. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to direct staff to work with City Attorney and the Planning Commission to review the implementation of the recently adopted Alcohol Beverage Manufacturing ordinance and provide a written report on the progress of permitting breweries and brew pubs under the terms of the ordinance. The report should also consider adding language to LBMC Section 21.45.114 to provide staff the ability to recommend waivers of special development standards based on findings. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_08232016_16-0780 | Speaker 2: Are you are you doing the first hearing or are you doing hearing to first?
Speaker 0: Why don't we do the first hearing and then we'll do the budget hearing. So let's do hearing one.
Speaker 1: Report from Development Services recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record. Conclude the public hearing. Declare ordnance relating to the extension of the temporary limitation on certain construction and development activities in the one L Zone in the low Cerritos and Virginia Country Club areas of the city. Read the first time and lay it over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for final reading, declaring the urgency there. Urban declaring that this ordinance shall take effect immediately. District eight.
Speaker 0: Mr. Modica.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Linda Tatum will give the report for staff.
Speaker 7: Good afternoon, Mayor, and members of the City Council. In September of 2015, the City Council adopted an ordinance to initiate a moratorium on new residential structures and additions exceeding 1500 square feet in the R-1 L zone. As you probably know, the R one IL is a very unique zone in the city. It is for estate homes and it is the only area of the city that has very specific zoning for large properties and large homes. And this is in the lower Cerritos and the Virginia Country Club areas of the city. The moratorium is currently set to expire on September 1st of 2016, and the purpose of the moratorium was to allow the development services staff and the Planning Commission time to revisit the current development standards and to study potential amendments to this zoning designation to address the issue of mansion ization. And as a result of this process, there was a core group of neighborhood representatives and staff has met with this group on several occasions. However, additional time is needed in order to to fully flesh out the analysis that has already been conducted. We've conducted significant analysis already, but what we really need and what we committed to at the very beginning of this process is to have a very full and robust dialog with the community. So the request for additional time is to engage the community and to present the analysis that has been conducted by staff and to get feedback from the community. And a part of that includes a series of community meetings, as well as taking the proposed recommendations to the Planning Commission and of course, back here to the City Council. So with that, our staff is recommending that we that the city council approve a six month extension to the moratorium that would end on December I'm sorry, March 31st, 2017. That concludes Tharp's comments, and I'm available for any questions you might have.
Speaker 2: And Mr. Vice Mayor, just a reminder that this item, if it does move forward, requires two votes, one on the urgency of the matter and then on the ordinance amended itself.
Speaker 6: Certainly. Thank you. So at this point, before we open it up for public comment with the maker of the motion, like to speak to this.
Speaker 2: Sure. Thank you.
Speaker 8: And thank you, Ms.. Tatum, for the staff report. I want to thank the residents who have been participating in this conversation with the Development Services Department, and I want to thank staff for engaging. Obviously, we are not there yet. We are still in the process. There are a certain few things that need to be worked out and I think Mr. Tatum explained that pretty clearly, particularly when we brought this forward. We had a expectation that there would be a community process and that hasn't happened yet. And so before we move forward, can I just. Miss Tatum, can you tell me what what?
Speaker 7: Did a substantial. And on some items and we're still working on others. And as we were preparing for the community meetings, the the residential neighborhood or the representatives specifically asked that that that those meetings not be held during the month of September. | Emergency Ordinance | Recommendation to declare an interim ordinance amending Ordinance No. ORD-15-0024 relating to the extension of the temporary limitation (moratorium) of certain construction and development activities in the R-1-L zone in the Los Cerritos and Virginia Country Club areas of the City; declaring the urgency thereof; and declaring that this ordinance shall take effect immediately, read and adopted as read.
(Ordinance No. ORD-16-0018) (District 8) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_08232016_16-0798 | Speaker 6: Thank you. Let's go ahead and continue to the budget presentation. For that, I'll turn it over to City Manager West.
Speaker 2: Vice Mayor, council members, if we can get the team down here. So the we're going to have to budget presentations today. One is going to be from library from the director. Glenda Williams We're also going to have the Development Services Budget presentation by Amy Barak, the director. We're going to focus on development services, on the general fund, portions of development services, which are code enforcement, and also the Neighborhood Services Bureau. So if we go to the first slide. Again, we the the departments that you've been seeing for the first three meetings are what we call the public safety continuum. It includes labor, it includes development services and code enforcement and neighborhood services and includes the city attorney, city prosecutor, areas like that. So with that, I wouldn't turn it over to our first presenter. It's Glenda Williams for the library presentation.
Speaker 11: Good evening, members of City Council, it is my honor to present to you the proposed NY 17 budget for library services. We have 12 libraries conveniently located throughout the city that provide services and resources to improve the quality of life for all our Long Beach residents and meet the learning needs and goals of our community. From babies and toddlers to adults and seniors, we are proud to be a part of the city's public safety continuum, assisting with prevention. It bears repeating that many studies studies have shown that there is a correlation between literacy and crime. 85% of youth in juvenile hall cannot read above a third grade level. Another thing another sobering statistic. Two thirds of the children that can't read by the fourth grade will either go to jail or be on welfare. That's two out of three. This results in a definite impact on the cities and communities resources. For our core services. The library has print media and online resources on a variety of topics and viewpoints. We have something for everybody, and everyone is welcome. At the public library, we provide convenient access to services and resources. There is no charge to attend. Library classes and workshops are use resources. It's free. We are proud to provide learning for a lifetime reading and enrichment opportunities for our community. Early literacy services and homework services are provided to help our children succeed in their education. Our array of public computers, along with Internet access and staff assistance. Our first point of entry for many new adult technology users. We offer opportunities to use and build technology skills and help people manage vast amounts of data to meet their information needs and support their personal goals. And of course, we strive to provide library services in an efficient manner by using library technology to select, organize and deliver information to our residents. We have automated many manual tasks and processes to save the time of library users. So we have some accomplishments. I'm very excited about our two building projects. Our buildings range an average of 50 to 60 years old, and Alamitos is actually pushing 90. And the most recent building is the Mark Twain Library that was built in 2007. The new Michelle Obama library is on schedule to open on September the 10th. The state of the art facility both three community rooms, wi fi and huge. A huge number of computers. It's almost 25,000 square feet of community space. And we hope to see all of you there. A new main library is part of the Long Beach Civic Center project. The new facility is almost 93,000 square feet and will provide expanded areas for our children, including an art studio. We'll have a larger information center for people with disabilities, as well as a high tech studio for all ages to learn, create and collaborate. Personal or shared mobile devices that provide connections to a library. WI fi is an increasing choice of connection. This year alone, more than 10,000 downloads occurred each month, and the goal BPL mobile app averaged 50,000 searches soon. Long Beach residents will be able to experience new high speed Internet access by connecting to the Kalman backbone, the same network that services California's K-through-12 schools, the University of California's and the California state universities. And while the digital age is definitely upon us, the physical public library remains a destination for many users, serving many purposes from personal, quiet time for reading or research to makerspace and collaboration spaces, as evidenced by 1.3 million visits this year. With City Council support, we were able to expand sunny hours to three neighborhood libraries, which has been welcomed by the community. This year we offer the career online high school through a partnership with the California State Library. The response has been overwhelming. Participants can receive an actual diploma, not a GED, and at the same time receive a career certificate in one of eight industries. Last but not least, we just finished our annual summer reading club. Reading the summertime is especially important for kids in school so they won't experience the summer slide and we'll be ready to hit the ground running when school began. The FY17 budget for our department is 13.4 million with 125 FTE is. Almost all of our funding comes from the general fund and 3% comes from grants which consist mainly of the money raised by the Library Foundation to fund the Family Learning Centers and the studio at the main library. There are several notable changes proposed for the new fiscal year that include staffing and investments. Library Services has a has a proposed net budget reduction of $135,000 for FY 17. In order to meet this goal, we took another look at the way our communities are changing and analyzed current staffing to be responsive to those changes, to provide flexibility to meet business operations. We made all department librarians equal. We are proposing not to fill a vacant general librarian position in two clerical positions, and we reclassified some non-career positions to assist with providing services as well as attend outreach events in the community. We also asked for more page hours at Main Library to get items off the shelves quickly and support the branch libraries as needed. Investments Proposals for FY 17 include another year funding for Sandy hours at Bay Shore. BURNETT and the new Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library. This has been great for individuals and families that want to use library resources on the weekend. And with the passage of Measure A by the voters. There's almost $450,000 of capital improvements projects slated for five libraries. We have some significant opportunities on the horizon for library services as part of the project team for the new Civic Center . It's been great working with city staff and plenty more civic partners. On the plans for the new 93,000 square foot state of the art main library, with grants from the community to the Library Foundation. We are very close to launching the mobile studio. It's a van that will feature steam classes at all of our branch libraries and community groups as well as participate in outreach events. Will also launch a book by a book bike service due to a grant from the 880 Emerging City Champions. The idea for this service was piloted during the recent Beach Streets event and videoed for the successful application. Library Services is well positioned to provide learning for a lifetime for our little ones. We provide preschool classes and resources to increase the vocabulary and get them off to a good start for kindergarten. We also partner with preschool without walls at the BURNETT Mark Twain and Mark Twain Libraries. Early literacy services are a key foundation for long term economic success, and this is the first link in a chain of investments needed to build an educated, competitive workforce. Our school age children receive homework assistance through our family learning centers. They have books and reliable online resources to help them be successful in school. As stated earlier, the career online high school is underway to help our largest residents obtain a diploma, as well as a career certificate in one of eight industries, including child care and education , office management and retail. Research shows that individuals that obtain a diploma have increased earnings than those with a GED. The career certificate program provides real life skills to increase take home pay as well. We also have educational resources that can be used by anyone with a library card. McGill courses are available 24 seven and our online classes taught by instructors on a variety of topics, including including business, health care, law and personal development. I personally enrolled in a QuickBooks class, completed my homework assignments and did my quizzes and interacted with my classmates. Of course, now I just need to take the final. And there's also an intercom which uses videos for individuals to learn technology, creative and business skills online. If you were to purchase this resource yourself, it costs you $25 a month. A free library card can save you $300 a year with just this resource alone. Lee Rainie of the Pew Research Center said As people march through their days with their smartphones, persistent education and learning are the reality. I think the mayor and the city council for you support of learning for a lifetime, for a community and your investment in our human capital. The residents of Long Beach. This concludes my report.
Speaker 6: Thank you, Glenda. City managers there. You want to go ahead with the next one?
Speaker 2: Yes, we do.
Speaker 10: Mr. Vice Mayor. Members of the city council. First, I want you to know that we do have the Parks and Rec Community necklace. If we need it tonight, particularly for council member super or not. So when we get to the question and answer period, Glenda and I will be passing the immunity necklace back and forth. It's also available for other departments to use as well.
Speaker 3: Thank you. That heads up to our video director here to get a shot of that in.
Speaker 1: All right.
Speaker 10: Here's the immunity necklace. It's very effective.
Speaker 1: All right.
Speaker 10: So thank you, Mayor. Members of the city council. Tonight, I am presenting to you two different divisional budgets within the Department of Development Services. But before I do that, I do want to just briefly mention development services as a whole, which is a department that includes the Planning Bureau Building and Safety Bureau, Community Housing and Community Improvement Bureau, Neighborhood Services and our administration. We have over 200 staff and a $122 million budget. Approximately 4% of that budget is general fund, and that's what I'll be talking about tonight. The two specific divisions that I'm going to be focusing on are specifically in the public safety continuum. They play an important role in that continuum, and we are very proud to be partners with the other city agencies. The first one that I'm going to be addressing is our code enforcement division. Code Enforcement is a very specialized program that does require a very dedicated staff for efficient operations in and a large span of control. And the code enforcement division is made up of 50 full time employee equivalents and approximately $7 million budget. It sits currently within the Neighborhood Services Bureau and we'll be talking about that as an opportunity for change for code enforcement. Each of you knows probably a little bit about code enforcement because you or your constituents have had involvement in either dealing with a complaint or or looking at potential code enforcement issues and how they're handled within the city. At its core, mission code enforcement is responsible for compliance with the Long Beach Municipal Code for zoning and building code violations, as well as property nuisance issues. Code code enforcement works quite extensively with other departments in resolving issues, including public works, police department, the fire department and the city attorney in order to address neighborhood nuisance issues, which have typically included both code building violations as well as potential criminal activities or public safety issues. Staffing Code Enforcement also maintains the city's foreclosure registry program and the vacant program, the vacant building program as well. We operate the garage resale inspection program in parking impacted areas, and we also implement the proactive rental housing inspection program known as Prep. Lastly, code enforcement staffs, the Board of Examiners Appeals and Condemnations, which is a very small board but deals with complaints or appeals on disability access issues, as well as complaints or appeals about citations that may have been issued in a code enforcement capacity. With 50 staff. We have handled over the last year, 11,000 calls for service and opened to 10,000 cases that are currently being handled or have already been handled. Of those 10,000 cases, approximately 85% of those cases have been closed within 120, within 120 days of the initiation of the code enforcement action. Importantly, this is clearly on the public safety continuum and is also a health issue. We have issued approximately 75 citations in 81 known cases for illegal conversion of a property into a dwelling unit. This could include a illegal garage conversion, people living in sheds, people living in storage containers, those sorts of things. As you know, there have been issues in the past with the city and we do take this issue very seriously and respond immediately when we are called about illegal conversions. We have processed over 1000 registrations in the residential foreclosure registry in the past year and have inspected approximately 11,700 units through our proactive rental housing inspection program. We have found violations and open cases in approximately 33% of those inspections to date. You can see on the slide behind you, the proposed budget is approximately 53% of the budget is general fund. We also receive funds through the drip fee program, which makes up our development services revenue. And then we also receive about 18% in community development block grant moneys for CDBG eligible areas. All in all, as I said, we have approximately a $7 million budget and 5050 is. Notable changes for fiscal year 17 are elevating the code enforcement division to a bureau and creating two divisions one, the standard code enforcement division, and then the other the Multifamily Housing Inspection Division. They are two distinct programs, and as we get more involved in them, it does make much more sense to have it created into two separate divisions. We are also proposing a fee increase for the multifamily housing inspections to ensure full cost recovery at existing service levels. I want to make a point that we are just trying to get to full cost recovery. We are not expanding the program, nor are we raising the fees to expand the program. But it is essentially just to pay for itself. And we are proposing to eliminate Saturday code enforcement activity in order for us to achieve our general fund target. This program was enacted in fiscal year 15. It has not received the response that we expected it to receive. We receive an average of two calls on a Saturday, as opposed to 40 calls a day during the week. So we have determined that this program could be better served if we were to just handle those complaints during the weekday. So if a call still comes in on a Saturday or a Sunday, we would still handle that call on the following week. We do have significant issues as well as opportunities. One is the continuous education of both tenants and landlords on their respective rights and responsibilities. One of the other issues that we have are developing appropriate technology responses in order to have better reporting capabilities and tracking mechanisms to help us enhance our own services. We would like to have a closer way, a better way of minimizing inspection delays when we make appointments to schedule an inspection at a building. If we are not able to get into that building, it does trigger a reinspection and it does result in a lost opportunity. And then we would like to look at the prep program and the fee structure to develop one that is more equitable to owners of all apartment sizes. The current fee structure is is very it's not balanced, I should say. If you are in a four unit, if you own a four unit building, you pay the same price that someone who owns a ten unit building pays. And so we think that there is a more equitable way of distributing the cost. And we are working with the Apartment Owners Association in order to look at something that is more equitable for owners of buildings of all sizes. Next, I'm going to talk about the neighborhood relations bureau excuse me, the neighborhood relations division. This division is also within the Bureau of Neighborhood Services in Community Development Services. They have some very important commissions that that really fall into the public safety continuum. They focus on implementing the safe Long Beach violence prevention program citywide. As part of that, we are the entity that does respond to administer the U.S. Department of Justice, National Forum and Youth Violence Prevention Grants. We manage the Cal Grip Grant program. We have received this grant from the state seven years in a row and we are their longest running city that they've had a relationship with and we're very proud of that relationship. And then also what this call group program is focusing on this year. In particular, this grant is focusing on a program called My Sister's Keeper, which is very important in that in that public safety continuum. The neighborhood relations division also assists other departments in administering their grants as it relates to reducing youth violence and improving community relations. We are focused on working with the police department on a recently approved grant that they received, and we're also working with the prosecutors department excuse me, the Office of the City prosecutor on a recently awarded grant that they have. We also are in connection with the school district and often administer a portion of their grant that they also receive through these same types of programs. Our staff in the Neighborhood Relations Division administers the Human Relations Commission and acts as the city's human dignity coordinator. And then we also implement the city's formally adopted language access policy. Some of the recent accomplishments that we had in this fiscal year are convening the safe Long Beach Coordination Team and work group again to reduce violence and focus on intervention policies. As you know, this Council recently developed and launched the the all important My Brother's Keeper program, and it is a local action plan that we are now in the process of implementing. We've hosted several community safety fairs and community watch fairs where we actually attend these meetings and focus on on police safety, health issues, violence prevention issues , and provide a conduit for neighborhood groups to focus those issues with city staff. We have worked with our National DOJ Forum Group and the Long Beach Unified School District to develop an individualized all in truancy response program. Continue the implementation of the Language Access Program and through our My Sister's Keeper program have actually worked with the police department to rescue a number of victims of human trafficking and have worked with several gang members or former gang members that are dealing with these these same very issues. And then recently as recently as a few weeks ago, we did assist the police department in securing a two year, $600,000 grant for implicit bias training, as well as violence prevention activities. Our proposed budget for fiscal year 17 is heavily focused on a grant funding. Approximately 79% of our funding does come from grants, and so that is a quite a challenge for us. That leaves the remaining 21% to be funded by the general fund. Note Most notable changes are for the language access policy. In previous years, we suggested that the funding be one time funds and this year we are moving from one time funds to ongoing annual funding to support the language access policy implementation. We average about $80,000 a year. Hence our request is that we convert this from one time funds to annual funding, which will continue to allow us to continue to get rid of that backlog of documents that need to be translated, provide interpretation at public meetings both in the community and at formal community meetings or formal public meetings such as the Council or the Planning Commission or other commissions. We are now doing annual staff training on translation techniques and ethics for employees, receiving bilingual skill pay, providing notification of the availability of lab services in all languages, and then continuing to update the 25 most frequently used web pages and the 40 most frequently called telephone lines . Lastly, as I said, there are some significant issues that relate to the instability of these funds on a on a going forward basis. As as I said, approximately 80% are funded by federal, state or local grants. So while funding is available through the fiscal year 17 program, a large part of our staff workload is essentially looking for new grant opportunities that we can continue to bring programs, but also to continue to staff these functions. We do believe that safe Long Beach is a tremendous opportunity for us to continue those dialogs and discussions with non-governmental partners in the same room to focus on commonalities in the public safety continuum. And for that, we think that is the biggest opportunity that safe Long Beach program brings to the city. That concludes my presentation on the Code Enforcement Division in the Neighborhood Relations Division. Both Glenda and I are available to answer questions and we'll be passing the immunity necklace backwards, back and forth. Thank you.
Speaker 6: Thank you. So we'll go ahead and begin with city council deliberation. So let's begin with Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 7: Yes. Thank you both so very much for your, uh, your information and of course, your work on both in both departments. It's definitely to be commended. So thank you both. I will start with Glenda and Library Services. Thank you so, so much for all you do. I know that you are working very hard and you're out there and you're in the community and I see it a lot. Can you describe the book bike that we will be receiving? Because that's very interesting. I think of like the Washington middle school area and maybe delivering bike books to them. But I don't I'm not sure.
Speaker 11: Thank you for the question, Councilwoman Gonzales. So this program was actually pioneered when we did Beat Streets. And I believe there was always twice tricycle that had some books and just riding through the neighborhood. So we can envision doing that, taking our services on the road. People will be able to borrow materials and also register for library cards and just really getting out into the community and making those community connections, especially for people that may not want to come into the library or not aware of it. It's thought we'll also use it as a marketing tool as well.
Speaker 7: That is wonderful because I think of that central area that doesn't really have a library to close. So it would be great to to do that. That's wonderful. And services to seniors. What are we thinking to expand our services to seniors?
Speaker 11: There is a plan that's being worked on, I believe, with the Health Department and Parks Rec Marine to provide services to seniors who will be joining them and their efforts, you know, kind of combining forces together and letting me know what processes and programs we have available for them, like our program, where you can have books delivered to you through the mail. So we have that available. And then we're also going to be working with the Library Foundation and we have some funding to provide some additional programs and classes that way. So it's in its infancy stage, but we'll be working on that.
Speaker 7: This is great, very creative. And then I know a resident in the past has talked about kind of back to Washington Middle School because I am very, you know, focused on that particular school. They had mentioned a book drop off opportunity, and I remember talking about it maybe a few months back. But would there be an opportunity to add a book drop off at that location? Maybe working with the school district, is that even an option?
Speaker 11: That's something we will have to take a look at, counselor.
Speaker 7: Okay. We'll talk. Definitely. Thank you. And then moving on really quickly to Amy. Amy, thank you for your presentation as well. I have a few questions to ask, so I know we're looking to upgrade technology and code enforcement. And what does that look like? Is that our software? Completely. I know Hanson was included in that report.
Speaker 10: It's actually Hanson. So we have we have the capacity right now where we roll out and function exclusively on Hanson, which is our information management system for property ownerships. However, we do want to add additional categories and checklists in order to help us run reports and collect more information about the types of of nuisances or the types of violations we're seeing and then categorizing them. Also, part of our technologic technology push is to get handhelds out in the field, which will reduce the amount of paper that we use and then reduce the amount of time that our staff have to come back into the office and then manually input data. So we are trying out both for code enforcement and for building inspections, some handheld opportunities that would still be linked to Hanson, but allow us to increase our efficiency.
Speaker 7: Okay, great. That's wonderful to hear. Great. And then I know we are looking to eliminate the week in code enforcement, which I understand the numbers don't quite pan out. But I also have a very strong push from our historic districts because a lot of the vinyl windows that go in are coming in over the weekend. And then we get the calls, you know, on Monday about, you know, they've completely just turned the historic district upside down. So how do we work through that? And I know it may make more sense to have staff Monday through Friday, but. Right.
Speaker 10: So of the two calls that we get per day for per Saturday, one of those two calls is in a historic district. And of that call, only 50% of the time is it an actual violation. So we do feel that we can continue to offer that service during the week, but it's just not responding the way we expected it would respond. I myself am responsible for several of those calls on weekends, so if you take me out of the mix, it probably goes down a little bit more.
Speaker 7: I know my my Long Beach numbers are through the roof, so definitely understand that. Thank you. That clears that up. And then lastly, I know the $11.7 million budget we have for the community investment company for affordable housing stock. What percentage or what portion of that would be used for new development, new housing construction?
Speaker 10: I'm sorry, can you repeat the first part of that question?
Speaker 7: Yes. I believe there's $11.7 million in the Long Beach Community Investment Company. Yes. And that, of course, manages some of our affordable housing stock. So how much of that would be towards new development, new opportunities?
Speaker 10: So they're actually for all four new opportunities, whether they are for new construction or to assist on an acquisition rehab project, acquisition rehab projects. We actually get more bang for our buck because they're existing units that probably do not have covenants on them. And if we're able to financially assist in rehabbing that unit to being a habitable unit, then we are able to put a long term covenant on that property to make it truly affordable from a long term perspective. And that requires a, a, um, a smaller subsidy than new construction. So for fiscal year 17, we do have that dollar amount coming in. It is available for both new construction as well as acquisition rehab.
Speaker 7: But historically, I guess my question is more aligned with like how what does that look like in percentage wise? How much are we doing in acquisition and habitability and what percentage would you say is new?
Speaker 10: You know, off the top of my head, I would say it's probably 60% new and 40% rehab. But we can actually go back and give you a summary at a future Boise or through a memo on what that has been over the last ten years.
Speaker 7: Okay, great. Thank you very much. That answers my question. And thank you both very much for your. For your presentations. Appreciate it.
Speaker 6: Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 2: Thank you. And I'll start.
Speaker 8: With the library. I want to first thank you both for great presentations. And you both do so much to make Long Beach the great city that it is, your departments do. And so I salute each and every one of the men and women who work in both the library services and the Development Services Department. My question number one is for the librarian, Glenda. Glenda with the. The new Michelle Obama neighborhood library coming on board in September. Do we expect a greater number of library visits and if why 17?
Speaker 11: Absolutely.
Speaker 8: Okay. And are we prepared for that?
Speaker 11: We hope that we are with.
Speaker 8: So we'll have the adequate amount of staffing for that library and the libraries throughout the city with the increase in visits.
Speaker 11: Additional staffing was requested for the opening of the library and that request has been granted by City Council.
Speaker 2: Proper.
Speaker 8: Variety that that is that's most important to me. You mentioned no, some notable changes with the library services and one was a reclassification of non-career positions. Can you you may have explained it already, but can you explain what that what that means and how classifications are going to be? Non-career positions going to be reclassified.
Speaker 11: Basically, we are meeting the requirements for human resources to use staff. That's not from.
Speaker 8: Excuse me, I'm having a tough time hearing you.
Speaker 11: We're basically reclassifying staff to meet human resources definition of a staff that are not permanent. We'll also be using library assistants to get out into the community and provide programs and services as also as well as working inside the building.
Speaker 8: Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 1: You're welcome.
Speaker 8: And I'm going to keep my comments short and questions short. My next question is for Amy Burdick. In the the accomplishments under code enforcement. And first of all, I think creating a bureau to separate bureaus is smart because there seems to be two separate responsibilities for the proactive Reno housing inspection program and other code enforcement violations. But you in the prep in its first year, one third of the inspection violations. Well, one third of the inspections were violations were actually found. Is that that number that we expected to have is unusually high?
Speaker 10: No, frankly, we were really weren't sure what we were going to find. And one of the issues that we have with Prep is that the inspections are taking much longer than we expected they would. Part of that is technology issues. And then also there's the scheduling functions in working with landlords and tenants to to do these inspections. So we do have good data on this, but I do think we need a good, you know, running total as we move on to see if that is going to be a continuation or not. I do want to say that when you look.
Speaker 1: At the.
Speaker 10: Standard code enforcement, where we get 11,000 calls for service and 10,000 of those turn into cases, that's 90% of those turn into cases. Those cases range from weeds and trashcans that are visible on the street to substandard buildings. So the the degree of violations that exist in standard code enforcement cases is very broad. And the degree of violations that we see in the prep program are much more narrow and focused on habitability issues. So the violations that we find in Prep are actually much more focused on health and safety and welfare than I would say the 90% of violations in the standard code enforcement.
Speaker 8: So I think I was reading in a recent article and one publication that talked about inspectors looking at esthetics as opposed to livability issues. Is that something that can be validated with the actual?
Speaker 10: We do look at the whole building, but we are first and foremost focused on habitability. So if there are habitability issues and there are also issues with peeling paint, we're going to we're going to focus we're going to check those off as well and say that that's included. But we're not going to be necessarily focused exclusively on peeling paint during a prep program.
Speaker 8: And what is the methodology to actually go about doing those type of inspections? I mean, is there a methodology we're going to look at this district or this community first and then move on to the next place? Or is it this is not complaint driven, though?
Speaker 10: No, this is not complaint driven. We are focused on areas that the housing element have suggested that we focus on. So it is where the housing stock may be older. So we're certainly not going to be scheduling a prep inspection for a unit that has been constructed within the last five years. We're talking about districts or census tracts that have overconcentration of units that have aging housing stock. So that is going to be where we're going to focus our resources first.
Speaker 8: Okay. And I know you're proposing a fee increase for multifamily housing inspections. What is that the increase going to look like so that you said you're looking to recoup cost?
Speaker 1: Correct.
Speaker 10: So I believe we charge. Let me get to my sheet. We currently charge $230 to inspect four units through ten units. Our fee increase that we're looking for, for full cost recovery will go to $254. So we're talking a, you know, a $24 increase to a property owner that may own a unit, a four unit building or a ten unit building. So we're talking very minimal fee increases.
Speaker 2: $24.
Speaker 10: $24.
Speaker 8: Okay. Thank you. And I want to move on to the neighborhood relations component. Obviously, I salute the department for its great work on the violence prevention plan and of the the managing account group grants and My Brother's Keeper and My Sister's Keeper, all the great work that you are doing in that arena. I'm curious to know what new grant opportunities are on the horizon for Cal Grip or gang reduction or intervention programs in FY17? Are you aware of and.
Speaker 10: We are we are actually in the process of looking at a couple of grants, both with the school district. But because we are part of the DOJ National Youth Forum, we actually get opportunities sent to us by the Department of Justice where they are suggesting that we might want to participate in those grant opportunities because we are a DOJ National Youth Forum City and because we have the MBK program, we actually score points and have grant opportunities sent to us. And so we are looking at a couple with the school district. We are looking at a couple right now with DOJ as well.
Speaker 8: All right. Thank you. Best of luck.
Speaker 0: Councilmember Ringa.
Speaker 2: Thank you. A lot of the questions that I had councilmember asked and asked. Who keep.
Speaker 0: It going.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Who has the necklace right now?
Speaker 10: It's sitting between us.
Speaker 2: Okay.
Speaker 10: Would you like to borrow it later?
Speaker 2: In regards to the library, there was a mention and a customer asked us to refer to it. But I was very clear talking about the reclassification of non-career positions. Is it a reclassification from non-career to full time or is it a reclassification or just simply a change of title or duties? What? Explain that a little more. I'm like, I'm not clear on that.
Speaker 11: Sure. Councilman Muranga The duties are basically the same. The classification is a non-career for human resources. They have a particular definition of using non-career seasonal employees. And our non-career people kind of stick around for a little while. So we just making sure we fall into line to what their definition of the classification is. That's basically what it's doing.
Speaker 2: Okay. So you're basically the classification classification is from basic non-career to non-career seasonal, which allows people to come back every summer or that type of a responsibility.
Speaker 11: Well, a lot of our council member, a lot of our non-career people don't come back. They stay.
Speaker 2: Okay.
Speaker 11: So we changed the classification to to make that the way it should be.
Speaker 2: Well, that's what I'm not understanding, because if it's a non-career in this day, isn't that a full time job?
Speaker 11: And they're part time, sir. But we do have we. They're part time positions. The part time positions.
Speaker 2: Full time, part time positions.
Speaker 11: They're not any full time positions. These are all part time positions.
Speaker 2: And that's where I'm confused, because to me, as I see now, careers can work only a maximum of 960 hours or something.
Speaker 11: That's correct.
Speaker 2: Less and less than 1100. Because if you work more than that, then you're due benefits and other. A minority of employment. So when you're saying that they never leave, so basically you work them up on a year to year basis, up to 960 hours. And then don't let them work anymore than that.
Speaker 11: That is correct. A lot of them are in school. So we have some students that are I mean, three employees that are in school. We have some people that have different have changed their job careers and they only want to work part time hours.
Speaker 2: Do we do we have non-career. Employees who have been there more than 20 years. 1 to 15.
Speaker 11: Not to my knowledge.
Speaker 2: I just want to be made aware of that. Then that in that case, if you're using our careers in a continuous basis like that, then that's not in our career. That's a position. And that should be converted into a full time position to provide a full time job, because that's what you're doing, and it's not fair to the employees to do that. I didn't know how to answer that, like. The other point that is mentioned, you mentioned that same page is at one time funds to continue Sunday hours at the branch libraries. What do you mean, one time? Would that be like one time funds for this county, this fiscal year? And then will you revisit it again the following year? Could you clarify that for me, please?
Speaker 11: Yes, sir. The funds that are being provided are one time funds for this fiscal year for FY17.
Speaker 2: Okay. So next year, hopefully we'll have the same amount available for more openings.
Speaker 11: That would be very nice.
Speaker 2: That's the plan, right? Okay. Okay. I guess I'll go to the other half of that necklace. And I talked to Amy and I really don't have much in that area other than to laud the the institutionalization, which I have always loved to see and hear of $80,000 in an ongoing funding for the support of language access policy . And I want to commend you on that. And I think that's great because that's what's really needed. If we're going to really commit to language access, we need to put our resources where our mouth is. And that's excellent. I want to commend you, sir.
Speaker 10: Thank you.
Speaker 2: That's all I have. Thank you. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Okay. We have a. A long list, starting with Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 9: All right. Here we go. Okay. Thank you guys so much for the presentation. And I just really wanted to say how much I appreciate all the work that we've done to try to open up our libraries and making sure that we have some branches with weekend hours. Not a lot of questions. I mean, I want to echo what Councilmember Ranga said and also Councilmember Gonzalez around the bikes, which is fascinating. Would that be something that we would be able to use at community events hosted by the district to have you guys come out?
Speaker 11: Yes, ma'am.
Speaker 9: All right. That's exciting. All right. I'll leave that there. Go on to development services. I have a lot of questions, Amy. A lot of questions about HRC. Are you ready?
Speaker 10: Tracy's ready.
Speaker 9: Just kidding. Just want to commend you guys and commend Tracy for all the work I had the privilege of serving on the HRC. And there's a great opportunity to get to know the department. Really. Thank you for that. Couple of questions. One is the neighborhood cleanups and partnering. I had the privilege of doing a neighborhood cleanup in AOC seven this Saturday and had our city staff out there and just wanted to see what type of support resources are available to continue to do those. Is that something that's ongoing and always available?
Speaker 10: Actually, it is. We do partner with the Environmental Services Bureau and Public Works. They are a huge partner on that and we do AOC and seven in particular. I believe they hold a cleanup once a month.
Speaker 1: They do.
Speaker 10: They are almost self-sufficient with it. So we do a very minimal coordinating with that particular group because they are so versed and experienced in doing neighborhood cleanups and has such a dedicated following. We also do work on a regular basis with scheduling neighborhood cleanups, typically twice a month throughout the city. We can handle two separate cleanups in a day throughout the city. From a staffing perspective, we do work with, as I said, the Environmental Services Bureau and then also private haulers as well, if it's going to be a significant event. But we do have those resources available to any community group and if the district also co-sponsors, it makes attendance increase and that increases invisibility. But they're very active and they're all over the city doing those cleanups.
Speaker 9: Great. Yeah, definitely. We'll be partnering with some of the neighborhood associations. Good. Thank you. Forward. Of course. I actually was very meditative. If you guys haven't done a neighborhood cleanup, there's nothing as calming as putting on some gloves and just picking up trash for 2 hours. So thank you guys for that. Facade improvements. I've had a number of requests in my district for facade improvements, but typically it's only one business in the part of, you know, a bigger building. Can you describe what resources are available for an individual tenant or if that needs to be done through ownership?
Speaker 10: Certainly, we do have some programs where it can be the individual tenant, particularly if it's a new business. We do have $2,000 startup grants that they may be eligible for. We also do have if it is a tenant and a property owner, we have the ability to do two $2,000 grants in order to potentially repaint and add new signage to those buildings for larger structures or a block of structures. We have been having some recent success in programing those through our annual CDBG entitlement. Those do take a lot more time because they typically are 50000 to $100000. Facade programs, it does require owner consent, but we do have the opportunity to focus on those. We're doing two this coming fiscal year in District nine and those have been in the works. I would say vice mayor for at least 18 months. So so it is is very lengthy. Our next one after the District nine, one is one on Anaheim Street in District six as well. So we do have those opportunities to look for new facade projects, but those must be in CDBG eligible areas.
Speaker 9: Great. Thank you for that. I wanted to ask and I didn't see it listed in here, but I believe it's under code enforcement short term rentals. Is that your department with code enforcement? Because I know they're currently illegal and I probably get a call every day about them.
Speaker 10: So certainly they are currently illegal. According to our zoning code, we do not have the ability to to permit them. And because of that, we're not able to issue business licenses for that type of use as well. I believe there was a request. For a two from four memo, and that is being processed right now. It will involve input from development services, both from planning and code enforcement perspective, business license, city attorney. And then we'll also be looking at what other cities are doing as well.
Speaker 9: Great. And right now, if one is you know, I mean, we've like I said, I get calls every day and we've called code enforcement. Can you just describe just briefly what we're currently doing?
Speaker 10: Certainly, we do. What we do on short term rentals is we like to hear it from two different complaining parties, not from the same household. So we when we get two complaints that are verified as not being from the same household, we then do a computer search of the various search engines, whether it's HomeAway, VRBO, Airbnb, all of those. Sometimes that's where we run into difficulties because you do have to search, you know, very narrowly on in order to see if there are rentals available. If we do find that there are rentals available, we do send out inspectors to see if that's occurring, if there are neighborhood nuisance activities, that certainly contributes to our inspections . And then we work with the city attorney's office to issue cease and desist letters to property owners that continue to do this.
Speaker 9: Great. Thank you so much for that last area of questions I just wanted to ask about with a pair of I want to say, you know, congratulations on codifying that. I know that was a little bit of a process a couple of years back and it's good to see that where that 33% that demonstrates that there was a need for it. I think it says that you guys are working to educate tenants and landlords. Which stakeholders are you guys working with directly?
Speaker 10: We are actually we did an RFP and selected fair housing counsel out of Orange County and they are working with both the City Apartment Association and Housing Long Beach and other stakeholders, including Fair Housing, Long Beach, to focus on what areas of town we should be doing our outreach. And so if you're if you are interested in us trying to reach out to a certain contingency, we're happy to to focus on that as well.
Speaker 9: Great. And last question. Sorry, guys, for we finding that there are we tracking possible landlords that are repeat offenders? And if we are, I guess that's the first question. Yes. Yes. If we are, is there a different fee for coming out or can you describe what we do if there's a repeat?
Speaker 10: Certainly, we do have a reinspection fee that is triggered after a certain number of visits to the property if they are continually not making the improvements. We do have other tools in our toolbox that we can implement as well, but we do have a reinspection fee as well.
Speaker 9: Great. Thank you so much, everyone.
Speaker 6: Councilwoman Mongo.
Speaker 1: Thank you. I wanted to say great work to code enforcement. I know on the chart at the two community watch meetings, but I also know that you came to community meetings organized by neighborhoods as well that was not counted. And I know especially in our community and the work that you did related to some problem neighbors, homeowners, actually, not just tenants, but homeowners.
Speaker 7: That were problems were.
Speaker 1: Exceptional work. And I think that your team needs to be commended. Again, it was exceptional. I'd like to also give praise to the library. I think anyone who has not utilized Linda Morcombe is really missing out on an asset that the library worked really hard to bring in house and that is a tool for our workforce to learn and understand nearly anything. You can you can take a course on developing websites and over six weeks become proficient. It's remarkable the amount of courses online and the resource available. I know that many of my staff have broaden their skill base because of their library card, and so I thank you for that. There's so much good work being done in the continuum of public safety. I want to thank both of you, and I appreciate that. My colleagues asked every possible question so I have no more.
Speaker 6: Thank you. And I am next. So I want to I think it's interesting to have the two of you sitting next to each other, because I feel like we've been engaged in the Michelle Obama library, the two of you, for who knows how long. But I want you both of there. I just want to say to you that you guys have both done a fantastic job and we cannot wait for September 10th to you know, I got to take a sneak peek, but I got to tell you, the community is going to be thrilled at what they see on September 10th . So. So I just want to start off by saying that the both of you on the library side, I know that a few months back when we launched the My Brother's Keeper plan, the school district gave a contribution, I believe was $100,000 to support afterschool programing and My Brother's Keeper programing at the new Michelle Obama Library. Do we have an update on that? I don't know which department he went to.
Speaker 10: It's actually mine. So even though it's in libraries, we're programing for her. So we did get a $100,000 grant from Long Beach Unified School District split, I believe 50. 50. So $50,000 specifically for afterschool programing at specific libraries. And then $50,000, I think went to Parks, Recreation and Marine to subsidize bussing, I believe, or subsidize swimming at our local facilities. So we're in the process of working with the school district and libraries to figure out the best way to implement that programing through My Brother's Keeper, and are working very closely with library services to do that.
Speaker 6: Fantastic. Thank you. And I'll I'll ask to Glenda because I thought it was a question for her. So I'll just make up a question for Glenda. Glenda. How's the staff transitioning from the North Branch to the Michelle Obama branch?
Speaker 11: It's a lot of hard work, but they're having a blast. Councilmember Great. The Vice Mayor.
Speaker 6: Glad to hear it on development services. You have a lot of accomplishments and that's that should be noted, given your department has that. I mean, since the elimination redevelopment, some of the most changes of all our departments. So it is really impressive to see what you've accomplished. And so I guess my first question is one of the people who was really instrumental in making a lot of that happened was Angela Reynolds. And I know that's a vacant position. How are we looking at it? I know it's really important positioning your shop. How how how are we looking in terms of filling that vacancy?
Speaker 10: I have about 30 days before I can introduce you to Deputy Director.
Speaker 6: Very, very excited to hear that. And I was I was also in here some of your accomplishments. I do want to acknowledge that you are structurally supporting language access. It's not like and I think that's smart because it's not like people are going to begin to speak less languages in our city. So I think it's it's smart that you did that. So thank you. I want to just ask a couple of questions. I know that you've taken on a lot of big planning efforts. What are the next few big I know, like the downtown plan and seated study and all that. What are the next big planning efforts on the horizon that we can look forward to? Because frankly, I want to get a north along, be specific plan, roll in at some point.
Speaker 10: So we are focusing in the next few months in wrapping up a sea trip plan in East Long Beach. We just you just recently approved and adopted the Midtown specific plan. We have the C-17 site that we're working with, Workforce Development and a Department of Defense grant to do some planning work along Cherry Avenue and that industrial zone. We also need to wrap up our land use element, which is a very significant effort in that ERs should be coming out in the next month or so, and all of your offices will be updated on that as well. Once the land use element is out, we need to focus on fixing our zoning, particularly along our commercial corridors. And we've had a number of discussions with your offices related to that. And then also the topic of resiliency and climate change needs to be dealt with as well as our an adoption of our local coastal plan. So that's really what we're going to be focusing on for long range planning efforts in the next 12 to 18 months.
Speaker 6: Great. With I'll say that with a lot of the focus on development and those things that are taking place in North Long Beach, that's a quarter of the Atlantic corridor. I want to work with you over the course of the next year to start identifying a timeline and a scope to start putting together something really specific for North Long Beach that helps guide some of this some of this movement. So I hope that's something we can work on, identifying a funding source and a timeline that that makes sense for folks. And then the final thing I'll ask, I know that we're in the process of the five year update on CDBG. How's that coming?
Speaker 10: So that will come to you next summer as part of our new consolidated plan. And we are doing a lot of community outreach right now that we've been working on. I would say it's pretty late. So we're working on that as well right now. And that should be coming to you and rolling out over the next 6 to 8 months.
Speaker 6: Okay. I would just say and I look forward to meeting the consultants on board with that. But as you know, CDBG is a really important funding source, but it's gotten even more important with the lack of redevelopment now. So I would I would like to just make sure that we are learning from what we've learned through these participatory budgeting pilots and integrating some of those elements into this. And I want to make sure that we you know, we really give it fresh eyes, because I don't know that we're going to have another source of revenue like CDBG. So we want to really get it right. And I know you can do just that, but thank you. Thank you. That that concludes my question. Is Councilmember Suber not.
Speaker 3: Thank you. I have three questions from council member Susie Price to read. So and Fur Council member Mungo will forgive me if these are boring. I have more than 3 minutes. They're not mine. Okay. The first question of this for the library services. How much does it cost to offer Sunday? Library hours at the branch library.
Speaker 11: Council members have been after the branch as the cost about $65,000 for a larger branch, about $73,000 annually.
Speaker 3: Okay. Thank you. The next question on the same topic, if we were to add Sunday library hours to a district that does not currently have them, what library would the department recommend? And before you answer, I think Councilmember Price would want me to state that. Los Altos Librarian Council District four IS has the largest readership in the summer reading program even more than the main library. But go ahead. Answer.
Speaker 11: Council members loop. Now, I need to do some analysis on that question, and I'd like to come back to you with an answer with the recommendation.
Speaker 3: Okay. And then third question is what is the data we have accumulated on Sunday library hours telling us about sun usage? Computer use included. If we have that information.
Speaker 11: Councilmember Slipper. Now I would like to provide that information to you at a later date and probably a two from four for the entire city council. That's okay.
Speaker 3: That's fine with me. It's it's fine with Councilmember Price. I'm sure she's watching right now. Okay, then just one question or comment for Ms.. Bodak. And in your in your violations, you failed to mention bedroom splitting. And I have knowledge that you got a personal thank you from fourth district resident on your recovery covering in that. So I just want to say thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you.
Speaker 7: All right.
Speaker 1: Thank you.
Speaker 6: Thank you. Councilmember Andrews.
Speaker 3: Yes. I also have three questions for Mrs. Price. It won't take that long. And then I'm just going to go right down the diocese. No, you guys, really? Seriously, it's been a long night and it's going to be longer. But I just wanted to tell. I just want to tell you guys, you're doing a great job. Keep up the good work and we see the money. All these things come to fruition. Thank you.
Speaker 6: Thank you. I think that concludes council comments. Is there any public comment on the budget hearing?
Speaker 1: Karen, recite again, just a couple of things for the library. Well, first of all, I want to commend both of these departments, because their employees are the most customer service oriented groups, I think, in the city. Their employees are always helpful. And the Neighborhood Resource Center is a wonderful resource for the neighborhood and the community. I wish we could have one in every council district. Your staff there are fabulous and they've been so helpful in a number of instances. So I wanted to mention them up front for the library. We're talking about Sunday hours and I. I hope you all have been to the library when the library opens. I counted as many as 50 people during the week waiting to get into the library when it the main library. And to me, it seems like if we're talking about Sunday library openings. We should talk about the main library. And I really think we need to look at libraries as community center instead of just literary pieces. Books that I've been to almost every library in the city, and the main library has the major majority of resources. And to me, it seems like with 50 people waiting to get in, probably some libraries don't have 50 people all day. That that's a large group of people that are not being accommodated in this discussion. As seniors, we have over 6000 seniors in the downtown area. And you're right, many of them do not understand the services that the library office offers. I know I did a survey in my building. We have almost 200 people. Only 30% of the people in my building have a library card. And many of them. And it's because they're mobility impaired. And we only have a couple of people that get book deliveries. And there's 23 buildings just in the immediate downtown area. So that's a huge service area that's not being served. You probably would run out of books in certain categories and. It warms my heart when city departments work together with these other city departments. And you two seem to do more integration with city departments than any other department. That needs to happen more across the board for cost efficiencies. That's all for the libraries, other than we love you and wish you could be open 24 seven and Amy, the Neighborhood Resource Center. I know for seniors we have major issues with the. Seniors in the community and tenant associations in the building. And I know Margaret has been really helpful, and I've gone to a number of the fair housing workshops, and they are just fabulous. The fair housing people.
Speaker 6: Thank you so much.
Speaker 1: They are every tenant and every landlord should be required to go to one of these workshops before they get business license, depending where they move in.
Speaker 6: Thank you very much. We have to move to next week.
Speaker 1: Thank you.
Speaker 2: I always had this on file. I guess my comment really echoes the previous speaker. I remember when libraries used to be open. The main library used to be open up on Mondays. It used to be open six or seven days a week. That was not that long ago. The reason why it was closed was because of what was called at the time. Necessary. Budget cuts, however, were no longer under those same fiscal restraints. We recently proposed a tax. Introduce a tax and I support the tax. I just want to see some of that money go to opening the library on Mondays. I think everybody.
Speaker 0: Behind the dice understands that a library.
Speaker 2: Especially the main library, the second largest library in Los Angeles County after Los Angeles, should be opened up on Mondays. Opening the library Tuesdays at noon is not an acceptable time to open up the library. The library offers critical services to many people, people who are looking for jobs, students. And when you have a report do or you have a job interview, you need the library open, not on Tuesday at 12:00. That's not acceptable to an employer. That's not acceptable to a teacher. And so for the students who depend on the library, whether it's printers or the other many services that the library opened offers, it's important that.
Speaker 0: The library.
Speaker 2: Is opened up on Mondays. I believe that our city is capable of that. I don't think that I'm asking for much. I don't think it's a very high standard to ask for the library to be opened up on Mondays at a decent time. Monday morning closed sometime in the evening. I know that we're capable of doing it. I know we've done it before and I'm not even going to send an email or anything like that. I just hope that you are, you know, can can somehow figure out some way to do that. Thank you.
Speaker 6: Thank. Thank you. Next.
Speaker 1: Good evening. My name is Kate Azhar. I'm the executive director for the Long Beach Public Library Foundation. First, I wanted to thank you, Glenda, for your report and also your leadership and advocacy for the libraries. Obviously, we support everything that you do, and thank you to you all for, again, funding Sunday hours at three of our libraries , Bayshore, BURNETT and Michelle Obama. Obviously, Sunday hours are very popular this evening. And I recently heard that Bay Shore had 400 visitors in 4 hours on one Sunday. So that's just an example of how popular Sunday hours are. Therefore, I'm here tonight to ask you to not only make this funding permanent for these libraries, but extend that funding to additional libraries in addition to the hours and not instead of the hours that are currently open. As the previous speaker said, Mondays and other days during the week are important to folks who have.
Speaker 7: Job applications.
Speaker 1: And resumes to work on during the week. And there are some families. We know that weekends and Sundays are the only days of the week they can take their children in the library. I know I'm a working mother myself, so Sundays are important day to bring my young son to the library and teach him the joy of reading. So I ask that you expand this access. I'd also like to ask that you consider using your discretionary funds to open the library additional.
Speaker 7: Libraries, open additional hours on Sundays. The cost.
Speaker 1: Is relatively modest, as Ms. Williams said, and I think in relation to the.
Speaker 7: Benefits that we'll see.
Speaker 1: In her community, it's really a worthwhile investment to provide residents with free access to education, technology, information when they need it. Thank you.
Speaker 6: Thank you. Next.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Good evening, Vice.
Speaker 7: Mayor Richardson and members of the council. My name is Elaine Hutchison, and I'm here on behalf of better housing for Long Beach. Thank you very much.
Speaker 1: I listened with a lot of interest to this Botox report, and I greatly appreciate it.
Speaker 7: And I know that your department does just a lot of work. We know that.
Speaker 1: I know that you mentioned something about the prep program.
Speaker 7: And so I had maybe.
Speaker 1: One or two questions. I don't know whether it's appropriate for me to ask questions or not.
Speaker 7: But maybe if I just put them out there, you'll let me know. I would like to know how many inspectors are as currently assigned to the prep program.
Speaker 6: I don't think we can. It wasn't his body. You want to answer.
Speaker 2: Quickly.
Speaker 10: If it's the pleasure of the report. So, Mayor. Excuse me, Vice Mayor Richardson and members of the council, we currently have 12 people assigned to the program.
Speaker 7: I guess as the matter of a budget question, my question would be whether you are planning to budget for additional inspectors in this next budget.
Speaker 10: Vice mayor, members of the city council. The answer to that is no.
Speaker 6: Thank you. And we won't have it any. What we can do other questions on to you know, to the site.
Speaker 7: Thank you very.
Speaker 1: Much. Thank you. Thank you.
Speaker 2: Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Seeing no other public comment, we're going to close the budget hearing. So thank you to all the finance staff and everyone else that's been very patient throughout that. Good work on that. So we're going to go back to the council agenda and we're going to take items 16 and 15 that are tied into one another. We actually need to take item 16. First, Madam Clerk. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to conduct a Budget Hearing to receive and discuss an Overview of the Proposed Fiscal Year 2017 Budget for the following: Library Services; and Department of Development Services. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_08162016_16-0773 | Speaker 3: Great. Thank you. Also, we have a continued public budget hearing tonight for health parks and public works and we're going to take item 28 and 20 to start and then we'll go right into the budget hearing. So, Madam Clerk, if we can start with item 28, please.
Speaker 0: Report from Mayor Garcia and Councilwoman Gonzalez recommendation to approve the expenditure of $20,000 as reward for information helping to solve the murder of Karina Mansehra and Jenna Bell Aniya on August 6th, 2016.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Madam Cook. My computer is not working, by the way, so someone can. Can I get a motion in a second? Just. I'll just say briefly. We know that we had an incredible tragedy not that long ago with these two members of our community that were very tragically shot, particularly the little girl, four years old, and her mother as well. This is this $20,000 reward matches the county's reward, which also passed today. And it's what we've been discussing with the police department. So I might turn this over to Councilman Gonzales.
Speaker 5: Yes, I, too, just want to say I extend my gratitude to our Long Beach police officers. I know they're working very hard to ensure that we bring this person to justice. I also would like to thank our Board of Supervisors, specifically Supervisor Don Carnaby. I know his work in this was very helpful in allowing us to obtain this reward. So thank you very much.
Speaker 3: Thank you. There's a motion and a second. Any public comment on this item? Seeing none. Members, please go ahead and cast your votes. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to approve the expenditure of $20,000 as a reward for information helping to solve the murder of Carina Mancera and Jennabel Anaya on August 6, 2016. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_08162016_16-0697 | Speaker 3: Unanimous. Thank you very much. Congratulations to Vice Mayor Richardson and council member Austin. We're going to go now right into our budget hearing, which is the start of the meeting and then the rest of the meeting. So let staff get ready for that. And Mr. West will go through the entire presentation and then do questions at the end.
Speaker 6: Okay. We're going to go ahead and get started. Last week we had our first formal budget presentation reviewing departments. We had the police department at the fire department and disaster management. Today, we're going to hear from three of our departments. We're going to hear Kelly Colby, the director of our Health and Human Services Department. After Kelly, we're going to hear from Marie Knight, the director of our Parks, Recreation and Marine Department. And after that, we're going to hear from Craig Beck, the director of our Public Works Department. So with that, I just. Thank you. We just want to continue that to note that we are working on a public safety continuum. It's just not all about police and fire protecting our community and public safety areas. It's a lot of other departments. It's health and it's Health and Human Services. It's Parks, recreation and Marine keeping kids busy. It's public works, taking care of our streets and our graffiti and issues like that. Obviously, library services as well. Workforce development, code enforcement. So there's a myriad of activities that work to help support our public safety continuum and work with our police department to keep our community a great community that it is. So that I'm going to turn it over to Kelly.
Speaker 11: Good evening, honorable mayor, vice mayor and City Council Members. Thank you for the opportunity to present the budget for the Department of Health and Human Services. First, I'd like to recognize my team members. Who in the audience? Raise your hand. Raise your hand. All right. Who make of what we do possible? They're bright, committed, caring, and their team are so passionate about their work. I appreciate them fully and know that the Health Department would not be where it is today without them. I am truly lucky to be here. I'm going to share with you first some, of course, services. So the Health and Human Services Department provides over 30 programs in nine sites around the city. Together, these services focus on building and supporting healthy communities, families and individuals with pre-natal through old age. Many people connect us primarily with homeless services and restaurant inspections, but we do much more. We promote healthy living through many of our programs, including healthy, active, Long Beach, the Hills Zone, Rick, and our public health nursing. We increase safety of neighborhoods, homes and businesses through our environmental health programs, as well as our strengthening families efforts at the Center for Families, Centers for Family and Youth. We provide housing and homeless services, work closely with our city, federal, state and local partners to prepare for public health emergencies. We increase access to health care and community supports and prevent, investigate and control communicable diseases through epidemiology, disease, investigation and clinical services. We have a diverse list of accomplishments this year. As you know, we achieved public health accreditation, demonstrating our superior level of service. We were the third local health department in California. Out of 61, only 5% of health departments nationally have achieved the status. We provided over 350,000 public health visits this year, all at free or no cost to do theirs. We brought in we brought in over $96 million of funding from outside of our city. This provides 225 jobs in the city. 60 million of this funding actually goes back to the community through the housing authority and rent payments to move to apartment owners. We really are an economic driver. We became the only California public health lab to receive our and molecular accreditation, which allows for a significant decrease the amount of time for testing results for Zika, other infectious diseases and bioterrorism. It went from days to hours for when we can get results. We had 498 homeless veterans and met the HUD benchmarks for functionally ending veteran homelessness, a level we've been trained for nine months. We work closely with city partners and public works and development services and other community partners to complete the pedestrian master plan to the Communities of Excellence and through Kaiser and the Office of Traffic Safety Funding. We implemented bike safety courses and a bike hub in North Long Beach, where youth learn to maintain bikes, receive free helmets. We were awarded a $5 million fatherhood grant, which allows us to work with over 500 fathers to become better parents. We opened the Section eight waitlist for the first time in 13 years, received over 18,000 applications for vouchers and over 14,000 more applications for project based sites. Finally, we led planning efforts for a large scale four day bioterrorism exercise that included many partners in the city and other government agencies. Our budget is just over $114 million. 61% of that comes from HUD for the Housing Authority. 30% 37% is health fund, which includes funding from grants, fees, sales tax and vehicle licensing fees. 1% comes from Cooper, which was previously discussed by the Health Department's presentation, and 1% comes from the City General Fund. This all turns out that we leverage about $1.4 million in city funding to bring in $114 million in resources, which is about an 8,043% return on investment. Our notable changes this year focus on homeless services, internal changes, and broader public health trends. The Health Department continues to lead the homeless outreach efforts and partnerships to support homeless in the city. But our capacity does not meet the demand for outreach and services. We do have new funding this year, which includes $100,000 in one time funds for outreach and response activities and $250,000 for Infuse Fellow to help further our innovative strategies and identify innovative funding opportunities to help address homelessness. This is added to the $7.2 million we receive from Howard to fund our Continuum of care, which includes 12 community partners that provide case management, mental health services, transitional and permanent housing and so much more. Another 1 million come from other grants to support outreach, emergency shelters, homeless prevention and veterans supports. Other notable changes include reorganizing the health department programs to create efficiencies, enhance coordination. In the past, we focused on the different grants and how people access them separately. Our goal this year to align our services around individuals, beginning with the common intake process. They'll help determine all the programs they qualify for and to better coordinate those services. We're also redesigning internal administrative processes for efficiency and consistency. Public health. Public health at the national level is changing. It's focusing more on the social context that impact health, such as housing, violence, prevention, trauma, environment and education. This requires significant partnerships as it takes all of us to address these issues. It also takes reviewing policies and programs through an equity lens to ensure we are building and supporting improve health for those who haven't been supported in the past and who now experience disparate health outcomes. We are looking for also looking at improving data sharing strategies across hospitals and community partners to better connect people to the community supports they need to build and maintain their health. Our significant issues include the increasing concerns about homeless across the city, and I've discussed those resources in a previous slide. We face increasing external public health threats such as Zika and other vector borne diseases, bioterrorism concerns and climate change that's impacting our environment, access to food, the heat advisories and other things, just to name a few. We're constantly working to identify sustainable funding streams for existing and emerging priorities. We've lost funding for asthma and diabetes. Education have not found resources to support those programs moving forward. In addition, grant funding does not cover full administrative costs or increasing employee costs, which which leaves us running about 110 grants and sub grants and responding to over 100 program and fiscal audits annually based on grants. The lack of sufficient administrative resources actually limits our ability to build our grant base. We also face increasing facility cost to aging infrastructure, which is also not covered by grants. Often we hear we can fund it through grants and we have been very successful at that. But it is not easy. If it were all work and all nonprofits would be fully funded. Funds, funds priorities shift and reduced and the competition continues to get steeper. In addition, writing and managing grants is very labor intensive. Grants are a great part of an overall funding strategy, but as the primary funding strategy, it can be very difficult. We are excited about the potential opportunities to build a more integrated system of services for older adults, as outlined earlier this year in the older adult strategic plan . We'll be working very closely with Parks and Rec in this work. The potential move of violence prevention and equity efforts into the department is also an opportunity. At the national level, violence prevention and equity have become key focus areas for public health because of their impact on overall wellness and communities. In addition, we're participating in many conversations about increasing opportunities to avert people with mental illness from criminal justice settings to treatment settings so that they'll be safer and served in the right place. Finally, health departments nationally are moving toward the role of chief health strategist. More of the convener pulling together government agencies, hospitals, community providers and community members to improve health and wellness. We're being approached by a number of partners to take on this role, and we appreciate the opportunity in their trust they place in our work. In closing, thank you for your time this evening. The Health and Human Services Department looks forward to working closely with you to continue to build and support a healthy, safe and vibrant Longreach and village of Christians.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Next up is Parks and Recreation Marine.
Speaker 4: Good evening, honorable mayor and members of the City Council. It is my pleasure to present to you tonight the Department of Parks Recreation and Maureen's fiscal year 2017 proposed budget. This has been an incredibly successful and dynamic past year for us. And I want to thank the mayor, city council, the city managers and his office and his team, our partners and other city departments and as well as the community for all the support. The investments that are included in the fiscal year 17 budget will help our city continue to be recognized as a national leader in parks and recreation services. And even more importantly, we'll help the Parks and Recreation and Animal Care Services team that some of which are assembled here this evening, to continue to have a positive impact on Long Beach residents and visitors each day. So our core services, we are one of the most diverse departments. We go from pets to beaches, buildings to youth and turf and trees to seniors. And we touch the lives in every corner of our community. We provide for the maintenance of parks, facilities, open spaces, marinas and beaches to promote an active, healthy lifestyle and improve the livability of Long Beach. We take our role in the public safety continuum seriously and work hard to provide access to healthy recreation opportunities and safe environments for the city's youth. Teens, adults and seniors who visit our programs over 2 million times each year. We promote responsible pet ownership and the humane treatment of animals and work to reduce animal overpopulation. Our Animal Care Services is a 24 seven public safety and public health operation. As the largest municipally run marina system in the nation. Our goal is to make sure our facilities are excellent quality and exceed customer and community needs. And lastly, we continue to implement the city's open space plan with projects that expand community access to parks and facilities. So we had many accomplishments this past year with a focus on livability. We've increased our bike ability, swim ability and walkability with the installation of the Bayshore Buoy, swim line, bike, fix it stations and fitness zones across the city in parks, beaches and waterways. We completed over 5500 work orders, many coming from the Long Beach app in our parks and removed over 4000 tons of trash from our beaches. And we were again rated one of the 25 best park systems in the country. Additional strategic investments included renovations and improvements to Homeland Cultural Center, Willow Springs, Park Stearns Park, the playground at MacArthur Park and the Community Center and Pool at Martin Luther King Jr Park. Also, there were restroom projects at Bixby Recreation and a forest projects done this year. To further our efforts to use irrigation water and our water budget as efficiently as possible. The conversion of over 300,000 square feet of street medians from turf to mulch has started. Gun Boehner Park will be completed in the coming months and the DeForest Park Wetlands, Drake, Chavez, Greenbelt and the El Dorado Nature Center projects are just starting. And with the rebuild of the Alamitos Bay Marina well underway, staff is now focusing on improvements of the other Marina amenities. And we are marketing the new, larger slips that will soon be available. We also act as an incubator for hundreds of local, micro and small businesses through our contract class and structure opportunities. Demand for our recreation programs continues to grow this summer. Excuse me? This summer, our programs were either at or exceeded capacity across the board. And as the demographics in Long Beach shift towards a larger senior population, demand for senior services has also grown. Our Animal Care Services field staff responded to over 28,000 calls for service last year. As we work to ensure the safety of all of our residents two and four legged. Through the many community partnerships, spay and neuter programs and improved health care, the live release rate has continued to grow for another straight year. Partnerships within the community and outside funding sources such as with the LA Kings and Signal Hill Petroleum have allowed us to continue and enhance programs and services during fiscally challenging times. This past summer, the Long Beach Unified School District provided free access to youth at all city and school pools and free swim lessons at Cabrillo High School . And once again, we teamed with the Long Beach Convention and Visitors Bureau to provide 100 days of summer program to increase the economic impact of the staycation concept and the impact of our programs. For our fiscal year 17, our proposed budget totals over $56 million across all funds, with 32 million in the general fund. The department also has substantial Thailand funds budgets to support our operations in the marinas, beaches and waterways. We have significant revenue streams to help support our many programs with general fund revenue of over 12 million and tidelands funds revenue over 24 million. The department is also significant also has significant grant funding for youth services of just over $2 million. This budget provides for 430 full time equivalent positions, and during our busy summer summer months, our total staffing complement grows to over 800 people. Each year we provide hundreds of area teens and young adults their introduction into the workforce through volunteer and employment opportunities. Some notable changes in this year's budget in order to reduce the impact to the community from any further critical program reductions. We worked hard to develop additional operational efficiencies and look for new service delivery models where possible. For example, we are reducing our mowing frequency and our turf areas during the winter months, saving approximately $60,000 each year. A reduction to administrative staff was made possible by leveraging technology to distribute information throughout our various locations more efficiently. We will also redistribute responsibilities in our sports field permitting program and in the supervision of the Long Beach Senior Center, resulting in some staff reductions. These reductions do not reduce recreation services, but will, however, reduce the amount of staff time available to interface with customers. Next, we look to make sure all of our programs are right sized by matching budgeted resources to the actual participation. The summer season of youth sports is historically the least attended, so reductions in this program will have the least impact to our city's youth. We were able to adjust areas of our budget for strategic investments for the future. For example, one adjustment that is offset by revenue is increased staffing at the El Dorado East Regional Park gates. Our General Fund budget was increased as well to help provide additional resources to maintain our parks and facilities. This included resources for City Council district funded improvements and to bridge the L.A. County Parks Tax Levy shortfall. In addition, we identified areas where a small investment will reap larger rewards by providing upgraded equipment for floor care in our 27 community centers and response to plumbing issues in our parks, as well as new equipment to more efficiently clean the Belmont Pier. As we continue to deal with the drought. One time resources were identified to further our water conservation efficiency efforts and provide emergency additional emergency tree care. The Be Safe program will be funded once again, and we will have the opportunity to build on previous successes, helping to keep youth and families engaged in positive and safe activities on weeknights during the longer daylight hours of the summer season. In the coming year, we will be working to increase efficiencies in animal care services and implement multi-year pet licenses for residents. Saving both staff resources and the customers time and the passing of the historic measure will allow us for long awaited and much needed repairs and improvements in our parks and to our many facilities. There are some significant issues and opportunities facing us in the year ahead. The Department will work to continue the investment in our parks and facilities throughout the city to increase the city's livability and safety. The identified projects for measure funding have a very aggressive goals in Year one and will require staff to dedicate significant amounts of time to complete the many, much needed projects. And we look forward to that challenge. The city's park trees have been hard hit by the drought. Their advancing age, lack of trimming and insect infestations and resources are now provided to start to address these problems. We will work to develop strategies to further impact these issues as we take as well as take action to address the recent audit findings within our current constrained resources. Future partnerships will also be critical with stakeholders to develop an innovative approach to address the challenges of homelessness, vandalism and an aging infrastructure and their collective impact on our limited staff and park resources. Our Animal Care services operations have come a long way and further investment will be needed to advance our progress in providing positive outcomes for shelter animals as well as those that we encounter in the field. The department sees great opportunity as well in continuing our efforts to seek partnerships with the community to enhance our service offerings in all areas. And finally, the demand for all of our programs and services and the use of our parks, our beaches and all of our spaces and places has greatly increased this past year, putting a strain on our limited resources. With over 168 public places and spaces, six miles of beaches, 27 community centers, dozens of athletic fields, 67 tennis courts, five municipal golf courses, 54 playgrounds, three pools, and 330 300 marina slips. Our opportunity to impact the residents of Long Beach, both our two and four legged, is great. And through all these facilities in our programs, we have made millions of positive contacts this year as we take our residents from diapers to diplomas and graduates to grandparents. Your continued investment in the Department of Parks, Recreation and Marine has been essential to our ability to meet the needs of the community, and we thank you for your support. And this concludes our presentation, and we will be available after the next presentation for questions.
Speaker 3: Thank you. And finally, it's a public works.
Speaker 12: Good evening, honorable members of the City Council, thank you for the opportunity to provide a brief overview of the Public Works Department's Fiscal Year 2017 proposed budget. If you recall, two weeks ago you received a presentation on the proposed capital improvement program, or CHP, which outlined the city's plan investment of roughly $76 million into city infrastructure. Tonight, I'm going to discuss the public works operating budget. Public Works is a team of service oriented individuals who actively support the successful operations of the city on a daily basis. These activities are summarized in three core service areas, which include overseeing the maintenance and rehabilitation of the city's core rights of way infrastructure, such as streets, sidewalks and our urban forest. We provide services supporting a healthy and sustainable city environment, including waste diversion, stormwater management and enhancing livability infrastructure. The Department also works to safely and efficiently design, construct, deliver and maintain our public facilities. So next time you drive to a council meeting, I'd like you to think about the hardworking public works employees while you're on the streets designed by your engineering group, while you obey the traffic signs supported by our street maintenance group. Now, if you don't obey the traffic signs, you'll be thinking about Chief Luna. I want you to think about when you walk into city hall that this building is maintained by your facility team and when you dispose of your Starbucks coffee cup that is serviced by an environmental services team. Public Works had a number of accomplishments in 2016, including completing 113 million in capital improvement projects. Some of those highlights include a $25 million investment in arterial streets and sidewalks. And I just want to note that to help ensure that our rights of way meet accessibility standards, the city has hired a new ADA coordinator. There was also 15.1 million invested in the new Michelle Obama Library, 7 million for Parks Recreation Improvement, some of which Maria outlined here this evening. As well as $35 million to start the new Civic Center project, which included the demolition of the old courthouse. Our refuge crews collected 186,000 tons of trash. This was either recycled or used for renewable energy. Street crews repaired 34,000 potholes, trimmed 25,000 trees, and removed 1.2 million square feet of graffiti. Under the Clean Team Initiative, over 13,000 illegally dumped items were collected. Many coming in over the Golden beach at. We assisted residents with 15,000 special item pick up requests, keeping those items out of the alleys. A highlight that particularly worth mentioning is the street sweeping optimization study, which focused on the elimination of the 14 street sweeping routes . This was done in one of the city's most parking impacted residential neighborhoods. Alameda Speech. This effort will continue in 2017, moving into the downtown and West Gateway neighborhoods. In 2017, Public Works is proposing a $177 million budget. This is divided across nine different funds. This includes about 107 million for operating activities and 70 million in capital funds. If you look at the pie chart, I just want to highlight that public works includes roughly 21% of its budget, which is made up of general funds totaling $38 million. This $38 million represents roughly 9% of the citywide general fund budget. Additionally, this $38 million is offset by $25 million in revenue from various sources, including parking meters and permit fees. You'll notice the refuse and recycling fund is our largest amount that we have in the department that represents $47 million and it's generated from customer payments. These moneys are solely restricted for waste diversion activities, including the city's clean team. The Capital Projects Fund includes the first year of measure investments totaling $27 million. This is in addition to the base amounts. These activities are all detailed in the proposed CIP plan, which again was presented two weeks ago. Notable changes that we're working on include working closely with financial management department to achieve the general fund saving target of $733,000. This reduction will result in minimal impact to operations as the savings was achieved by reducing overtime, essentially shifting after our call outs to regularly scheduled hours. We also reallocated our survey staff to the oil fund and the Capital Projects Fund, thus aligning staff with the funding areas where the actual work is performed. I want to take a moment to thank the limited gas and oil department for their continued support of our survey team. Public Works is proposing to enhance the Clean Team Initiative, allowing for two dedicated clean team crews. This will expand the proactive response to illegally dumped items, litter abatement and other clean services that's included in this year's budget. The budget also includes Measure A again, $27 million will help address many deferred capital projects. We are also adding staff to help meet the demands of not only measure but the other side IP projects. When thinking about project delivery. Public Works is is restructuring its organization by establishing a focused project management group. This will align tidelands measure A and base SIPP into one work team, providing more efficient effort and better communication. Additionally, it will allow us to support private development as it relates to work within the public right of way. Opportunities in 2017, with the passage of Measure aid, the city can begin to address its aging infrastructure, which has been a constant budget challenge to ensure the city is making strategic investments in its street. The Pavement Management Plan, or PMP, will receive an update in 2017, giving council an understanding of what condition all the streets are within the city. The city will also complete its first alley, including courts and Ways Management Plan, funded with $300,000 for measure. There is also a new sidewalk management plan which will be prepared to evaluate the condition and help us prioritize repairs based on need. This will also focus on the needed accessibility improvements that we need to make in many of our intersections. The proposed budget includes an update to the city's refuse rates. A study is currently being conducted by an outside consultant and those results and recommendations will be brought to council in early 2017. The study will include an evaluation of rates in comparable cities, including Los Angeles, Burbank, Pasadena, Santa monica and San Jose. I want to point to the phase the completion of phase one of our led streetlight change out program that updated 1750 intersection lights, or we call safety lights. That program continues with phase two. That will result in replacing roughly 24,000 high pressure sodium lights with LED lights. This is in partnership with City Light and Power. And also I'd like to point out that it's a sustainable project and will significantly reduce the city's city's energy consumption for streetlights. And I'm pleased to announce that we are investing in technology, working with the innovation team and our technology and Innovation Department. The city will deploy an easy park, Long Beach smartphone mobile application. This will show a parking information for on street and off street parking, allowing users to view parking availability throughout the cities. When that 1651 smart meter on street parking locations and over 10,000 spaces in our lots and garages. Finally, the department will continue to focus on citywide mobility programs, including completing the deployment of 50 bikeshare stations, which will result in 500 bike share bikes throughout our city communities. We're also adding 19 bike repair and hydration stations that again will be deployed throughout Long Beach. Again on mobility, we will work to continue the construction of the Daisy Avenue, the 15th Street and Sixth Street Bike Boulevard projects. These will be in addition to the newly completed expansion of Alameda Avenue buffered bike lanes and the new parking protected bike lanes on Artesia Boulevard that were just unveiled last week. It's also I'm pleased to announce that our beach treats events will continue in 2017 to support the community and make sure that we're working to educate them on mobility options. So in closing, I want to reiterate that our goal is to continue to efficiently and seamlessly provide these essential services to our communities. On behalf of the 466 dedicated men and women of the Public Works Department. I want to thank you for your support, and I look forward to working with each of you in the coming year. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you. I think that concludes all of our presentations. I think everyone did a great job. Thank you. And we're going to begin by going into some questions. Again, a lot of members want to speak. So please, if we can just try to note that everyone has has questions, we'll probably get to all of them instead of , you know, one person asking all of them. That would be great. So, Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So I want to start with public works. I just want to say and this isn't a question, I just want to say that it's apparent that you've invigorated your department and it's clear that your staff, in all your all your bureaus and divisions, they're clearly thinking outside of the box and really striving to meet the needs of our city. So so I have to say that I recognize that and you're doing a fantastic job and your staff is doing great. That's all I have for public works. Thanks. And Parks and Rec, a few things that came up. I noticed you mentioned that you have 800 staff during the summer and that's that's huge. That's a tremendous point of entry for employment. That's you know, this is it's a front line for youth violence prevention. And with all of the constraints with dealing with a department that large it I think your staff does a fantastic job at balancing community interests city council interest and needs and you're really the you know, you're really sort of delivering on a number of programs like our concerts in the park are fantastic the Be Safe program, a number of improvements like our de force wetlands, the Harlem Park Community Center, our north town open space masterplan can go on and on, but your staff is they're killing it. So keep up the good work on health. I would say, you know, along that same along that same vein too, to think that, you know, it was something you mentioned. So you have a lot of accomplishments. I see everything from the heels on to the bike club, the fatherhood initiative, which is huge. All your work. I'm very proud of your work around veterans and homelessness and I think it's to hear all that. I think it's astonishing to know that you only receive 1% of the general fund and as much of as much of you know, as much that we talk about it, city council about a lot of these social issues. It's just surprising me that that you receive less than most other departments and you're completely you're completely grant funded and fee funded. And I know that we can't expect our departments to continue to be innovative and forward thinking if we can't support them and if our budget doesn't reflect our values. This department continues to be a smart investment. You invest 1% and we literally get 99% back. And that's that's just fantastic. And that's a lesson learned. But we can't think long term when we're thinking in terms of grant cycles. So today we did receive this memo here on the Office of Equity and we received a letter from the Board of Health. So I do want to thank your staff for your hard work and research that went into this. But because this just came out and I did take the time to read it, I want to ask you if you can just take a moment and just walk the council through this memo.
Speaker 11: Good evening. So we were asked to look at the feasibility of integrating the violence prevention efforts and equity efforts in the Department of Health and Human Services. This is the first the first memo that outlines the steps and initial resources that it would take to do that. We provide some background about the the safe Long Beach and violence prevention efforts, as well as the existing equity efforts. But in the end, what I'd like to talk a little bit about is what the structure would be and what we're proposing. We see equity as an overall encompassing activity. It is not an activity, but a philosophy and the way that we look at things. And so what we'd like to do is to place an equity office within the Administrative Executive Office of Health and Human Services, and then the violence prevention efforts really to move into the Human Services Bureau, which we don't currently have, but we will soon as we're realigning our organization. We see the nice fit there because the we have the Center for Families and Youth, we have homeless services, the Fatherhood Initiative, our kind of strengthening families activities. All of those are considered core violence prevention activities. And then that would allow for those integrated efforts to look around prevention as well. We're also been spending a lot of time looking at mental health diversion from incarceration opportunities, which is also violence prevention. So we'd like to incorporate that into the Human Services Bureau and then the equity efforts would be within the overall department.
Speaker 7: Thank you. And I think that makes a lot of sense to place, you know, violence prevention with all the human services stuff that you're doing from homelessness to, you know, fatherhood initiative and all that. I think that all make sense. And in terms of like the staffing in the Office of Equity, I want to applaud the fact that you've looked at two positions you've already gotten grant funded and you're leveraging that. So that's great. I want to just ask that that, you know, I see a timeline here that says, you know. The City Council asked that we look at some time in the next fiscal year to make this happen because I know it's going to take some time to do some some outreach and things like that. Could you just walk me through just what you anticipate to be a potential timeline, like how I know we can't be open on day one, October 1st of a fiscal year, but what would it look like, that sort of phase in a ramp up?
Speaker 11: So the in terms of the Office of Equity specifically, we are in the middle of hiring an equity coordinator for the department that was that is funded through the California Endowment. We also have a few fellow who will be joining us for one year that is funded between general fund and grant funds. In addition to that, we would we would language access and My Brother's Keeper would be would be incorporated there. So as we look at what it would take to plan, when we talked about the feasibility of what was originally proposed here, there were a large number of people here speaking and wanting to engage in that conversation around equity. And what we understand is that we want to be able to be out in the community, to engage with the community over the next 4 to 6 months, to have a conversation about what are the expectations and how do you align the expectations and the resources to really move forward and determine together what we want to create with this office. So we would come back in six months with a plan in terms of the violence prevention, we're looking at another probably year sometime in early, early to 2017 to be able to move those over based on space and technology and other things. We also the memo outlines the fact that because we are grant funded and all way to pretty much everything that is coming through violence prevention and equity are grant funded as well that we would be seeking an administrative analyst at the most as an absolute core piece to help run all of those grants and monitor them and do those kinds of things, as well as bringing on a public health professional level or high level sort of program and person to really look at the data and to help drive violence prevention efforts across the department.
Speaker 7: Thank you. So I'll just end with I'm very comfortable with that timeline. I think it meets exactly what we discussed in initial motion. I'm going to ask our budget folks, Leia, John GROSS and I and our chair of our Budget Oversight Committee, just look at this proposal, talk with city staff, see if there's a way that we can make sure that this gets phased in to meet the needs of the health department. Because what I understand is our director saying, yes, we can do the things that the council asks, but at some point we have to talk about real capacity. We can't continue to be, you know, grant funded and look at we need to have some support on the administrative side. And that's my analysis here. So I'm to ask folks this to look at that through the BRC process and I look forward to what comes out of it. But thank you so much and great job to all of you.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzales.
Speaker 5: Yes, thank you. Thank you to each of the department heads. I really appreciate all of the work that each of you have done and also the women and men of each of your departments. It's been phenomenal working with with all of you. I will start with public works. Just real comments. I want to say thank you. I know the courts and waste management plan is will be underway. It's very exciting. Also your commitment to parking. Craig, I really appreciate it. I know that we will receive a study that will discuss the courthouse area. We're also looking at the greater downtown and city place as well. So thank you. Moving along to Parks summary. I have a couple of questions, so thank you for everything. Your reports are always very inclusive and comprehensive and I think we've streamlined a lot of our questions and we've received a lot of answers from you. Have a question? I see a couple of reductions and eliminations. You did talk about the youth summer sports programing. I guess historically it's been low, but I have questions also the reduction for Silverado and Veterans Park. So can you just explain that a little bit?
Speaker 4: Yes. The reduction in the youth sports for summer, there was a at one point in time an all city track meet that was produced by our department. It wasn't run last year because the numbers from the year before before were very, very low participation. So that was something that we thought we could eliminate in this year's budget without having an impact to some of our other summer programs. As far as then Silverado and Veterans, what we were doing there is really eliminate or not eliminating, but bringing the budget back more right sizing it to the participation level. So the numbers are low there during the summer show and the staffing level doesn't need to be as high there.
Speaker 5: Okay. And was the track meet? That's the only youth sport for summertime. Yes. And then as far as the low participation is that that money be placed in other like different types of programing. I mean, that would be great if we were able to do something like that.
Speaker 4: So just that would be great if we were able to do something like that. But as we looked at the need to do reductions in the department across the board, we tried to be as efficient as possible and look at right sizing and and areas where we could reduce without the impact. And that's one of those areas.
Speaker 5: Okay. Thank you. And then last question for you. I think it's been a question that we've had historically as park patrols. I know that's been talked about formally. What is the next step? Because I know we talked about it last budget season and I don't know where it's at at this point.
Speaker 4: Well, right now we have our park ranger program is actually housed in the police department, and they are mainly working with our regional park system. We had a pilot program a year and a half ago, I believe it was. It stopped in the council district two. That was, again, pilot, and that was to be funded if it was going to go forward through the local homeowners association, if they chose to continue to move it forward. And that was really using some of our part time recreation staff to be at that park, to sort of be eyes and ears on the park after program hours and and to help with some of the issues that we were having there. We don't currently have plans or we don't have funding in the budget to start a program or to bring back that pilot program.
Speaker 5: Okay. Thank you very much. That answered my question. I appreciate it and Kelly and help thank you also for everything that you do specifically with homelessness. I feel like it's been really prioritized. We've been talking about it quite a bit and I know there's different funding sources coming through, but I really appreciate your commitment to that and all of your your team's commitment as well. Question about the lost funding for asthma. What are the next steps? Because I know that has been lost for some time. So I don't know what where we go from here.
Speaker 11: Right. So recently the port announced, I think it's $47 million that they'll be putting out into the community over the next 15 years to to start to address some of the issues. We had been receiving a human being port mitigation funds in those funds, and it so we'll be reapplying for those resources when they come forward. We are also looking at working with different health insurance organizations to see if they will start to fund asthma education as part of this part of an effort. We're in early conversations in that I'm not sure where that will go, but it is a possibility.
Speaker 5: Okay. Would you be able to inform us? I know that you you do regularly just to ensure that we know where it's at, because I know a lot of residents on the West Side specifically will have questions as to the funding. And I know you're very tight end, but be good to just get an update on where that said.
Speaker 11: Yeah, sure.
Speaker 5: Thank you. And then just last question. As we are discussing, the Office of Equity is I know there had been discussion of an Office of Aging and I don't know if aging will now be tied into Office of Equity and how that will work out.
Speaker 11: No, they'll be separate.
Speaker 5: Okay. Just just checking on that. Thank you very much. Appreciate it.
Speaker 11: Yeah. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Excellent. Yes. Thank you, Councilwoman Pryce.
Speaker 5: Thank you very much. Okay, so a few questions. We'll start with public works and regarding the measure, plans for 2017. Is it realistic that we will actually be able to complete all of the projects that we have scheduled for 2017? And if not, at what point during the year will we have a sense of what projects we likely won't get to in that year, thereby allowing us the opportunity to reallocate some funds?
Speaker 12: Well, Councilmember, I'd just like to say that the mayor has issued me a challenge in completing these projects in three years, which I've gladly accepted. Joking aside, I do believe we will get through our $27 million of measure money in year one. A lot of the items on here are are things that don't take a lot of design time. So, for example, in year one, we're going to be doing a lot of street work that's focused on slurry while we we will be designing streets that we would be reconstructing in year two and then we would design streets in year two that we would be reconstructing in year three. So that really is the long lead time items. Many of the other things in here we believe we can get to should we find ourselves in a situation where we believe we're not going to achieve that in carryover moneys, we're going to be utilizing the Transportation Infrastructure Committee to make regular updates as long as well as the Measure Committee to give them updates on expenditure plans in progress.
Speaker 5: Okay, great. Because I know that we have a lot of public safety priorities as well as infrastructure priorities. And if there were if there was a realization that maybe we couldn't get to all the infrastructure ones, maybe for the 2017 year, we can reallocate some of that money because $1,000,000 may go a lot further with some of our public safety priorities than with infrastructure in terms of our our first year plan. So I just want to put that out there, something to think about. Okay. The pavement management update that we're going to get in 2017. Is that going to impact at all the three year plan that we've come up with? Or is the three year plan pretty much determined based on the last study that we did and will be identifying new, new challenges moving forward?
Speaker 12: Well, I think best management practices are that you keep your payment management plan current. Our goal is to update it every two years. So we have a very robust plan. I think you've you've spent some time looking at it and understand what's in that plan. We want to make sure that the street ratings that we're basing our decisions on are accurate and current. So essentially in 2017, those street ratings will receive an update. And I would imagine that our our strategic approach would remain consistent. But if, as an example, we have a street that significantly deteriorates in that two year time frame, we may want to shift some priorities to address those streets.
Speaker 5: Okay, great. Thank you. Okay. And thank you very much for the work that you do. Have shared this with Mr. Beck in private, but happy to do so in public as well. Your team does your department does an amazing job responding to the go along beach app requests, especially in the area of graffiti removal. So I think it's that is the one. Service, a resource that we offer our residents that allows them to have direct contact with the city staff and city departments. And when that contact is positive, I think it fares well for the entire city. So thank you for that. Okay. Going on to health, if that's okay. I want to commend the Health Department for the amazing work that you do in bringing in grant funding. There's there's no doubt about it. When you look at your budget, like my colleagues have mentioned, you get very little from the city, but yet you bring in so much in grant funding. And so for that, you should be absolutely commended. And I can imagine that homelessness is a challenge. For the department at this time, because although you get over $7 million in funding from one source and some money from other sources, it still presents some new and unique challenges that are being presented , and we're not necessarily able to keep up with those. My question to you is, you know, we're hearing a lot about creative programs and projects that different municipalities are using to try to determine what works when it comes to homelessness. This morning, I heard on NPR that L.A. County is going to be implementing another idea of selling city advertising space and using that money to fund homelessness initiatives above and beyond what we do. And we're known for doing as a staple in the area of homelessness in the city of Long Beach. What creative methods or ideas or plans do we have moving forward that we can share with our constituents in regards to homelessness? Are we are we planning to try out any pilot projects anywhere? Is there anything that we're looking into that might be a little bit different than what we've done in the past to meet the new challenges?
Speaker 11: Yeah. So the Fuze fellow, we will have a Fuze fellow joining our team starting this fall for a one for a one year activity. And the Fuze fellow was the sort of led the much of the planning in L.A. County as part of their work. And so they will be looking at different sorts of innovative opportunities for how to address homelessness, as well as creative financing solutions and innovative financing issues to help fund additional resourcing in the work that we're doing right now. When we think about the 7.2 million coming in, six over 6 million of that actually goes to all of our partners. So we're doing that. We are providing transitional housing and permanent supportive housing and mental health services, veteran services, domestic violence services, even child care for people so they can begin to find jobs and to be educated . So we're really spending a lot of time, you know, working with our partners to house people. As for those who come in, the other is we're really spending a lot of time trying to you know, when we think about different ways that we can provide mental health treatment and substance abuse treatment, many that many who are homeless experience mental illness or substance use. And so we are working with our partners to try to identify new ways to do business there. But there's work to be done.
Speaker 5: In regards to that. And I know that you attended a recent meeting that we had in the third district that was very well attended by over 150 people on this issue. And some of the folks in the group were asking whether or not we have a plan in place. Do we have any sort of strategic plan in place for homelessness? And if not, what would it take for us to create one? I imagine that would be quite an undertaking that would be costly. What would be involved and do you think it would be helpful?
Speaker 11: Well, we do have we have a coordination. We very closely with our region as well. And so there's there are there's a lot of work through the coordinated entry system and through our teams. So it doesn't lay out as the strategic plan. It is a it's a highly coordinated effort that has brought together many partners from across our region in an effort to to address homeless. I think the work coming in for the few fellow that's actually going to be a core part of that work. So how do we look at the next steps? And we would be laying those out as part of a plan. So that's a one year process, and I'm not exactly sure what it's going to look like yet, but there will be much more engagement and opportunity to think through different possibilities.
Speaker 5: And when does this Fuze fellow join us?
Speaker 11: This fall, the next month or so, one week, October one.
Speaker 5: Would it be possible for us to have a little bit more engagement with this Fuze fellow as a council body? So maybe periodic updates because homelessness is something that's impacting all of our districts. And I know that sometimes we've you know, just in the short time I've been on council in two years, we've had programs that we've we've gotten grant funding for. But months have gone by. And by the time council gets an update in terms of what folks are working on, it's a little bit late for us to give input on what can you also work on this or can you also look at that? So is it possible for us to have like an early opportunity to maybe give input what we're seeing, what we'd like to see explored so that the Fuze fellow has a little bit of focus in terms of some of the issues that we might be dealing with that might be the same and some maybe not.
Speaker 11: Sure, we can do that.
Speaker 5: That would be great. Thank you. I'd appreciate that. Okay. For Parks, I echo everything my colleague said. Your team does a fantastic job, so they should be commended. Every single one of them, especially the ones that are out there every day, bringing a very positive spirit to people who may not get it elsewhere. So I thank them for that. I do have a question about the park safety issue that was raised, and I remember being very involved in the discussions regarding Bixby Park, but I'm not sure if we ever received and we could have and I missed it. But any sort of like a summary or overview of, you know, how effective was that program? Was it an effective program? Did we collect any data? And if it was an effective program and we wanted to continue it, what would that budget look like?
Speaker 4: I don't know that I have the budget numbers at my fingertips of what that would look like. As far as an effective program, I think it really is going to depend on what outcome you were looking to achieve. If you recall, they are mostly young, part time recreation staff that were in the park and I don't think they had the ability to enforce some of the issues and the concerns effectively that maybe the residents were looking for. So the program effective? I you know, I don't know that I heard it was with an overwhelming response that it was an effective program or that on either side from our team or from the residents, that it really did what they were looking for. But I think partially that was because some of the outcomes really weren't clearly defined going in as to what the program was to to achieve. I know recently we've worked with the Friends of the Bixby Park and we started to do some things in the park that I think have have created some change and and solve some of the issues. So, for example, the skate park, there was great concern that the skate park was attracting somewhat regulars and the regulars were older. So it made it very intimidating for the young kids and families who wanted to enjoy that activity or that space in the park. So we started this summer the funding from the Friends of Bixby Park with some free skate opportunities. So Tuesday nights and Saturdays we had one of our contractor instructors out there doing some free skate programing, which sort of broke up a little bit the what activities were taking place at the skate park. And it seemed to have a very positive effect. So we're looking at continuing that, moving forward, using that space a little differently, bringing in some of our other program opportunities and ideas for the park and just activating it in a different manner than it had been. And we're seeing some great success with that.
Speaker 0: Right. Okay.
Speaker 5: Thank you. I don't have anything further. I actually I do. But the mayor said don't ask all the questions, so I'm going to pass.
Speaker 3: Thank you. And just to something that Councilman Price said with which I want to just clear, because people are probably hearing views. Fellow what's what's his views fellow in and out in the in the world there. Just just to clarify. So what what what this fellowship program is, is these are it's a it's a fellowship where they they go out and seek and find kind of the best and the brightest that are experts and innovators in civic innovation. And then they get placed in cities and communities to innovate on a topic that the city needs, innovation and development. And so these are some of the some of the the brightest minds out doing this work. And then they're also a network. So that, for example, I think my call it we just mentioned that there's a few fellow in Los Angeles that works on homelessness and so that that those ideas and those projects and get network to this Fuze Fellowship network and so in Long Beach from from per staff's kind of recommendation and and hope is that our Fuze fellow that will be coming in I guess October 1st they're going to be focused on homelessness and we acknowledge that homelessness is an area that needs new ideas and innovation and commitment as well. And so, you know, want to comes from as prices continued commitment in this area. And we're really excited about having this fellow. And I think that that's a good idea to have them hopefully meet the council early. So we all can kind of get to know who this person is and we look forward to their work. Thank you.
Speaker 2: And Mayor, just just to add that we are actually going to be able to have two few fellows. So you mentioned the one on homelessness, and we're also going to have one that's be working on safe, safe Long Beach and violence prevention as well. So we can certainly do that.
Speaker 3: Great. It sounds good. Councilman Ringa.
Speaker 2: Glad to hear that. But I was one of the things that I wanted to add have that that, you know, along with a lot of the questions we might have today in terms of the budget that are being presented, we also have a lot of comments to make in regard to the services we are already currently receiving . And I think that that is a that is a commendable in the sense that we have great departments in the city and they're working the best they can with the budgets they have. And in regards to homelessness, it is my expectation, my hope actually, that eventually we're going to institutionalize our budgets for homelessness and for a lot of the things that we have here, because every year we're always looking at, you know, what grants are available up there or what innovation can we go for to continue the work and continue that battle that we're dealing with, with homelessness. And the only thing that we can do is not rely on outside sources, but rely on ourselves to get those budgets at a level that we need them to be to battle the homelessness issue. Throwing money at it is not enough. We need to have a commitment from our city staff, from our city farmers, from this from this council to to fund these types of programs, to keep them funded year in and year out, and not rely on budgets going up and down and relying on grants that are made available or grants that may be two, three, four years down the road. And then once they go away, the program goes away. And that's that's not the way to operate as far as I'm concerned. So much of what I have to say is I'd like to see some of the a lot of these these programs that we are talking about being more a permanent fixture in our budget so that we're not having these kinds of discussions about having the health department, which is the one, first of all, comes up, you know, where they you know, they function 99% outside the general fund, 99%. They're getting all their money from other sources. They have people who write grants. They have people who hire they hire part time. They have people they hire for maybe three or four or five years. And then they have to go away. What kind of commitment are we giving those people? And we're giving them great training. No question about that. They live us in Long Beach and they go somewhere else to do their job, to do their work because other jurisdictions or other agencies have the money to hire them on a permanent, full time basis. And we don't do that. I think we need to have a more much more of a city council commitment to our health department so that they're not functioning at 99% grants and having to rely on and on the federal agencies or the state agencies or even other local agencies to to fund their programs. So I want to challenge this, the city council, to find the money. To find the resources. To address the big issues that we have. And we and we have two fellows that are coming in with two of the biggest issues that we have going public safety with kids that the safety the be safe program and homelessness. I think it's a great start and we should start looking at that. Maybe these these fellows can find a way to convince this city council that, you know what, you need to devote more of a full time institutionalized commitment to those two areas, and you will make a difference. I didn't see it for that reason, but I think I'll get off my pedestal at this point in terms of public health. They're the first ones up. I want to go in that order. I notice in your budget that you have three vacancies, three bureau manager vacancies. One is going to repeal very shortly with the excuse me, with the city health officer. Once that city health spots are going to start again.
Speaker 11: Health officials on September 19th, September 19th.
Speaker 2: And it was vacant for a number of years, if I'm not mistaken.
Speaker 11: We've had it filled for the last three years. Yeah. Yeah.
Speaker 2: Well, I hope you get a great one and one who will stay with us longer than a few years. Thank you. You also have a vacancy in the current structure that you have here. So that's what I'm going by, is a vacancy in community health and a vacancy in policy planning and prevention. I'm guessing the policy prevention I'm playing with. You'll be a. Prevention Bureau, correct?
Speaker 11: It is. Things are a number of years ago, things were realigned based on what was available in terms of funding during the recession. As we are looking now, we are realigning our programs once again. So we'll no longer have a policy policy prevention bureau. Instead, what we'll have is a Human Services Bureau that will align the homeless services, the Center for Families and Youth. And if the violence prevention work moves over, it will align there as well. The the Community Health Bureau will now take on public health nursing risk, and then all the other health promotions work. So the Hills, unhealthy, active, Long Beach, all of that work. So those are the those three will align in the Community Health Bureau. We are excited we start interviews this week for both well one on Friday and then starting next week. So we're hoping to have those filled within the next within the next month.
Speaker 2: Very good. Because that is going to be my next question to turn to. If you had current recruitment going for these two other positions, and when do you expect it to have a feel to it? That's great that you're you're on your own. You're on your toes on that one. You have to have it yet. You want to you want to help your department? Of course. The other question that I had regarding to do your funding was that you mentioned during the course of your of your presentation, you mentioned VLF is that the vehicle license fees? It is, yes. I thought those went away. We are still made available now.
Speaker 11: We received we received about $8 million this year from the from the state from the from the vehicle licensing fees. And we used those resources. Those are the only they have to be used for health purposes. But they, in addition to the general fund, are only more flexible source of funding, which we use to cover some administrative costs and to support grants where grants cannot be fully supported by the funds that are provided by the grants.
Speaker 2: What would be an estimate of what you get from vehicle license fees and how much do you use or how much of that money goes towards administrative?
Speaker 11: So we get so this year is about $8 Million. It decreased to about $7 million a number of years ago. And it's you know, it's basically about how the economy is doing is how those rates go. So we are at about $8 million this past year. And those resources support. They pay for my salary. They pay for the health officer salary. They pay for our administrative salaries. You know, so they cover a lot of administration, but they also because our grants generally administrative costs up to 10% and our overhead is closer to 16%. They help to cover those costs as well.
Speaker 2: So if I hadn't been in the health department before, so basically you can't cover a lot of your administrative fees. So a lot of these grants that you get because they have to be basically used for services for the services that they are funded for. Correct? That's correct. Yes. Homeless and whatever else.
Speaker 11: Right. That's correct. So many of the grants we get some some include no administrative opportunities. I include up to about 10%, if you will, take us up to our to our actual cost. In addition, if there are increases in employee costs or anything like that, they can't be built in. And so we have been using the realignment resource to be able to cover and support what is left of the grants that can't be covered by the grants.
Speaker 2: Okay. And I notice in your budget that you're budgeted for or where is that page again? Well, just go ahead and tell me the your your funding for how many fees.
Speaker 11: Refunded for 374. I believe we have.
Speaker 2: I found the page. And you're hoping to go up to 381. Correct?
Speaker 11: Yes.
Speaker 2: Okay. Now, those those additional positions you're looking at. General, generally, what are they going to be supporting?
Speaker 11: What programs we'll be bringing in? We'll bring in bringing in resources to support the clinic. So a medical assistant in the clinic will also be looking at support for the for homeless services, as well as the positions that that could be involved here through the violence prevention equity work.
Speaker 2: Okay. Well well, thank you. And again, I want to commend you for all that you do, all the health department staff who are here. All the great work you do. Keeping our city safe from bioterrorism for. Are you still having immunizations, by the way?
Speaker 11: We do. We do immunizations. We'll be having we'll be having a free immunization clinic again this year where we practice our response. So we set up as if there is an emergency and we do somewhere between 809 hundred flu vaccines in a couple of hours at the health department.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I was going to say, I think to be laying up for flu this year in terms of parks and recreation, a lot of a lot of the questions and comments that I have, you know, we've dealt with personally. I want to thank Marie and your staff for always meeting with me and being open and addressing the issues that I might have in my district regarding the parks, especially with all the work that you're helping us do with the Will Springs area, that is that is very helpful. And I also want to commend you for meeting with my two big constituency groups in in the Wrigley area, Wrigley Neighborhood Alliance and the Wrigley Association. And dealing with your questions regarding our Daisy Lane, which is a big area that we have every year. We have our Daisy Parade and and dealing with the trees. And I know it's going it's somewhat sad that what's taking place because all trees get old. And when trees get old, they have to they have to be replaced. And you dealt with it with the with the community very sensitively and are working with them to deal with how we can replace them or and or do something different on that on their Christmas tree. So I want to commend you and and the work you're doing there. One question that I had, I was a back back in the day like. Two years ago. I was a what you call a rec spec recreation specialist, but I was I was a recreation specialist with the Department of Parks and Recreation in L.A. County, and I worked in it in a program called Get High on Life. Many moons later I come to Long Beach and I'm driving down Pacific Coast Highway and I see some kids with old T-shirts that say, Well, there's a kid high on that program here in Long Beach. Wow. Amazing. I wonder how long it's been here. So that that brings up the issue now in terms of do we have programs in our parks that are funded by the county or any other entities for youth diversion programs? This was a they they can't program that it worked for a long time ago. Do we have those types of programs in our parks, recreation programs that they're supported by other other funds?
Speaker 4: We do we have grant funding that comes from different sources, for example, for our rap program and our afterschool programs. We don't have a Get High on life program.
Speaker 2: I'm not sure that's at all true.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I'm not so sure that that moniker would go over very well today. But we do have a lot of you.
Speaker 2: Should have heard the original, you know what it was originally sports addicts.
Speaker 4: That sport. That would be good. That'd be good.
Speaker 0: Okay. Right.
Speaker 4: So we do we do get funding from multiple sources. And of course, you know, that's part of what our B Safe program is about as well is, you know, positive engagement with our youth. So we do have state funding. We have our ACES grants that help us with our afterschool funding programs. So we have a few other sources. Yes.
Speaker 2: Okay. Well, great. Well, I want to thank you for all the work you do in public works. You know, you're doing a great job. I'm glad that you added a clean team, an additional clean team. We're looking forward to seeing that around town and keeping our streets free of debris and also to the implementation of our Missouri fund. So I want to thank all three of you for being here today.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Councilmember. Super now.
Speaker 7: Thank you. I'll be very brief. I just have a question for health and and the homeless issue. I know you're in the midst of the grant application process and I see Theresa Chandler in the audience. So thank you for being here, but we won't keep you long. Get back to that grant writing we talked about the 7.2 million versus the 6.0 million. If you got more money, where would you want it to go? Or would it be equally divided? Oh, I'm sorry. For what? For goes to outside sources versus what you use internally within the race.
Speaker 11: So right now, the funding that comes in from the continuum of care funds, one outreach worker and five, five case managers, intake worker. So when everybody say we need more, we need more outreach and we're seeing a lot more on the street than we would want to support additional outreach workers within it, within the community. The other key pieces for us is to really start to look at additional service for those with mental illness. So mental health practitioners and the ability to link people to care as well as for substance abuse practitioners and to be able to link people to care. And supportive housing is also a key piece and there are a lot of different models that one can work on in terms of supportive housing, which means that you are providing, you know, treatment and case management and those sorts of things where people are permanently housed so that they can remain housed. And so that would be another area where we would look to build additional capacity in permanent supportive housing beds and transitional housing moving in that direction.
Speaker 7: Okay. Thank you. And Councilwoman Pryce referenced a plan, and it strikes me with with limited staffing now that a lot of your duties are day to day putting out fires, and it's so tough to to function in that mode and work a plan at the same time. So if you have additional resources coming in. Well, will most of that go to planning or just your day to day, or have you determined that yet?
Speaker 11: I think we do receive we did receive some additional resources to to do planning and also for the unified funding agency, which allows us to shift resource where it is most needed across the different contracts, which we did not have that capability as of two years ago. So we are receiving some planning dollars and when we're able to do that. I think this the the Fuze fellow will be joining, you know, so that is a it's a funded it's a funded support person. I wouldn't say support person, but who can really lead and participate in these efforts. So that is a fund that's funded as well. But you're right, most of what most of what happened is we are we are on the you know, we are boots on the ground making things work for people and and doing outreach, connecting people to services on a regular basis.
Speaker 7: Okay. Thank you. And my council office is very close to this problem and we put a lot of time and energy into it. So we certainly want to help you and what you do. Just moving to a move to public works first and again reference. Councilman Price was talking about any any extra dollars that you have will will throw a different direction. Let's get a a stump removal program in place first. So that's that's just a real issue. We want to go back and and and eliminate this backlog. And to my way of thinking, it makes no sense to cut down a tree without removing the stump. Two things. You can't plant a new tree if the stump is to it's still there. And on residential streets, it's just you don't want the neighborhood to get used to a tree not being there. You want them to miss that tree and want it back very quickly. And to Parks and Rec. I just want to compliment compliment Marie actually to Craig, too, because you both have been in the job a short time, but you really hit the ground running. And to someone who took office eight days after he was elected, elected, I can relate to that. Hitting the ground running. Can we get a shot of Maureen while we're talking about her here? I go ahead. Okay. Also, let me compliment I want to compliment Murray on that necklace that looks great on camera. Thank you. All right.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Councilmember. Councilwoman Mongo.
Speaker 0: Our colleagues were so loquacious that Councilmember Supernanny. I had time to comment on how fabulous you look tonight, Murray. I'll start with health. I think you guys are doing an excellent job. I look forward to long term funding streams that have the ability to ensure that our community is healthy. Safety and health really do go hand in hand. So please tune in next week to the Budget Oversight Committee, where the I-Team will be making some presentations that I hope the community will really embrace and we can move forward with related to public works. Craig, you're doing a great job. Street streets. Streets and more streets. I think that we'll hear from you later tonight on other council items that are in the district but related to streets and traffic. I think you're doing a fantastic job. I'd also like to say that with regard to trees, you've really stepped up and we had a tragedy in the community where a tree fell on a home. No one was injured. But we need to be aware that not only are a third of the trees that are in our parks dead, many of the trees in our parkways are dead. And so the arborist is having to change because the drought situation has changed the make up of trees. And so the community of arborist. Is happening to change. And I really appreciate the great work that your office has been doing. Mr.. BECK And I also support and have been discussing this for weeks. We've used a lot of our council district funds to remove the tree and the stump, and then the replacement program. The Volunteer Day Long Beach last year that was hosted in the fifth District, resulted in many new tree replacements and tree placements, specifically in areas that really needed the canopy coverage that make the community cooler and safer. In the end, it really creates a healthier community time in our health department when we have that canopy coverage, especially during these really warm times like we're having now. So I'm excited to hope that that tree study from Lemieux will be worked in. And then I'm looking forward to finding a way to fund tree and stump removal with a record breaking tree removal a few weeks ago of 26 tons. Yes, one tree. 26 tons. And then finally, I'd like to concentrate on Parks and Rec. I know Marie got a letter from me, an email last night or Sunday, stating about how fantastic the staff were on Sunday at Eldorado Park. I think that the added gate staff is definitely being used properly. I think it's fantastic. I'm very supportive of the $370,000 one time funds to properly water our parks and maintain our drought tolerant plants. I think that if we're going to put in all this drought tolerant plants, we need to maintain it. The community needs this is a quality of life issue. We need to have it maintained and we do need to water. So no more trees don't die. Very supportive of $150,000 for tree trimming in our parks and removal of some of the dead trees because they are dangerous. I'm really excited about the Be Safe program, hoping to add a few more parks to that. And then I think that your staff are doing a fantastic job on the turf management plan. So I think that those modifications under your leadership have been phenomenal and I look forward to the study this fall, and I don't remember if we asked for it formally at council or if you and I've just discussed it so many times that I feel like it's coming in restructuring the allocation and fees associated with leasing our parks. Our parks are an amazing asset and we're very lucky to have them and we need to properly fund the utilization of those parks and look properly at programs that have been grandfathered in and what it means to add them and bring them up to compliance. And I know it's a tough discussion to have, but to have the assets we have without maintaining them would not be appropriate. So I appreciate your leadership on this. Thank you. That is all.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 8: Thank you. And I want to say thank my colleagues for answering or asking most of the questions that actually that I have. And I want to, first of all, start out by thanking the directors of the Health Department, Public Works and Parks, Recreation, Marine. All three of them are exemplary in doing a great job for for our city. All three are relatively new in their roles, but are certainly hitting the ground running as a Councilmember Suber nomination. I want to start with the Health Department and I want to go back to this issue of homelessness. It's something it's a recurring theme among my council colleagues, but it's something that we hear from quite frequently from our constituents in the community knocking on doors. People are really concerned about what they perceive as a increase in homelessness, and they would like to see the city do more to address that. And so to Councilmember your point earlier, I wholeheartedly agree. We need to look at ways to sustain our efforts in this this budget proposed budget. There is there's a line item for $100,000 and one time funds for proactive homeless initiative. Can you. Ms.. Collopy, tell us exactly what that will be utilized for and how that how you expect to utilize $100,000.
Speaker 11: So we received $200,000 last year as well in the way that we have used that is is as needed. So it's really been more of a hotspot approach. So last year, the $100,000 was spent as part of our team. So it was part of it was overtime for the police department to do quality of life work with us so that they're going out with our homeless outreach folks to meet with homeless individuals. We had sort of infrastructure maintenance. So, you know, Lincoln Park in areas, making sure that that things were being cleaned up, power washing those sorts of things and cleanups from individuals who were sleeping during the day. We've also did some of the river use some of those resources for L.A. River cleanup and then for motel vouchers. So we were we used some of those resources from motel vouchers for people who are homeless and who needed housing immediately. We did not have any other options we would foresee using that hundred thousand dollars similarly this year. So as things pop up and are needed and they don't fit, they don't fit a certain budget category, we would use those resources to help support that.
Speaker 8: So I guess I have to ask is is that enough?
Speaker 11: Let's see. I mean, there there are there are a lot of different resources that that are needed in our community to help support homeless as they are, you know, throughout the region. So, you know, I'm not sure what enough would ever be in terms of the resources that we need, in terms of mental health service and substance use and those kinds of things. We are looking and we are receiving another outreach worker through our emergency services grant and through and through. We are starting to build some capacity. And we are we had a veteran outreach person who retired. So we are feeling that and we have funding for an additional in there. So there are a lot of other other moving parts where we are building some of our capacity.
Speaker 8: So I'm here now. We have we will have two outreach workers, correct? Okay. And that seems like an area of need.
Speaker 11: It is an area of need, definitely.
Speaker 8: And I guess the other question I have in terms of your budget is you mentioned the health department seniors, our senior outreach and services. And I would go back to Parks and Rec a little later. But what services does does that supply provide and how many people are we actually reaching annually?
Speaker 11: You know, we have a we have a public health nurse that is co-located at the senior center on Fourth Street. And so she she receives a number of referrals to help, you know, and works to connect people to service. We also have a social worker on staff who helps with senior outreach as well. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but I can find that up for you.
Speaker 8: So that's just at the fourth, the Street Senior Center.
Speaker 11: The public health nurse is she is located at the Fourth Street Senior Center. The other is located at the Health Department and receives her first. And then we, our public health nurses, will go out and do home visits. They do that for, you know, for for families and seniors and others, but one specifically for seniors services.
Speaker 8: And I know Ms.. Night Marie mentioned that, you know, there is a growing need for for seniors services. Just curious to know what type of coordination and collaboration you have between the departments on that particular issue.
Speaker 11: We worked together very closely on the Seniors Strategic Plan that was presented here earlier this year as part of that effort. We'll be moving forward. We have a management assistant who is agreed to work between the two of us over the next six months to help drive and coordinate through the senior senior planning groups who will be pulling people, people together from all different all different parts of the of the older adult service community, as well as older adults to start to identify and plan out more specifically, the resources that are needed. In addition, are our real goal for this, you know, moving forward is that we better coordinate and inform people about what's actually available. There are a number of services available. People don't know about them. The lists are incomplete. So there are a lot of people with different lists. Those lists aren't yet all in one place. And then our referral systems are not as effective as they could be. And so we'll be working at we are looking at some technology solutions, not just for older adult services, but also for a number of social services about how is it when someone comes in and you refer someone that we know what the capacity of that referral spaces and that they actually have a place. And so we are looking at some different technology opportunities so that we can start to improve the coordination and service for folks in the referral system.
Speaker 8: So with one outreach worker for senior services, it sounds like there's some serious need. Is there there as well?
Speaker 11: Yes. Yeah. I believe the senior strategic plan had well, we have five staff members which include any additional public health nurse technology focus, as well as a lot of coordination and staffing.
Speaker 8: Okay. And I guess the next question on the same area, in the same line of questions would be for the Parks Recreation and Marine director. What does it cost to to run a senior center? I think we have three in the city right now.
Speaker 4: We do. And I have some information on our costs. You just bear with me for a moment. So right now we have five park locations for senior programing and that's at Houten Silverado, McBride. And then we have the Four Street Senior Center. We also have senior programs at Chavez and El Dorado West. So combine the fourth Street Senior Center, costs 620,000, a little over $620,000 a year to operate. And then the ancillary sites costs 265,000 to operate.
Speaker 8: Okay. Is there a do we do we do a census count for each of those locations? And do we know how many seniors are actually utilizing the services?
Speaker 4: We do have program numbers. I don't happen to have them with me tonight for our overall per site, but I can get those to you.
Speaker 8: That would be greatly appreciated. I'm just trying to understand how we're spending our resources and making sure we're getting. Optimal coverage throughout the city and reaching as many seniors as we possibly can. I know there's a lot of good information that we provide to that population. I'd like to move on and ask about our Be Safe program this summer. Do you have any figures on how many kids and families are participating in the program and how that compares to previous years?
Speaker 4: So the Be Safe program has been, again, a very successful program this summer. And as with all of our programs, we have seen an uptick in participation. Interestingly enough, for the B site safes this summer or B safe sites this summer, we're also seeing families participate. So in past years, they've been having, you know, their kids come and kids stay on the site. So they stay maybe for the day camp program and then they continue to stay at the site for the Be Safe program. But families are coming as well and participating, which is really nice to see that we're also providing that safe space and that safe place for family recreation in the evening hours. For some numbers, I don't have exact numbers per site or participation numbers this summer as we're still in the summer, but I can get those for you . But definitely we are increased over last year.
Speaker 8: Thank you very much for for that. And I'm encouraged that that the program is actually working so successfully. One thing that I would just request in, and I think we talked about this in our briefings, is that after the summer months, particularly at these parks that are very highly utilized, we look at the maintenance in terms of reseeding and, you know, making sure that our parks are still beautiful and appealing for fetal position to families. Thank you. And Mr. Beck, I think. I'm curious about that. You mentioned the payment management plan update occurring biannually to every two years.
Speaker 12: Yeah. Our goal would be to update the street index every two years. So in 2017, when the first plan was presented to council in 2015, so an update in 2017 would stay on that schedule.
Speaker 8: All right. Thank you. And I know when we we initiated the very first payment management plan, it was. Do you have any do you recall how much there was was about $1,000,000.
Speaker 12: I'm told that it was roughly that that dollar amount. The update will be nowhere near that amount.
Speaker 8: Okay. That's mainly.
Speaker 12: Just.
Speaker 8: Next question. It's going to be $1,000,000 every time.
Speaker 12: No, no, not at all.
Speaker 8: Okay, great. And I wanted to get that clarified. And then the the the clean team. This year we're proposing a second clean team, which I think is great. Can you share what the team clean team has been able to accomplish in this initial year?
Speaker 12: Yeah. So some of the numbers that I that I quoted are really the results of our clean team. The clean team gets involved in not only addressing illegally dumped items, but helping coordinate with both the police department and health department on homeless cleanups. When there's encampments, when in homeless leave materials behind. The clean team will get involved in cleaning that. I think the real difference in the Clean Team versus a normal refuge collection is that it's proactive. So, for example, we may service your your trash at your residence every Monday, but the clean team's out every day and they're actually driving corridors and they're looking for items that have been dumped. Many of those are reported through the Golden Beach app or through our telephone centers. But just additionally, we're out there looking for items that may have been illegally dumped and picking them up right away. So the ability to add another team again will be funded out of refuge dollars. Not an impact to the general fund will allow us to expand the number of quarters that we're doing and the number more quickly address those illegally dumped items.
Speaker 8: So if I'm not mistaken, last year we used the clean team was required for us to to buy more equipment. We're going to take a pay by or purchasing more equipment.
Speaker 12: Yeah. So so part of the budget increase would include not only the staff, but a vehicle necessary to do the driving around with the team.
Speaker 8: Okay. And is there a specific area or route that they focus on?
Speaker 12: Again, we're primarily looking at are our main thoroughfares. So examples would be Long Beach Boulevard, Anaheim, PCH, Atlantic, both in throughout the areas of our of our city. So we believe that important corridors to add that we're not currently able to get to as frequently would be Santa Fe some of the areas on our west side up in north Long Beach Market, South Street. So there's a number of areas that we believe are a mix between residential and commercial corridors that that should be addressed with our clean teams.
Speaker 8: All right. Well, I look forward to a fiscal year of success. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Council member Pearce.
Speaker 4: All right, there's been a challenge.
Speaker 0: I'm going to talk.
Speaker 4: For at least 15 minutes. Okay. Stacey, you ready? I want to just say that everybody that's the comments that have been said. I couldn't agree with more. And it's really. It's really great to come on to a council. Be here for a month and know that you guys have been doing so much work for the last several years. On trying to push the conversation around equity. Because what I've heard today is that people on this council want to prioritize equity over a lot of things. And so taking that frame, I'm not going to echo all the questions that have already been raised because I think they're really great questions, particularly the ones for our health department. I did want to ask, you know, knowing that that funding and when we all saw the $100,000, I think when we think about that being a priority number seems.
Speaker 5: Really small in comparison.
Speaker 4: To things that we're investing in, whether it's capital improvement projects that are, you know, obviously things that we need to invest in. But in my district, we have here City Hall where we've got Lincoln Park, we've got the convention center where we have tourists coming in. It is an issue that it's homelessness is an issue for the entire district, for the entire city. But thinking about the impacts here in downtown, thinking about our capital improvement budget, I wanted to just float out there that through future conversations as we can try to prioritize what we're investing in, I definitely want to say that I want to push the council and the staff to continue to prioritize the health department. If that means looking at our entire budget and looking at a project that could wait a while or could possibly, you know, isn't as urgent as we work with this fellow, trying to identify opportunities and funding sources to go big is something that that I want us to be able to do. And just from hearing the conversations that we've heard today, I wanted to ask, is there are there any grants out there that require matching dollars that we're missing out on?
Speaker 11: There were missing out on there are we actually for the tenure move care requires a 25% match, which we do match. There are some that there are others that are one for one match, like the emergency services grant. Emergency Solutions grant is a one for one match. So we we are we work very, very hard to make sure that we can meet those matches and to align the different resources to make that work. There are grants that around the more around the judicial system and things around substance abuse and those that are have a match that have very high match rates. And so we have chosen not we have chosen not to apply for them in the past because there are sort of a 50% to 100% match, and that's just not feasible.
Speaker 4: Okay.
Speaker 0: GAO would.
Speaker 4: Be interested if there are some on the 50%.
Speaker 0: Match just to.
Speaker 4: See those so we can start. You know, now that the counsel and folks seem to be prioritizing equity on these issues and if there are things that are there that we can make a decision to say, hey, if we all pull together a little bit and cut a little here, that we could get those grants.
Speaker 11: Because they come forward.
Speaker 4: That would be very helpful. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah, everybody.
Speaker 0: On my.
Speaker 4: My health department stuff. So I'll keep it short on that. I did want to just ask one last question is, is the city doing any work with bridge housing? To try to identify new opportunities for bridge housing that aren't necessarily around.
Speaker 0: Drug rehab.
Speaker 11: That's what I mean. We do rapid rehousing and prevention programs, so we're connecting people through that. And we do have transitional housing. We have we're participating in housing across the spectrum.
Speaker 4: And is would you say that the biggest challenge is staffing? Like, instead of having five days a week, we have seven days a week of people going out and doing outreach. Or is the bigger challenge identifying housing that people can be in long term?
Speaker 11: That's a that's a good question. We have a we have a 24 hour hotline for folks who, you know, who can call in if they see somebody that they would like to have some support and outreach to. And we do do that outreach to our partners specific to, you know, if they're partners that are like the mental health America or the veterans U.S. vets, they have outreach workers specific to their population. And so if they're being served by them or if they will fit within their services, then they will help support us. But they won't do just on call outreach. So we do have some support around those efforts. Really, what it is, is, you know, many homeless. It takes a lot of time to go out and keep re approaching and keep re approaching. We can approach 15 times or it might be ten years before they decide to come in. And so we want to make sure that we have those resources available for them when that occurs. And so providing the the supportive housing, you know, the transition to permanent supportive housing is absolutely essential.
Speaker 4: All right. Thank you so much. I know you've been on the spot tonight for Shade It for our Parks and Rec. Thank you so much for all the work that you've done. Thanks for helping us out with our upcoming budget meeting. I really appreciate it. Just I guess my only comment here is a great job. I wanted to say that it seems like with our youth programing, it's something that both connects with violence prevention and crime reduction and making sure that there's any way that we're collaborating with our health department and with the council offices to try to get more sustained programing in our parks. And if that means for my office, identifying organizations that can come in and also fill that void that we definitely want to try to activate those parks as much as possible.
Speaker 0: Yeah, I'll leave that.
Speaker 4: At that one. Thank you so much. And then for Public Works, also, thank you so much for handholding with us the last month as we get up to speed on all the great work that you guys are doing for Measure $8, we've talked about slurring in the first year. We've had a lot a lot of residents asking about their their maps and and what streets are getting done from the get go. How can our residents identify which streets are going to be slurred in this first year?
Speaker 12: So I believe the maps are already up on our public works website and if they're not, we'll make sure that they're up next week. But we do have a map per year, one which is identified the street segments that we are planning to do from a slurry seal perspective. And we will be resurfacing one major corridor in year one. And that is Broadway.
Speaker 4: Thank you. We're excited about that. The one other question I have for you, Mr. Beck, is, you know, we talking a lot about trees lately, and we have a number of parkway trees, you know, the Lovett Focus Tree, which has been damaging some sidewalks. And we've done a removal of those trees. I wanted to find out what the cost are to remove bad trees before they they damage sidewalks. That that might be a broad question.
Speaker 0: But.
Speaker 12: I don't we don't normally take out a tree that isn't sick or causing some kind of either damage to the infrastructure or creating some other public safety hazard in as far as removal cost. It completely varies and it depends on the size of the tree. We did bring forward a council, a new tree trimming contract recently. And for those councilmembers, you may remember that all of the trimming costs depend on the trunk size of the tree. So, for example, Councilmember Mungo talked about some of the trees. They were Italian stone pines in the fifth District. They were very, very large trees. And those cost were much greater than maybe many of the trees we would normally address.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 4: It's all my questions, everybody. Fantastic job. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Councilman Andrews.
Speaker 9: Fine, thank you. May I thought I waited for this time because I wanted to be less because of the fact I want to group everyone together. I just want to thank each and every one of you for doing such a fine job. And with that, I'll have my budget on the 30th, and you can come and ask any questions you like. Thank you very much.
Speaker 3: Thank you. And thank you all again for the presentations. It's budget season. So, you know, obviously meetings start a little bit later and fortunately during these these sessions for the budget. So with that, we're going to go right into the council meeting and public comment. But is there any public comment on the budget department that you just heard? Not general public comment. Please come forward and just go ahead. If you have a comment on the budget here, please come to the podium right now so we can do this expeditiously. Go ahead.
Speaker 5: Hi. I've never spoken to the city council before I came last year to speak, and there were 40 people talking about coyotes, and I had to go home to bed. I've been ill, but I was trying to do a lot of research last year. Okay. My name is Catherine Jeté. Four 4102 Cranston Court, Bixby Village, Susie Price's District. I'm speaking tonight about the budget for Parks and Recreation, Long Beach Animal Shelter. We bring animals in from Cerritos, Los Alamitos, SEAL Beach and Signal Hill. At the present time, this shelter has two part time vets half time, two full time registered vets for several hundred animals. The staff works tirelessly under the direction of Ted Stevens, who have made who has made such a huge difference toward the goal of having a no kill shelter. It is unconscionable that this many animals have actually one vet for all the sick and injured animals. The majority of residents in Long Beach, if you talk to them, have no idea that animals are being killed at the shelter. The SPCA is next door. They get very confused. They're actually horrified when I tell them. Last year I did my homework. The shelter received $56,000 more for the year 2016 of a $2.7 billion budget. I asked Ted Stevens for the facts from this year, January 1st to August 31st, how many animals were euthanized? 212 cats, 217 dogs, 469 kittens, and 495 other animals. Total animals killed in six months. 1393. For the budget every year, millions of dollars are given to various organization activities, studies, museums, one time trainings, etc.. I'm a former teacher of 39 years and kids are my first priority. These are all needed and important. But as a member from the shelter recently pointed out, these animals are alive and healthy. I doubt seriously if any of the city council members are regularly visiting the Long Beach shelter. Every time I go, I cry all the way home and go, What can I do? I'm not with an organization. I'm not with a rescue group. I'm just.
Speaker 10: One person.
Speaker 5: These animals are lost, afraid, and sometimes sick, just like the ads on TV that make us cry. The SPCA, L.A. gets lots of donations. They choose animal from the shelter. And in six months, they took 1099 animals. The problem is, is in the month of July, there was 700 animals, cats and dogs turned in 700. Mayor Garcia took office and had a meeting at the El Dorado Park last year, and many of the city's rescue groups were there.
Speaker 0: They were actually begging for help for the shelter.
Speaker 5: The mayor promised to help. I really think the many rescue.
Speaker 0: Groups are doing the.
Speaker 5: Majority of saving animals lives in our city every day. Mr. Ted Stevens.
Speaker 10: Told me one person can make a difference.
Speaker 5: That's why I'm here. I went to Ms.. Price's meeting last Saturday in my neighborhood. I'm very hopeful that those that were there and.
Speaker 10: Those tonight really help this.
Speaker 3: Problem. Thank you, ma'am. Tony Zoller, sorry about that. Okay. Thank you very much. And thank you for caring about our shelter animals as well. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Hi.
Speaker 6: My name is Ramon. I'm in the, uh.
Speaker 9: The fifth district. In the past, I've.
Speaker 6: Been a little bit critical.
Speaker 2: Of some of the the way that the parks has Parks and Recreation has has been going. But now that I'm in, I'm standing here.
Speaker 6: Listening to all this stuff and seeing Marie, I am now very happy with all the way things go. I can't say enough.
Speaker 2: Praise for for Marie in.
Speaker 6: The way that she's handling.
Speaker 2: A lot of the the way the parks are going under the conditions that she's been under. She's been just doing a great job. I think she said she goes something like 160 emails a day.
Speaker 6: And I've been lucky that I got a couple of couple of ones that I sent. The only ones returned with actually correcting some of the assumptions that I had, which was great. And I'm giving a lot of the information that she's given me to the residential groups, and I'm really happy that the trees and the are getting trimmed. You know, we can see all that stuff. I have nothing but praise. That's just what I've seen in the last couple of months. It's just been great.
Speaker 2: We had a problem with with a branch falling from it were no park.
Speaker 6: It hurting somebody and it was a safety issue and everything started it looks like the tree trimming started taking place. So I'm sorry it had to take that long, but it's great. And I call today I spoke to someone in the mayor's office about the budget. Everybody's like totally on board with what's whatever's taking place, you know, a guy named Daniel, great guy and Stacy Mango. I mean, I know maybe this is kind of confusing to people, but Stacy Mango saying all this stuff about the the the.
Speaker 2: What more stuff got more.
Speaker 6: Money coming in for the water is great. And the only thing really that I would like to see is, is I'm trying to get residential support to try to get more water for our parks. I mean, a lot of people don't realize that we haven't even budgeted enough money to water our parks. I mean, this is what she's faced with, that 80%, she could only water 80% of the parks. I mean, this is ridiculous, you know, so and I'm not saying that to be critical of her, but I mean, is elected officials, I think you guys really got to help her get her funds that she needs. At least a lot of the park finished the tree trimming 1.1 million. 18,000 or something like that. Let's get it all done and and handle that. Those are the main, main issues. Re planting trees. I got some time left. I don't need it. But I mean, Stacy, I know you got to be surprised, but thank you for for for finally, you know. Getting this stuff organized and done. I appreciate it. And please try to help get some more water.
Speaker 2: All right.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 9: Good. You clearly as the address. I echo the gentleman's sentiments relative to our parks director doing a great job. Also, I'd like to echo the support of the lady that spoke before relative to our animal shelters, and I would offer the suggestion that I did last week when she made that presentation at the meeting. I would seriously. Request the City Council to consider a tax. On a minimal tax on pet food, I would think with the dollars going toward the projects you was talking about. My sense is any pet owner wouldn't mind paying a half cent or a cent or percent. When they go to buy their pet food. And I think that's those people that don't have pets may not do it, but I think enough pet owners in this city to or those that support it wouldn't mind paying a minimum tax on that. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Any other budget from other departments that we spoke of today? Please come forward. Is there anyone else besides Mr. Boland who's going to speak? Okay. See, now, Mr. Boling would be the last speaker when closing this and then moving on to the council meeting.
Speaker 13: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And council learnable. And I want to address the issue of the homeless and the fire department's response to these homeless non-emergency calls. Other jurisdictions throughout the country have identified clusters of where non-emergency homeless calls were made. These clusters, then they put into that cluster of calls, an SUV with a nurse practitioner and an EMT. Right now, what we do is we send a $500,000 fire engine with four firefighters making from 175 to $200000 cost, plus two paramedics. We send six people to sometimes deliver a bandage to a homeless person. It seems fiscal insanity. So here's my thought. The fire department is at five years to do this to cost effectively help the homeless. Why don't we just have the money sent over to the Health Department? Let the Health Department put together the SUV with the nurse practitioner in the empty place. That vehicle or those vehicles were the clusters of the homeless are and deliver them the services they need to get at some reasonable price. Thank you very much.
Speaker 3: Okay. Thank you. And with that, we're going to go ahead and continue the budget hearing to the next budget hearing, which, again, will be at the start of the next meeting. And we're going to just take a minute to just a quick 30 minute, 30 minute, a quick minute recess to get the council agenda started here. Okay. And we'll start here in just a minute. Yeah.
Speaker 7: Okay. We are ready to recommence the city council meeting. Clerk Can you recall the roll call?
Speaker 10: Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 0: Councilmember Pearce. Councilwoman Price. Councilmember Superman. Councilwoman Mongo. Councilman Andrews. Councilmember Odinga. Councilman Austin. Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 7: And I'm here. So now we're at the consent calendar. So let's go ahead and take up Ms.. Clarke, the consent calendar. Okay. So we have a motion by council member Urunga. Is there a second by Mungo? Let's go ahead and take public comment on the consent calendar items number two through 14. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to conduct a Budget Hearing to receive and discuss an Overview of the Proposed Fiscal Year 2017 Budget for the following: Department of Health and Human Services; Parks, Recreation and Marine Department; and Public Works Department. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_08162016_16-0754 | Speaker 0: Report from City Manager A recommendation to award a contract to Anchor QCA for Professional Engineering Design Services for the Colorado Lagoon Open Channel Restoration Phase two A project in the amount of $300,000 execute in MSU with the Harbor Department and grant first rights of refusal to come compensatory mitigation credits generated by the project to the Harbor Department and accept a Harbor Department contribution of $350,000 for preliminary engineering design services for the project district three.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Their staff report?
Speaker 6: Yes. Vice Mayor Councilmembers with a brief staff report from Eric Lopez, our Tidelands bureau manager. Thank you, honorable mayor and members of the city.
Speaker 7: Keep me just for a moment, folks. If you could just quiet down on the way out so we can conduct our our meeting, the business of our meeting. Thank you. Continue.
Speaker 6: Vice Mayor, Members of the City Council.
Speaker 2: On June 30th, 2016, the Board of Harbor Commissioners approved.
Speaker 6: A memorandum of understanding.
Speaker 2: With the City for their continued participation in the Colorado Lagoon.
Speaker 6: Phase two A Open Channel Project. The Division of the Open Channel Restoration Project is to improve tidal, flat, flushing and natural habitat and to create new habitat in the open channel footprint. Approval of the MCU would result in an additional 350,000 financial contribution. That is, in addition to an existing $250,000 that is currently budgeted and would allow staff to move.
Speaker 2: Forward with the project. That includes house staff.
Speaker 7: Thank you, sir. Councilmember Price.
Speaker 5: Thank you. Well, I want to thank Eric Lopez and the folks on his team and the city managers team who have been working on this project. This is a priority project for the city, I believe, and especially for the third district. It's a fantastic project and we're very excited about getting this underway. The Colorado Lagoon, it's an incredible asset for the third district and the city as a whole. So including this investment in a beautiful and unique location that is a valuable ecologically as well as for families to enjoy recreationally. The Open Channel project will help improve the environment for marine life, making it a more impressive habitat and creating a more natural vegetated channel further improving title exchange in that body of water. The Port of Long Beach has been a great partner in helping fund this project, and I'm grateful for their role in making this possible. The Colorado Lagoon is regularly rated as at an A by Heal the Bay, which is a huge improvement from years past, and the water quality continues to get better. I encourage everyone to come out and enjoy this great lagoon and I look forward to future improvements as we move forward with this phase of the project. And again, I can't thank staff enough for not only becoming subject matter experts and working on this project, but also for working so closely with the community and engaging in a process that's very open, transparent and open to input from members of the community who feel very strongly without them, this project would not be happening. So thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Councilwoman Price, is there any public comment on this item? I go and state your name, please.
Speaker 2: Good evening. My name is Dave Paparazzi. I'm a resident of the third district.
Speaker 13: I live at 445 Los Altos Avenue.
Speaker 2: And I currently serve on the board of Directors of Friends of Colorado Lagoon. We want to thank the Council for your support throughout this process. We especially want to be thankful to Councilmember.
Speaker 13: Price for her.
Speaker 2: Leadership and support in making this a priority of her administration. We also want to thank the harbor commissioners and the Port of Long Beach for their support.
Speaker 13: They've been a partner.
Speaker 2: For many years. We're coming on 15 years now. We've been working on restoring the Colorado Lagoon along the way. We also have established an educated and devoted community that fully supports this restoration, and they are excited about the future of the lagoon. And that's something that we couldn't have said just.
Speaker 12: Five or ten years ago.
Speaker 2: Through this partnership. We've made great progress addressing the sources of pollution, removing contaminate contaminated sediment, expanding the intertidal zones of the lagoon and revegetated with negative with native plants. Residents from all districts of the city of Long Beach use Colorado Lagoon to swim, to picnic, to relax, and to get close to nature. Since it began, this restoration has dramatically improved water quality, as measured by the Health Department and reported by Heal the Bay each year. I think we all rest easier now when we see hundreds of kids swimming in the lagoon and some adult swimming in the lagoon as well, thanks to that improved water quality. But our work's not done. The Regional Water Board has set challenging targets for the Colorado Lagoon and in order to meet those, like those TMD Isles, the experts all agree that the opening of an open waterway between the Lagoon and Alamitos Bay is required in order to restore full title circulation. Tonight, staff is seeking approval to begin value engineering and design work for this waterway. It's been a long time in coming. We, the Friends of Colorado Lagoon, fully support this and urge you to approve this. Thank you. And I'll just close by saying if any of the council members would care to come down to the lagoon for a visit, or if we can be answer any questions in any way, please contact us. We can be reached at Friends at Colorado Lagoon, dawg. Thank you very much.
Speaker 7: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 9: Very good. Are you fully supportive of this project? And it's important to understand that. Let me share the genesis of how this concept came about. It's not only important to the third district and to the city, but to Southern California and actually nationwide. The concept of the open channel flowed from, I believe it was the 1990 that excuse me, the 2005 Olympic bid when the USOC came to Long Beach and it selected the Long Beach Marine Stadium as the rowing venue for the pending Olympics, which eventually ended up in London. We all knew that it was a it was going to be a very, very tough, you know, tough bid because 84 had just, you know, it's very close behind us and so forth. But the committee came armed with NASA's satellite photos that showed what could be done by opening that up and the concept, in addition to the tidal flow and so forth, the concept was to allow to provide and the channel can be created wide enough not for any racing, but running room after race and entry room from the staging area that would be in Colorado run and on its land areas for the boats after the regatta. In addition to that, it provides people that want to go in and kayak and tour the lagoon 365 days a year. They can do that. The it also will provide an additional over water. So there will be a clear, unfettered 1000 meters within the Marine Stadium, which will not require interfacing with the cross-channel through from the back waters so far. So it's a it's a tremendous project. The port is picking up the the cost from the mitigation, and that's the goal. The port needs that because they are our largest economic engine. So it's a win win situation all around. I'm going to suggest and I mentioned this before, that on every project, every project, no matter where it is in the city. That the project have a the contractors have a public contact so people can keep track of and provide them input if necessary. I'm not qualified to. I know the general specs required, but I'm not qualified. There are other people are and I want to make sure they have a contact and knowledge. Thank you, Mr. Good Counsel.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Thank you. Seeing no more public comment. Will the council cast their votes?
Speaker 5: That's why I just wanted to clarify one thing, that the just because if people are watching, they might get confused where this is just an item regarding the cost of the design. It's actually not funding the open channel project. That would be many, many, many millions of dollars more. This is just the design. So I just want to clarify that. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Councilwoman Price. Let's go ahead and cast their votes. | Contract | Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFP CM16-028 for Professional Engineering Design Services for the Colorado Lagoon Open Channel Restoration Phase 2A Project (Project); award a contract to Anchor QEA, LLC, of Huntington Beach, CA, in the amount of $300,000, for preliminary design services, for a period of three years, with the option to renew for three additional one-year periods; authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to enter into the contract, including any necessary amendments thereto;
Authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute a Memorandum of Understanding with the Harbor Department and grant first rights of refusal to compensatory mitigation credits generated by the Project to the Harbor Department, in exchange for the Harbor Department’s continued contribution to the Project;
Accept a Harbor Department contribution of $350,000 for preliminary engineering design services for the Project; and
Increase appropriations in the Tidelands Operations Fund (TF 401) by $350,000 in the City Manager Department (CM) by $350,000, offse | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_08162016_16-0756 | Speaker 10: Motion carries.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Let's have item number 18.
Speaker 0: Report from Development Services recommendation to request the city attorney to prepare ordinances to designate 11 properties as Long Beach historical landmarks. Authorize the city manager to execute mills. Act historic property contracts with owners of 15 historic landmark properties and adopt minor revisions to the Mount Mills Act guidelines effective January 1st, 2017 citywide.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Mr. West. Ms.. Boda because their staff report.
Speaker 6: Amy Burdick, Development Services Department Head.
Speaker 5: Mr. Vice Mayor, members of the.
Speaker 0: Council, thank you. This is one of those staff.
Speaker 4: Reports where it's concluded with this is.
Speaker 5: A good thing. So we're moving.
Speaker 0: Forward with Mills Act contracts and landmark.
Speaker 4: Status for 15 different.
Speaker 5: Properties. If you approve this action tonight.
Speaker 4: We will work with the city attorney to prepare the appropriate.
Speaker 5: Ordinances and then come back to you for final approval.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 5: I just want to say thank you very much, Amy, for your hard work. Appreciate it.
Speaker 7: Councilmember Yanga. It's a good thing. Thank you. As any public comment on this saying none. Let's go ahead to the vote.
Speaker 10: Thank you. Councilman Andrews. Motion carries. | Contract | Recommendation to request City Attorney to prepare ordinances to designate the properties located at 344 West 8th Street, 347 West 7th Street, 539 Daisy Avenue, 711 Daisy Avenue, 2202 East Lowena Drive, 2220 East Lowena Drive, 331 Wisconsin Avenue, 3943 East 5th Street, 1162 Los Altos Avenue, 14 Paloma Avenue, and 3020 East Vista Street as Long Beach Historical Landmarks;
Authorize City Manager to execute Mills Act historic property contracts with owners of 15 historic landmark properties; and
Adopt minor revisions to the Mills Act Guidelines effective
January 1, 2017. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_08162016_16-0758 | Speaker 10: Thank you. Councilman Andrews. Motion carries.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Number 19 Please.
Speaker 0: Report from Economic and Property Development and Development Services recommendation to declare a city owned property located at 553 572 East Vernon Street and 2515 through 2545 Atlantic Avenue as surplus and execute all documents necessary with the IDM Development Corporation for the sale of the property in the amount of $700,000. District six.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Thank you. Anchor Mr. West and Mr. Conway.
Speaker 6: Yes, sir. Mike Conway. Vice Mayor Richardson, members of City Council. This item relates to a former redevelopment property located at the southwest corner of Atlantic Avenue and Vernon Street. The RDA was in preexisting and near-final discussions with the IDM Development Corporation for the purchase and development of the property. And the IDM has expressed interest in proceeding with the purchase of the property for affordable housing for seniors. So staff request that City Council declare the property surplus authorized city manager exceed all, any and all documents necessary for the sale of the property except a categorical exemption. C 16 Dash 192 and this concludes my report.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Mr. Conway. Councilman Andrew Hay Thank you.
Speaker 9: I'm hoping that Amy and Mr. Conway will say this is a good thing, but I do know the pride of this situation here because I am very glad that despite the setbacks, this item is finally up for purchase sale agreement. You know, this project is very dear to.
Speaker 2: Me as a seniors housing.
Speaker 9: And in desperate need, not only in the sixth District, but in the entire city. The project sales agreement is only another way to keep this project on track and keep it aligned with the details and goals that are going to benefit our community. And I'm hoping that the providers here and letting them know that this is it, we have to get this off the ground. We must get this done, because this is very important not only for the society, but for the city of Long Beach. And I'm hoping that he is here. He's here. Thank you very much.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Mr. Andrews. Councilmember Yanga.
Speaker 2: I want to echo Councilmember D's comments. It's a very important project and I hope that we can get accomplished.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Thank you. Any public comment on this item? Seeing none. Will the council please cast their vote? Thank you. | Contract | Recommendation to declare the City-owned property located at 550-572 East Vernon Street and 2515-2545 Atlantic Avenue, Assessor Parcel Numbers 7208-006-908, -912, -913, -914, -915, -916, -917, -919 and -920 (Subject Property) as surplus, authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute any and all documents necessary, including a Purchase and Sale Agreement, with DIDM Development Corporation, a California corporation, or affiliate, for the sale of the Subject Property in the amount of $700,000, and accept Categorical Exemption CE 16-192. (District 6) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_08162016_16-0759 | Speaker 10: Councilman Price motion carries.
Speaker 7: Thank you. We've already heard item number 20. So let's take item 21.
Speaker 0: Report from Economic and Property Development and Public Works recommendation to authorize a city manager to execute a lease with an option to purchase buy in between the City of Long Beach and the Jenni Rivera Foundation for city owned property, located at 1850 through 1862 Atlantic Avenue, District six.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Mr. West.
Speaker 6: Mike Conway, Vice Mayor Richardson, members of the City Council. This item replaced the city owned property at 1852 1862. Atlantic Avenue contains a 4800 square foot building, a former playground and an adjacent parking lot, all on a total of 14,600 square feet of land. Property was acquired by the Environmental Services Bureau with the objective of developing an educational environmental recycling demonstration depot to educate elementary school children on the benefits of recycling. Project implementation was hampered by budget constraints and the property has remained in its existing condition for a number of years. Representatives of the Jenni Rivera Love Foundation approached the city with a proposal to rehabilitate the property for use as a child daycare center, community meeting space, space and a Jenni Rivera museum. To pursue this objective, the foundation would need to invest approximately $200,000 to address the deferred maintenance and capital improvements to the building, the playground and the parking lot, and additional funds for tenant improvements. Staff proposes at least the property to the foundation for five years, with two five year extensions plus nine months for early access during due diligence. Rent will begin on the 16th month. Rent shall be a dollar 35 per square foot. A building or about 60 $480 per month rent shall be increased every five years by the cumulative change in the CPI, but rent shall also be abated dollar for dollar based upon the value of daycare services provided to the community that are below the market rate for such services , all on a non-cumulative basis. The lease will also include an option to purchase the property at today's value of $850,000, and that option will expire in ten years. So staff request City Council to declare the property surplus. Authorize City Manager to execute all necessary documents for the sale of the future development property and the lease of the government. Use property except categorical exemption. C 16 dash 190.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Mr. Conway. Mr. Andrews.
Speaker 9: Thank you, Vice Mayor. You know, I'm excited to see this come into the sixties. Not only with the late Jenni Rivera, but will create a service needed in our community. I will be 15,000 square feet of land as a daycare community room. And imagine I was nothing but a success for Jeanne Rivera's love foundation. Finally, I want to give a special thanks to you, Mike Conley, the director of Economic Property Development, who is retired for helping this project and many others in the sixth District. I wish him well on his retirement, and I want to thank all of you for the hard work. I know that voice. When you just hear it, you listen to it because this is the last time you're going to hear this individual. Sounds like Vin Scully. You will never, ever hear this voice again, you know, because.
Speaker 2: He always said, when we say why, he.
Speaker 9: Say why not? Thank you again, my love. And you very much.
Speaker 2: Yes.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 5: Just want to congratulate Councilmember Andrews. I know he's very close to the family and I know his hard work is now coming to fruition. So great job.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Any public comment on this item? Seeing none. Let's go ahead and cast our vote.
Speaker 10: Councilman Price. Motion carries. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary for a Lease with an Option to Purchase, by and between the City of Long Beach and the Jenni Rivera Love Foundation, a California 501 C (3) corporation, for City-owned property located at 1850-1862 Atlantic Avenue for a day care center, community room and Jenni Rivera Museum.
(District 6) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_08162016_16-0763 | Speaker 10: Motion carries.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Item number 24 police.
Speaker 0: Report from Long Beach Airport and Financial Management Recommendation to award a contract to AT&T B Corp and Jacobs Engineering Group for as needed design, engineering, construction management and other related services at the Long Beach Airport in an aggregate amount not to exceed $5 million. District five.
Speaker 7: Thank you.
Speaker 6: Staff Report. Our interim airport director Juan Lopez is.
Speaker 2: There are some slights to it when you put some slides up. Item 24.
Speaker 0: We have a copy of the video.
Speaker 2: Okay. Here we go. But. Vice Mayor Richardson and members of the City Council. This item relates to the award of an of as needed airport design, engineering and construction management contracts with H and TB Corporation and with Jacobs Engineering Group for the Long Beach Airport. The projects identified for these contracts are funded under the FAA Airport Improvement Program and will focus on reconstruction of runways and taxiways to sustain a projected 20 year usable pavement life and updating runways and taxiways to the current FAA standards. This involves services of a civil geotechnical and electrical engineering nature. The initial projects for these contracts will be to design for the reconstruction and shortening of runway seven right to five left. The reconstruction of Taxiway F. And the conversion of former runway 16 left three for right into taxiway C. Other needs may include design support for repairs for existing facilities such as the concourse, or for repairs to runways and taxiways. The RFQ was advertised for bid in March 2016. 7165 potential bidders specializing in engineering services were notified of the RFQ opportunity. 161 of whom downloaded the bid. The RFQ announcement was also sent to 22 local minority and women owned business groups and was also released in Aviation Daily, a national publication as required by and in accordance with the Phase Consultant's selection requirements. The statement of qualifications were reviewed by a committee consisting of the airport's engineering officer, civil, senior civil engineer and civil engineering associate. The top four firms were placed on a shortlist for demonstrating exceptional. Exceptional competence and preferable experience performing comparable services. The top four firms were invited to present their qualifications and general project approach to the committee, which was expanded to also include the Public Works Construction Services Officer and a public works civil senior civil engineer. The top four firms were ranked according to various criteria, including technical expertize, key personnel qualifications and previous experience in communication and interpersonal skills. The selection committee determined that H. A.B. and Jacobs were the most qualified based upon the criteria specified in the RFQ. The FAA prioritizes AP discretionary funding for projects that are construction ready, which is a project that has been designed, advertise and for which bids have been opened. Project seeking priority for calendar year 2017 must be construction ready by May of 2017. Staff request council approval of the recommended action so as to meet the FAA priority date for 2017. AP Discretionary funding for the airport's upcoming runway projects. Physical construction for any of these projects will be subject to Future City Council approval. This concludes my oral report. I'm available for any additional questions.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Mr. Lopez Rios. Councilwoman. Mongo.
Speaker 0: I appreciate that you did extensive outreach. I think that the comments of this council have been heard in your outreach. And I think that. We appreciate that. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 8: Thank you very much. And thank you, Mr.. Mr. Lopez, for your staff report. I think he answered a few questions that I might have had, but I do want to have just just for the record, I want to know when. When was this capital improvement project? How long has this been in the works?
Speaker 2: So these projects, these are the first of the projects that were identified under Alternative three way of the geometry study the council adopted excuse me, the council approved forward to the FAA for approval in 2010. So they're part of that involved the safety of the runways. The overall projects for the geometry study will take between 15 to 20 years to actually implement. These are the first three initial projects that we anticipate to be completed in the next five years.
Speaker 8: Okay. And thank you for that clarification, I think. And why are we shortening runway seven or to five IL?
Speaker 2: We're shortening the runway because it was if you look on your on the map, currently, the runway extends all the way further to the east and crosses our main runway 1230. One of the recommendations of the geometry study was to eliminate what they call this hotspot. This is the the crossing of three different runways in one area. Are are alternative runway seven left to five right, which is located on the north part of the airfield, is our secondary runway. And so we we do have the capacity shortening this shortening this runway eliminates the hotspot, but also provides for what is typically the general aviation arrivals and departures.
Speaker 8: We can I know I've talked about two five right in the past. I would think that that runway should be utilized more. I think it would do a lot to, I guess, mitigate noise in certain neighborhoods and maybe be more equitable with with our noise dispersed. Dispersion throughout the city. I'm in. The question that I think many people want to ask is I want me to ask is what does this project have any sort of nexus to the FISA study whatsoever?
Speaker 2: These these contracts have no access to the FISA study. Any design, engineering or any additional further direction from the counsel relative to the FISA would be handled under its own separate procurement.
Speaker 8: All right. Thank you for the clarification.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Mr. Austin Councilmember Supernova. Thank you. I think Councilmember Austin asked all the questions I had. Just to put it in perspective in terms of the timing, though. The geometry study came about two airport directors prior to you. Is that correct?
Speaker 2: That is correct. All right.
Speaker 7: Thank you. And to that point about T5, right, being used, I think last week you had 30 closed at 10 p.m. and you had a flight come in at 2:30 a.m.. That use today, right, as I recall. That is correct. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Supernova Councilmember Pierce.
Speaker 4: Councilmember Austin answered my questions. I think it's great that we've finally taking a step forward to get this done.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. That concludes council comment. Any public comment saying none. Please cast your vote.
Speaker 10: Councilman Soprano. Councilman Sabrina. | Contract | Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFQ AP16-105 and award a contract to HNTB Corporation, of Kansas City, MO, and Jacobs Engineering Group Inc., of Pasadena, CA, for as-needed Design Engineering, Construction Management, and other related services at the Long Beach Airport, in an aggregate amount not to exceed $5,000,000, for a period of four years, with the option to renew for two additional one-year periods, including any necessary amendments thereto, provided that the total aggregate amount is not exceeded. (District 5) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_08162016_16-0766 | Speaker 10: Motion carries.
Speaker 7: We have item number number 26.
Speaker 0: Next report from Public Works and police recommendation to adopt the findings of the Pedestrian Safety Advisory Committee relating to updating crossing guard locations at intersections throughout the city. Based on qualification criteria and receiving final report on crossing guard deployment plan for the 2016 2017 school year citywide.
Speaker 7: Thank you as our staff report.
Speaker 6: Yes. Public Works director Craig Beck and our traffic engineer, Eric Woods from.
Speaker 12: Good evening, Vice Mayor, members of the City Council. This item before you is the result of a citywide initiative started in 1978 to perform a pedestrian safety advisory committee to look at crossing guard locations throughout the city. So many people think that the school districts have crossing guard responsibility. Actually, it is the city we utilize general fund to pay for the crossing guards. So tonight, the peace sack recommendation is before Council for Consideration, which is focused on the crossing guard deployment plan for the 2016 2017 school year. And I'd like Eric Winston to just walk through some of the criteria that was used to evaluate these locations.
Speaker 2: Good evening, Vice Mayor, Council Members. The recommendations from Peace Act for the upcoming 2016 2017 school year relating to crossing guards include the recommendation of three new locations for school crossing guards and the removal of seven locations for crossing guards. These seven locations have not.
Speaker 9: Been staff for.
Speaker 2: The past six or seven years, so this is not a new loss for crossing guards within the within the city. The criteria we use to look at crossing guard placement and removal is number of students, elementary school students, crossing given location and the number of vehicles per hour that students have to cross conflict with crossing streets. And that number varies depending on if you've got a traffic signal or a stop sign or uncontrolled. Other locations have been evaluated as part of this program and have not been recommended because they do not meet those criteria. In addition to the school crossing guards, public works and traffic engineering, look at additional pedestrian safety improvements at these locations, whether or not school crossing guards are recommended or not. Some locations have been recommended for enhanced visibility, marked crosswalks, continental style crosswalks or other locations. I'm happy to take any questions we have at this time.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 5: Yes. I'd like to thank you for your efforts in all of this. I think the Public Safety Advisory Committee, their work in finding locations for us is it's incredible. We've been waiting for this for a long time. So I know a lot of us are excited. Quick question. I have one question relative to Third Street. I see Main Avenue is one that is selected, but third and Golden was not selected and I don't know the reasoning why. Do you have that information?
Speaker 2: Yes. Councilmember the of the volume of elementary school students at Third and Main was about twice the number over twice the number as a third and golden. That's why that was recommended over and over. Third and golden.
Speaker 5: Okay. So it was just the amount of students. All right. Thank you very much.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 4: I just want to thank you guys for bringing this forward and being really clear about, you know, the fact that the ones that we're removing haven't had stopped there in a while.
Speaker 0: And just thank you for that.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 0: I, too, appreciate the clarity. And fortunately there's some misinformation out in the community. And so I wanted to ask a couple of quick questions to make sure that we had the record correct. So, Mr. West, if I remember correctly, the Public Safety Advisory Committee was reactivated last year by this council after having not met since 2008, because this council cares about safety, transparency and our community's input on safety. Is that correct?
Speaker 2: Yes, it is.
Speaker 0: At that time, August of last year, the committee evaluated six intersections that were last evaluated for crossing guards in 2005, more than a decade ago. And all of those that were in the fifth District have not had a crossing guard at them since 2009, far before my time on this council. Is that accurate?
Speaker 6: That is accurate.
Speaker 0: I know this is Councilman Mongo. Not probably. I know there's only one at home to be confused. So to be clear, I'm using the proper questioning methods. Right. So to be clear, this council's vote does not remove any active crossing guards from the fifth District.
Speaker 6: That is absolutely true.
Speaker 0: Maybe I should have been a lawyer. Susie's inspiring me. Furthermore, the proposed budget for school crossing guards budget is budgeted for an increase from last year's 972,000 to a proposed budget of $1.142 million in 2017. So should this Council approve the proposed budget, we would be furthering our commitment to public safety and the safety of our intersections . Is that accurate?
Speaker 2: Yes.
Speaker 0: Wonderful. I just want the community to know that this council is more active and more committed to public safety than we have seen since, I believe the record shows 2005. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Councilwoman Mongo. Councilman Austin.
Speaker 8: So I want to first say objection for leading the witness, but thank you for the staff report and the clarity. I have one location obviously in my district that I am a little concerned with because it is slated for elimination. One of the sites is Duley Elementary School and the location is Daisy and Alamo. And I know that it hasn't been starved for for several years, but we are we're there's some changes happening in that direction, that neighborhood that that could could impact this. And I just would like to know, how often is this going to be evaluated, the Peace Corps, how often are they meeting? And will there be opportunities for for the community to kind of weigh in? Should there be some changes?
Speaker 12: Councilmember, as you heard, that this committee has been lax in meeting. But we think it's an important thing to review on a regular basis. So we we have actually the city's traffic engineer who participates in the Peace Act meetings. We'd be more than happy to reevaluate this site if you believe that that something has changed since we looked at it about a year ago and come back to this council, if we have findings that would dictate that it should be added.
Speaker 8: I would just just ask that you do some outreach to the school community and to the principal at Dula Elementary as well, because I'd like to and I do know that that, you know, the participation on the BP stock has been optimal either. And so I want to make sure that, you know, we make sure that everybody is at the table.
Speaker 12: Certainly happy to do that.
Speaker 8: All right. Thank you for the clarity.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Councilman Austin Councilmember. Thank you. If panelists will indulge me, I would just like to mention one crossing guard from the fourth District, Connie Donati, who retired this year after 22 years of service, walking that route between the third and the fourth District on Atherton at Studebaker. And Connie is 78 years old. She watches the meeting. So I hope she's watching this item. And she's 78. And they calculated that each day she steps up on the curb 75 times. So it was time for retirement, I think. Thank you, Connie. Thank you, Councilmember Eureka.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Councilman. Vice Mayor. Excuse me. I notice that there's very good. Only one that. In West Palm Beach. I have four or five schools in West Palm Beach and only one crossing guard. How is it? Is that a correction? It's only for the elementary school. Is that it? That's correct. Only elementary schools. Okay, I stand corrected. Then I will. They will.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Is anything public?
Speaker 0: Councilmember Mongeau I received a text message from the community, so I thought I would add one more clarifying point on redirect. Mr. West, is it true that all of the intersections that we have evaluated in the Fifth District that have not had crossing guards for quite a long time, but are now here on this docket. Are now. Signaled intersections with buttons that people can push for green.
Speaker 6: Yes, that's what I understand.
Speaker 0: Wonderful. So we've made those intersections more safe. Yes. Thank you for that.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Councilmember Durango.
Speaker 2: My chief of staff is earning her her pay today. She indicates to me that they have about four elementary schools, some that are key to it, and yet only have one crossing guard was at Garfield. Polina. But in. Mr. WEBSTER So I think that there's a disproportionately number of categories lacking in my district, perhaps. I want to take this offline and perhaps let's talk further about what I have my needs in that area.
Speaker 12: Catherine. We'd be happy to work with your office to identify particular intersections that you believe we should study in. Have future inclusion in this in this program.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. And is there any public comment on this item saying non, please cast your votes.
Speaker 0: Motion carries. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to adopt the findings of the Pedestrian Safety Advisory Committee relating to updating crossing guard locations at intersections throughout the City based on qualification criteria; and
Receive and file the Pedestrian Safety Advisory Committee report on Crossing Guard Deployment Plan for the 2016-2017 School Year and concur with its recommendations. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_08092016_16-0712 | Speaker 2: Recommendation to refer to hearing officer the Business License Application Denial Appeal by All Saints Lorain Fine Pastries Inc located at 4334 Atlantic Avenue, Long Beach, California. 908007, District eight.
Speaker 1: Mr. AUSTIN.
Speaker 3: Thank you. As their staff report on this.
Speaker 0: Yes, we can have one. Jason McDonald, our manager of this is Licensed Services can give the staff report. Jason. Thank you. Mayor City council members. This is a request to have the city council refer a hearing to the hearing officer for the denial of a business license application by the state's Lorain Find Pastries located at 4334 Atlantic in District eight. The location was previously cited during the earlier iteration of the medical marijuana ordinance and that this is his request to refer that matter to a hearing officer for adjudication. I'm available if you have any additional questions.
Speaker 1: Mr. Austin.
Speaker 3: Yes. In terms of the business being cited, can you go into a little bit more detail on that, Mr. McDonnell.
Speaker 0: This location. Has received leads and citations of over 400 citations and totaling almost 1,155,000 with penalties and interest. That includes the citations against the property owner for failing to regulate the business under the business license ordinance.
Speaker 3: So when you say the the the citations actually that will go before the hearing officer, is that money due to the city of Long Beach?
Speaker 0: The the citations would be due to the city of Long Beach. This matter actually in front of you, councilmember, is regarding referring their hearing for a denial of their business license. So on a separate but related matter, there were attempting to deny their business license for failure to follow the business license ordinance.
Speaker 3: And so as a matter of process, it will go to the planning commission.
Speaker 0: It. It's being referred to a hearing officer or an officer or hearing officer.
Speaker 3: And will there be public input on that that that hearing or will public be able to participate in any way?
Speaker 0: It's a public hearing that is allowed to be attended by the public, but the presentation is limited to city staff or city attorneys presenting for the hearing officer and the defense or the defendant rebutting or arguing any of those points.
Speaker 3: Okay. In this matter could come before back before the city council. Is that correct?
Speaker 0: It is my understanding that the hearing officer's recommendation would be returned to the city council for final vote. All right. Thank you very much.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilwoman Pryce.
Speaker 4: Just to clarify, this was an illegal marijuana operation that resulted in 100 citations being issued by the city. 400 citations.
Speaker 0: Yes, Councilmember. Over 400 citations were issued at this location.
Speaker 4: That's shocking. I can't even imagine something like that would ever happen in this type of a situation. What is what is the process from this point in terms of what is it that the business is now trying to do? And what are the factors that the hearing officer will take into consideration in making a decision?
Speaker 0: Councilmember, the the factors that the hearing officer would take into consideration would be what was being presented by the city, which is regarding there this location's refusal or noncompliance with the business license ordinance. Specifically in this situation, we are talking about the property owner and there we would be attempting to revoke their commercial and industrial license, which means their ability to rent the property for commercial purposes.
Speaker 4: Okay. Was this business just out of curiosity? Were there any fines or fees associated with this illegal operation?
Speaker 0: I'm not aware of any fines or fees. The city issues a citation that then results in a lean.
Speaker 4: O and a lean. Okay. Okay. Great. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilwoman Mongo.
Speaker 2: You'd mention that if they. If we move to that next step, they would not be able to rent the property. Would they be able to operate their own commercial business out of there? I would think that would be a no.
Speaker 0: That would be my understanding, Councilmember, that they would be restricted for any commercial activity, their own or anyone else.
Speaker 2: Wonderful. Just wanted to make sure that clarification. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Councilman Austin.
Speaker 3: One last question. I won't stay on this too long, but when you talk about 400 citations and I'm sure there were other activities associated with this property, what was the do we have an accounting or any way to determine what it cost the city administratively to deal with this particular establishment?
Speaker 0: Our office has not specifically calculated the the administrative costs, but I believe those considerations are being taken into account for future consideration.
Speaker 3: But I'd like to know the administrative costs as well as public safety costs in city attorney's costs. And all of the above. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Okay. We have any public comment on this item. Please come down.
Speaker 0: We have a motion in a second.
Speaker 1: There's a there is a motion in a second.
Speaker 0: Larry Goodhue, Clerk As we address this very important information and I think the councilman from the third District did a very good job of. Focusing in on the number of calls. That's absolutely a. Astounding and troubling. And. I will send it to the council and to the council district council person. I know of two. Locations. Where the number of calls, although it doesn't involve this type of crime, are. The number of calls. Exceeds by, at least. 200%. These numbers for which from which other crimes have. Emanated. And. I would hope that the city would move with dispatch on these two areas and these two locations where point in fact, they've been dragging their feet for almost two and a half. Two, four years. Thank you. You'll get information on that by close of business tomorrow.
Speaker 1: Any other public comment? CNN members, please cast your votes. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to refer to Hearing Officer the business license application denial appeal by Alsace Lorraine Fine Pastries, Inc. located at 4334 Atlantic Avenue, Long Beach, CA 90807.
(District 8) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_08092016_16-0722 | Speaker 2: Report from Development Services and Financial Management. Recommendation to appoint the Planning Commission as the hearing officer for the purpose of conducting a revocation hearing for the revocation of a business license issued to MICO Sports Lounge and for the Commercial Industrial Business License issued to the Ronald and Peggy McKee Trust for the operation of a business located at 710 West Willow Street, as well as a hearing on the revocation of the cp47701 West Willow Street based upon violations of the conditions of approval associated with ACP District seven.
Speaker 1: Thank you. I'm going to turn this over to Mr. City attorney.
Speaker 0: Mayor and vice mayor. Councilmember Austin has to recuse himself on this item as he has a conflict. And so he will step out of the room during the discussion and vote and then return in his conflict. Is he is a union representative of the owner.
Speaker 1: Okay. And also, I know that Mr. West is going to begin by giving us the staff report. Mayor council.
Speaker 0: Members. We have.
Speaker 6: A quick staff report by our Director of Development Services.
Speaker 0: Amy Bodak, as well as our Manager of business licenses, our business license bureau. Jason McDonald So Amy or Jason.
Speaker 2: Mr. Mayor. Members of the City Council, thank you for your attention to this item tonight. The planning staff recently notified the the business owner that there was consideration for the revocation of their conditional use permit and that a hearing would be scheduled in the coming weeks or months regarding some potential allegations and violations of that conditional use permit. As part of our research, it has been determined that there are also potential violations to the business license for the business, as well as the business license for the underlying property. And in an interest of consolidating these issues, it is requested that you consider appointing the Planning Commission as the hearing officer for the potential revocation of the business license aspects of this application. That's the short version of the staff report. I and Jason McDonald are here to answer any questions you might have.
Speaker 1: Okay, Canterbury Ranga.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Mayor, and thank you. Voted for that report. I know there's a lot of people here interested in making some comments regarding this item here. So I would let the the people for a public B please line up and speak about this if they want to say anything otherwise. I would like to support that this item go to the Planning Commission for a consolidated hearing. I would for sometime in the very near future. And that was your support.
Speaker 0: Please.
Speaker 1: Okay. There's a motion in a second on this item. If you have public comment, now's the time to please come forward and make your make your public comment on this item. Do you have a comment? Please line up so we can go one after the other.
Speaker 0: And each 3600 Pacific Avenue. Hello again. I am in total support of the recommendation to have this hearing. I don't expect to give any testimony tonight, nor should there be any given tonight, only a matter of whether or not to conduct the hearing. I do believe that there is a typo in the way this is agenda ized. The second reference to an address on West Willow is 701.
Speaker 5: That would be on the other side of the street.
Speaker 0: I believe it should both reference 710.
Speaker 2: Yes, sir, that's correct.
Speaker 0: Okay. And with that. Good luck. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Speaker.
Speaker 2: Mayor Garcia. Council members. My name is Christy Cain and my husband and I live on the 2600 block of Main Avenue, just across Willow Avenue from Chico's Sports Bar. We are very close to Willow and we see Migos from our front door. I am speaking to voiced our support for the closing of Migos. The business has been and continues to be a poor neighbor to the wriggly community. They have ignored the concerns voiced directly to them by the residents affected by the criminal activity of their patrons. And they have ignored wake up calls in the form of the denial of their entertainment license and the recent strings of violent incidents that have broken out there over the last several months. We will never forget witnessing the immediate aftermath of the attempted murder of a bar patron that occurred literally in front of our house a few days after Christmas. This was followed a few months later by a stabbing. Other problems, while less dangerous, are nonetheless a blight on the community. The bar is so loud that we often cannot keep our windows open on summer evenings. This happened as recently as last Sunday morning at 1 a.m.. Bear in mind, we are all the way across Willow, a busy boulevard. That is how loud it is. We also deal with overflow parking on our street and the subsequent 2 a.m. interruptions and littering from drunk patrons that come with it. Residents closer to the bar have it even worse than us. MZ Yancy has had the opportunity to work with her neighbors and with the city to address these problems. Instead, she denies and scapegoats. It is time to say enough and revoke the business license of Mico Sports Lounge. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Just as the city attorney also just wants as a reminder that I want to remind everyone so that the motion in front of us is to send this issue and to give the Planning Commission the ability to do a hearing. So the motion from the council is not to revoke or not revoke any sort of license or any sort of business. It's to send the issue to the Planning Commission. So obviously make sure you're speaking to that issue. The issue in the debate is about whether or not this should go to the planning commission, not whether or not something should be revoked or not revoked. And I just want to make sure that we clarify that for the purposes of this discussion. Next Speaker Thank you.
Speaker 0: Hi. Mayor Robert Garcia and Council. I'm Steve Duprey. I'm a member of the Wrigley District and I'm going to change my format and that I would. There's been a lot of violations regarding their planning commission cases. So I'd like you to seriously review them in regard to, you know, the purpose of the business is to enhance the local community and increase the property value and the livability of the area. So we need to consider all the violations because it seriously affects the value and the health of that neighborhood. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: How you doing, Mayor Carlson? My name is Hank Norman.
Speaker 0: I grew up in Long Beach. I'm a I'm a local entertainer.
Speaker 3: And Michael's is a is a safe haven in our community. It's a place where community activists we go. We have meetings their. He's allowed us to have meetings there where we can talk about better in our community. And we've got community actually like hashtag, say, Long Beach. And the Long Beach players we meet there. And we.
Speaker 0: Have community meetings about.
Speaker 3: Saving our community. So I would just like to say that.
Speaker 0: Michael's is one of those one of the stalwarts in our community. And we need to keep it.
Speaker 3: And keep it going because.
Speaker 0: It's a place where we can come and enjoy ourselves.
Speaker 3: Come out and dress up and have a good.
Speaker 0: Time and get out there and enjoy ourselves without having to go through all the problems. So I just want to say thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, sir. Next speaker.
Speaker 9: Hi. My name is Priscilla Quinn, and I'm an employee of Mico Sports Lounge. I've been there from the beginning and in rebuttal to what the lady said about the shooting. That happened not in our bar, didn't start in our bar. And I don't know how we are being punished for events that happened surrounding the bar. There's a liquor store on the corner. There's a flower shop on the other corner. They're blaming us for the parking situation because of the traffic. We have no control of that. There's an alley is actually not an Alyssa Street, 25th Street, where the cars go up and down. It's not necessarily our patrons that's coming up and down the alley with the loud music or parking on their street Valentine's Day. One of the neighbors was upset because they couldn't park, but people would buying flowers from the flower shop. But we were faulted for, you know, people parking in front of their property. Also, I don't know the 250 calls or whatever that's supposed to been made. I want to know if all of those calls was for Michael Sports Lounge or for 710 West Willow. Because I have patrons that come in all the time that mistakes are bar for the 710 bar. So with that being said, our crowd is a nice crowd. We have a 30 and over crowd. There's never been a fight break out in the bar. The police has never had to come in there and break up a fight or arrest anybody. I'm none of that. Unlike other bars in Long Beach just in January, January 26, where the officer was injured at a bar brawl, there's been a stabbing at a bar that's not even a half a mile from us where five people were stabbed. I don't see them being punished. And like I said, I think we're being held as a scapegoat for all the other things that's happening around the bar and they're following us for.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next speaker. And just just as a reminder, so I'm under the assumption the last speaker is against sending this to the planning commission for for for a hearing. Okay. And I just wanted to make sure we try to keep the conversation within the parameters of of what the motion is in front of us. So. Yes, ma'am. Next.
Speaker 9: Hi, my name is Monisha Sara and I'm also an employee of Meiko Sports Lounge and I am also against. You going forward in any kind.
Speaker 1: Of sending to the planning commission?
Speaker 9: Yes. Yes. And I also reiterate what she was saying. We don't have any problems. There is a a nice place. A lot of people come. They have 50th anniversaries, parties and. And it's nothing. Outrageous or outlandish going on there, but people having a good time. People park on the street because they're allowed to park on the street. If they if someone wants someone not to park in front of their home, they should have to get an extra one to get a permit for people not to park. People park there and go other places. They don't just come in to the bar. And I just want to say thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next week.
Speaker 2: Hello. My name is Vivian Bonner session and I stay and also stay around the corner from me called the state of 2400 block of Daisy Avenue. I am a single parent. I raised five kids, two that made it to the NFL. So my thing is now that Michael is around the corner from my house, I decided to go there just for comfort, not to see fights or to engage in fight. I think it's a safe haven for me before me even open. I never attended bars until they open. Now I tend bars and when my kids come back in town from playing in a field, they do visit me also. So I think it's a safe haven and I feel no reason they should be closed.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Next speaker.
Speaker 2: Good evening, Mayor. Council members. My name is Sabrina David. I'm a 49 year old native of Long Beach, California. I'm also a professional. I'm a banker. I'm a commercial real estate agent in the city of Beverly Hills. I am one of those heathens that patronize me. I have never, ever experienced any problems while I was in the bar or outside of the bar. I've never been robbed. I've never felt any fear for my life or my safety, nor my livelihood. I am against the recommendation to send this this to the hearing, to revoke her license, her business license. All of my friends are professionals. You see some of them standing before you or sitting before you. That's a place where we go and unwind after a hard day's work. It's a place where we gather and we have an opportunity to meet up with our friends that we haven't seen for 30 or 40 years. I personally am like Vivian. I did not patronize bars in Long Beach. I have never been to another bar other than because within the city of Long Beach, I think that it's a shame that we're not being supportive to. And in my personal opinion, I think that there needs to be more representation if the neighborhood is not happy with the parking situation. There's a very easy fix for that. There's permeable. Think other areas of Long Beach? No, no. There's no parking after a certain at the time. If you don't have a permit, that eliminates that entire problem. If they're concerned about the people that walk down the street or are in the alley, then you're basically going to have to close every business in the city of Long Beach, because I'm pretty sure all of you are very much aware of the melee that is occurring within our city. It's not just in the Wrigley. A child and a mother was just killed on ninth Street. I was 10 minutes away from there at that time. That could have been me. I wasn't doing anything wrong, and it appears that they weren't either. So this isn't a matter to me of whether or not the participants or the patrons that visit Migos are unruly. There's unruly people throughout America. In case we haven't noticed, that is something that law officials need to get a better handle on it. That is not her job to police people who leave her business. It is her job to police the people that are patronizing her business within her business. And she's done a fine job in doing that. Thank you very much.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Speaker, please. And man, before you go, your if there's any other speakers, I'm going to close the speakers list. So just please get in line and then I'm a close, closer speakers list so we can. Okay. So I see. One, two, three, four, five, six, folks. I'm going to close the speakers list after the gentleman that's walking that gentleman back there is the last speaker. Then the speaker's list is closed. So these are the final speakers.
Speaker 0: Please go ahead.
Speaker 2: Good evening, Mayor and council members. My name is Deborah White. I am a resident of Wrigley, and I would just like for you to reconsider sending this to the Planning Commission. I think that there are unwarranted. I too patronize Michael's and had not patronized a bar until Michael's opened. The 250 calls that I read yesterday in the press telegram that that that they say are being made. Find it hard to believe. But I mean, if that's the case, that is the case. But please take into consideration the people that are coming before you today, the professionals, the ones that feel very safe going there. If if I didn't feel safe, I wouldn't be going there. And as I said, I am a resident. I live probably two blocks away from the bar. And I just want you to look at the accusations to me that are unwarranted and reconsider sending this to the planning commission.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Yes.
Speaker 4: My name is Trinidad Renfroe.
Speaker 2: I'm a 46 year old and I am a 42 year resident of the Wrigley. This is I am. First of all, I want to say I am against the recommendations that you that we have before us against Michael's. And I just want to tell you that this is the first bar that I have been able to bring my family to for different occasions as far as baby showers, birthdays.
Speaker 4: And all those above things. And I think that.
Speaker 2: It would be a very, very sad story if you guys would.
Speaker 4: Go against what the.
Speaker 2: People are here to speak about. Michael's is not the only bar on Willow. There are a few bars on Willow.
Speaker 4: And I feel that if.
Speaker 2: We are going to condemn her.
Speaker 4: About these different.
Speaker 2: Allegations, these same allegations are against the other bars that are on Willow, also. So I'm just saying that please take in consideration everyone that is speaking here, because we're here for a reason and we're here to support Michael's Bar.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next speaker.
Speaker 0: My name is David Pittman. I live on Main Avenue, very close to the bar.
Speaker 7: My neighbors and I were all going to speak.
Speaker 0: Actually, I wasn't even prepared to speak because we thought that this was going to come on around 7:00. So they will be showing up, I guarantee you. We are thrilled that this is coming before the the council and to be recommended to the planning commission. This has been going on for two and a half years. It's an incredible nuisance, over 250 calls to the police. And let me also say that many of those calls are doubled up when they give us a call number. They put two and three calls on the same number. One of my neighbors. Who lives the closest to the bar. Recently, regretfully had to sell his house and move because he could no longer take the noise, the rudeness, the behavior of both the staff. And the patrons of the bar. And I just feel sorry for the person that bought that house. But we urge you to put this forward to the Planning Commission, and I assure you my entire group will.
Speaker 7: Be there at that.
Speaker 0: Meeting. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 0: Good evening. Good evening. My name is Randi Hall, and I'm a lifelong Wrigley resident as well. I'm here to say that I'm totally against the recommendation, and it's kind of upsetting to me personally to try to destroy somebody's dream. Based on a personal vendetta, you cannot attribute what goes on outside of cause, which goes on in pretty much every neighborhood in Long Beach to make out. There was a shooting. Yes, with a patron, whether by the person that committed this crime. And Michael's name. There are lots of things that go on in that neighborhood that need to be addressed. There's a homeless problem in that neighborhood. You can interview that to me. Can you? You can't. I'm just here to say don't destroy somebody's dream based on a personal vendetta. And that's all this is a personal vendetta. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next speaker.
Speaker 0: Good evening. My name is Vincent Lawrence. I'm a 57 year old resident of Long Beach. I've been here basically all of my life, except for when I was in college. I left to play pro ball and I came back. I've also been a peace officer, Compton PD. And, you know, the things that I see sometimes that go on, they're not right. I was hired by D.D. and a staff of mine. We patrolled that place. She wasn't having events. We would have somebody out the front door. We would have somebody in the alley, which if you lived in Long Beach and you know it. That's not an alley. That's 25th way. That's a street. Now, as far as I remember, there's a liquor store on the corner. I chased homeless people away from from urinating in that alley. We don't sell 40 ounces. We don't sell drugs. But I'm chasing people through the alley. That's not Diddy's responsibility. You know, the 250 calls. I'd like to see the proof of it. We had a book. Every time they come out. And after being a peace officer, it really saddens me to see this go on here. And the police officers that come out have said there's nothing going on here. There was one night in particular where five times the officers came. And the resident that you're talking about, the gentleman that so-called moved, he was upset because officers didn't do anything and the officers told him, we're not coming back out here. I introduced myself to him and he kind of had an attitude with me and I said, Sir, I'm here to make this work. We can work together. I gave you my name. I gave you my number. And I never heard from me. Every time when we're there, she has us there sometimes on Friday and Saturday nights. There's nothing going on. It's sad that there's a liquor store there and people are driving from that liquor store now. It's sad that women are selling flowers on Valentine's Day at 230 or three in the morning. They're blaming me cause. Somebody said earlier, Didi is supposed to take care of two people in the bar. We take care of the people around the bar, inside the bar and behind the bar. We try to pick up trash and stuff at night. That's not our responsibility. We make sure we know people go out, they have McDonald's and this and that. And the gentleman who stays behind us, he has cameras faced on us. All you got to do is pull his cameras and you see my security people doing that. I'm just saying, I don't think this needs to be gone. It's like they're trying to blow her dreams. You know, she has the right to do like everybody else to make a living and have a place for the people in Long Beach to go and come back and be proud of not to be chased away because of prejudice, because basically that's what it is. You know, I heard the lady say that she lives across Willow. You can't hear anything across Wall because we have the doors close and your sound walls in there. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, sir. Next speaker.
Speaker 9: Hello. My name is Demetrius Yancey. My friends and family know me as a Dee Yancey. I am the owner of Make All Sports Lounge. I was basically here, too. I know that you guys have a list of items that I supposedly violated. I'm here to let you guys know that I in no. And every way I'm trying to come with in compliance. I received a letter from the planning commission or whomever it was that asked me to give a security floor plan of my security. I contacted Detective Burress, Laurie Barry. I was worried. Would she? I asked her, what did I need? She told me, Just get your guard cards from your security and give me a floor plan of how you have it laid out. I submitted that to her. I submitted all the documents that the city asked for. I got additional five parking spaces. Yes, I did put the wrong date on there, but I did everything the city asked before. When they returned it back to me, they said I was out of compliance with my security because I should have two security at 7:00 and one that comes in at ten. Now, they wanted me to have that. They should have said that. They just asked me to do a floor plan. How was I supposed to have my security when undercovers came in and they said I was outside of the my permit? I had they documented this having eight customers in a bar. What eight customers do I need to security? At $80 a watt. And then I need another one at 10:00. No. So I don't see that as a need for the city to tell me to have security and have different things that's not needed. If you guys are coming after me because I've had a shooting outside my bar, I had a stabbing, which I believe was a plant outside my bar. I don't know who tried to commit suicide outside the bar, even though alcohol is a depressant, but nobody on a Sunday. I have a bartender back here. Well, gee was like about seven or eight people there on a Sunday night, crowded like out there. Say, if you want to replicate my license because of me having these six items and over 250 calls which have not been validated, I need you to then go ahead and revoke the license. Panama Joes. Legends Tailgate. Todd Bowles. Give me 70 and bar. I need all those bars revoked too, because they have done worse than I have and they've been open for 60,000 years. Stabbings, killings, shootings. Seven Wardlow Station had a security guard and a patron shot inside. There was no coverage of that at all. I had somebody shot outside my bar 70 and had somebody at the same time. Media coverage everywhere. Two people got shot at. Wardlow stated nothing but I'm getting revoked. Revoke all the bars license. Thank you. You are welcome, sweetie.
Speaker 0: Next speaker.
Speaker 9: Hello. My name is. And to make Michael Lewis. And part of me goes for snatch. I'm a bartender and I have been bartending for turbos and duties. And as a bartender, I have never seen what I have seen between them two at our own bar. What you guys put heavy on us? I'm not putting the blame in on what I'm trying to bring out in our problems because you both to worry about your own. But I'm just saying, as example, that I have worked at these bars, L.A., the bottom line in which you how you are coming at us and what I have seen throughout me working as Bartell. That's okay. I won't do that. I won't say foul play. That's not writing for Justin and neighbors in Harlem next door. How long that bar? I've been a 40 years before we got there. We can find the stuff at the bar in a way before work. So which makes it different from us being there when it was there before us. So what were the complaints when it was KBR, the Mai Tai Sandbar, all that? So what makes it different from us that we black women and we want something? So what's the difference? That's what I want to know. Want to answer that? No. Because what's the problem? That what he's talking about? You know, when you moved in that place, it was a bar there where before you even decide to move into Wrigley. So how do we have the guidance to control about what's going on around there with way before us? So the the blame is all he told is on us. And I don't understand that. Like I said, the shootings like say across the street, they come from other places drunk, want to come to the last minute, make their last rounds, and they bring them problems with them with the last rounds. So but in the case. And that's because why the night within the damn calls. And that's a shame that you guys allow it just because they can call it means from any time the police have came and nobody knew that they were mad. So by your being wasting your time in this city for doing nothing, you actually can add to what the residents because they're waiting all the time because it was a waste of noise. I have a beautiful day.
Speaker 1: Thank you. All right. Sorry. You're going to. I've closed the speakers list. I'll let you go ahead. But you're going to be the last person. I can't I cannot keep allowing people to speak. So, ma'am. Hey, guys, guys, guys, I'm going to go ahead that I'm going to go ahead and let this gentleman speak. Ma'am, if you are, you and I have to close the speakers. Listen, so I understand there may have been a confusion about the time certain I guys. Okay. And I'm making it fair. And from what I understand, there was a confusion about the time certain for certain people. And so I'm trying to be I'm trying to ensure that there's the people that are here to speak on it, can speak on it. And we'll we'll clearly want to make sure if there is a time certain. From what I understand, some people thought it was six, that people thought it was seven. Okay. Well, I. I didn't. Well, ma'am, I can't I know nothing from no speaking from the comments please. From the sections. So, sir, you can go ahead and speak. I'm going to close the speakers list, ma'am. So this is the last. This is the last. The last gentleman. Well, listen. Hold on 1/2. Give me 1/2. Charlie, can you for 1/2? Sir. 1/2. Okay. We're going to do. Listen up. What we're going to do is because this is a possible hearing and it's a sensitive issue. I'm going to allow if you want to speak on this issue, you can lineup right now and I'll allow you to speak on it. And then I'm closing the lesson. Last call right now. If anyone else wants to speak on this, please come forward. Okay. So please come forward. And then I'm closing the speakers list as the last call. And we're just doing this because it's a it's a it's a sensitive hearing of the possible appeal. So. Okay. This is it. Last call. Okay. The four people can speak. Go ahead, sir.
Speaker 0: Thank you. My name is Rick Europaischen. I'm the one who owned two houses right behind the bar. I'm the person that was the most affected by the bottom. You know, I lived in that house for 17 years, and two of my kids were actually born and raised there. I have no plans of moving very comfortable. I love my neighbors. I love the neighborhood. You know, one of the speakers mentioned earlier that we knew when we bought the house it was a bar. And you're absolutely right. But it was a neighborhood boy, not a nightclub.
Speaker 1: Hey, guys, we everyone has an opportunity to speak and be respected at the mic. So please, no outbursts from the audience. Continue, sir.
Speaker 0: So all the problems that they feel that they're not responsible for in the beginning, call the police. By the time the police will get there, the answer is whatever that might be, where there was loud people drinking outside, urinating on my mind, on my yard, doing number two on my yard, all those kind of incidents. We have proved that, ma'am. We have proof of that. So I had to put cameras on the house just to be able to prove that. And if they want proof, there's plenty of including Mrs. Miss Yancy, you know, acting like she is God and she can do whatever she wants. And I have it in video, record it. So I'm not here to do any personal or become any personal because I did deal with it for two and a half years. I moved. I took a hit on the house. I had to make personal sacrifices. So you talk about someone's dream, you know, for a bar. I'm all for that. I'm I'm a business owner for over 20 years here in Long Beach. Some of you know me already for for many for many years. And including the gentleman that spoke earlier, which is a police officer, I actually sold time to his wife. So, yes, absolutely. But the way he approached me when he did it wasn't the way he mentioned or polite. It was all every time through it. And you know what it's like to be threatened at 2:00 in the morning, 3:00 in the morning, people knocking on your door, mentioning by name. And I have proof of that as well, too. And also people are telling me they want to f me they're going to go. So I was afraid we left because I was afraid for my family's safety and for my safety. So you want to consider that? I want before I urge you to take a look again, I don't want to kill anyone's dreams. But why this shadow of mine? I have to make sacrifices. And before you guys consider body, put yourself in my shoes, please. Thank you for the time.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next speaker, please. Next speaker come forward, and then we have the two ladies after her, and then we're done with the speaking.
Speaker 2: Good evening, Mayor, and thank you for allowing me to speak. I'm an employee. I've been there two years. I'm a single mother, which I most definitely would not put myself in a position not to come home to my son. As far as the noise. That is so not true that front doors shut and she is adamant about keeping that back door shut at 8:00 or we get in trouble. It's terrible. But we have to live together, work together and try to make it work for everybody. This man bought his dream home, left and came back. So, you know, as far as people outside and the stabbing, actually, I was working that shift. He wasn't even from he wasn't even in the bar. He came running off the street in. There was something from somewhere else that came running from way down past the pizza place. So I most definitely, again, would not put my son's life or my life and this is my livelihood as well as a lot of other employees there. So we just try to come to a medium. Of course, I'm against sending it to the commission, come to meet medium and work it out. I've heard my CAC speak with the gentleman in the back. It's almost like he is looking and antagonizing. He's, you know, looking for a reason. We will be there was four women leaving the bar one night. It was myself, the two owners we have, we're leaving. And it was not like we were thinking like giving hugs and saying, have a safe trip home. And he came out yelling at us all to go home. So I'm sure there are loud incidents that surround the area. But again. You can't justify closing a bar or yanking her rights or her her license because of what happens outside. Like I said, officers have come in, walked through, said they've come back on an off shift. Thank you for listening. Have a good evening.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Speaker.
Speaker 2: Hello, everybody. My name is Kerry Sanders. I just live a few doors down from the bar. I wasn't planning on speaking, so I don't have anything prepared. I just am appealing to you to please consider rescinding the license based on the fact that.
Speaker 1: Just as a reminder, we don't rescind the license. It's appealing to us to send us to the Planning Commission for hearing.
Speaker 2: Okay. Obviously, I'm not prepared, but my my issue here, I've only lived there for a year. I got very lucky in being able to buy a home. I never thought I would be able to. And I bought my home there. Nothing was disclosed to me when I bought the home about a nuisance problem. You know, I'm not saying there is. There isn't, you know, in my opinion there is, because I've lived there a year and I've seen a lot of things and heard a lot of things. Uh, I've never talked to my fiancee or anybody, but I, you know, I, myself and my daughter live there. And I remember.
Speaker 4: Many nights.
Speaker 2: When I just hear a lot of.
Speaker 4: Screaming and yelling.
Speaker 2: People obviously drunk because I used to drink. I know what it's like, you know.
Speaker 4: Just going at it in the middle.
Speaker 2: Of the night or going giggly in the middle of the night on the way to the car to go home after partying. And then there was the incident where I was sleeping and my daughter woke me up at. I forget what time it was. To tell my mom I heard gunshots, you know, and it was like, come to find out that was somebody getting shot in the face. And this is my American dream where I'm living. Somebody is getting shot in the face steps from my house. And I'm just I was in shock. It was I think it was Christmas Eve, the day after Christmas, something like that. I don't remember exactly because I obviously I'm not prepared. But, you know, I I am all for her having a business. I just don't think this is the right place for a nightclub atmosphere. There's no parking for it. You know, my daughter has to park sometimes down the street as some of the other residents. And, you know, I understand everyone needs a place to have fun from time to time. I just don't understand why it's so difficult to, you know, real in, you know, the people that are leaving from the bar. I've you know, I've I've frequent in bars when I was younger and a lot of times there's security around they're telling you, you know, on go home. You can't just hang out. Well, that doesn't happen around there. Just last weekend, there was somebody hanging out in front of my next door neighbor's house just drinking from their car. And my dog started barking. It was like midnight. That's what goes on on a weekly basis, and it's hard to sleep. So I'm just asking you to please go forward, send this to the council and thanks for listening to me.
Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you. And then this is our last speaker before this goes back for discussion at the council. Go ahead.
Speaker 9: Hi, my name is Jeannie Moreno. I am kind of a little sickened by what I've heard since I've been here. A lot of the residents have stated that they haven't spoken to me, Nancy. They don't know why my fiancee allows the things to go on and around in the perimeter of the bar. Unfortunately, her character has been assassinated here today. I have no Ms.. Yancy, I am 52 years old, August 12th. I have known Ms.. Yancy for over 40 years, and I know her character, I know her intentions, and I know the type of businesswoman that she aspires to be. And it's not somebody that wants to bring havoc into a neighboring community that she grew up in. Okay. It's a it's a haven for a lot of us that most of the people that patronize that bar, I don't want to say most of us, they everybody that patronized that bar have been classmates since elementary school. We all know each other. We all look out for each other. We all help her, police that area to make sure that she is successful in her business. It just seems to me that every time a community sees a a group of black individuals get together and we try to have fun. We try to communicate. We try to be together as one. It's always looked upon as a place that needs to be shut down or a place of danger. Well, that's my opinion.
Speaker 1: I guess. No, we're not having outbursts from them.
Speaker 9: I just feel that she's being victimized on that aspect. And I understand that this gentleman lived behind her, be on and outside the business. But sometimes when we purchase property and we are in an area where there are businesses, liquor stores. Several bars. Flower shop. There's all kind of things that going on in that community. We have to understand that there's a possibility that the purchase we making, if it's a family house that we're buying, that we may want to reconsider where we placing our families. So I say that to say that people have to understand that the decisions that we make, we have to take responsibility for those decisions. And I understand that you relocate it. It's no longer a problem for you. So when people's businesses are trying to prosper, it's always unfortunate when it's an African-American business. That's always viewed as a problem. In Long Beach. This has been constant. We have to shut it down. We have to stop. People like myself don't normally get in a political situation. But when it when you don't speak. This is when problems and things persist. I had to say something tonight, and I'm glad I did.
Speaker 1: Thank you. What? 1/2. Councilmember Ringa and then I have a couple of council members that won't make it. They'll want to comment.
Speaker 8: First of all, I want to thank everybody who came down tonight to speak on both sides of the issue. Just as a reminder that this tonight was not a hearing. So a lot of the testimony that you provided and I can't go into the record there is going to be a should this item move to a planning commission. That would be the opportunity for everyone to come in and testify and give your opinions and your viewpoints and whatever evidence you have on this issue. So tonight, it's an administrative procedure that we have to conduct to determine that the planning committee will be the hearing officer. They will hear all the evidence. They will hear the staff report more at length with everything that has been out, that appeared even in the paper. And then at that point, all the the evidence can be presented and then the planning commission will make its decision. The decision is not here tonight. We are simply putting it to the Planning Commission for a hearing, and they will schedule it and have the hearing at some future date. So I strongly encourage you, those who spoke tonight to contact our planning, our our Development Services Bureau man, our bureau bureau department head to get a schedule as to where the Planning Commission will meet again so that you are notified and you can attend that planning commission meeting to again provide your testimony. So I want to thank you for being here tonight. Unfortunately, we can't accept all your testimony for a hearing because this is not a hearing. This is simply to refer it over to the Planning Commission for a hearing on some future date. But again, thank you for being here.
Speaker 1: Thank you. I'm going to have a couple of speakers from the council. And just as a reminder, there's a motion by Councilmember Turanga to send this to the Planning Commission for a hearing. Councilwoman Gonzales.
Speaker 4: Yes, I have a question. Is justice is a part of process. I understand, you know, the conditions were not met from what it states and then the police calls for.
Speaker 2: Service were high.
Speaker 4: But what was the defining moment for us to be able to refer it over to the Planning Commission? I'm just trying to.
Speaker 2: Clarify that there was continued issues with their entertainment permit and continued issues with their inability to comply with the voluntary conditions of the business license combined with ongoing issues with the conditional use permit. So combined, those triggered us to consider this a potential nuisance property and the Planning Commission would have the hearing of the CFP. At that point we investigated whether there were other issues related to the business license because those tend to if there's tends to issue be an issue on the land use side, there also tends to be an issue on the business license side and discovered that there were significant issues related to the lack of an entertainment permit and the continued entertainment that was going on. Okay.
Speaker 4: Great. Thank you very much.
Speaker 1: Camera. Go to Vice. Vice Mayor Richardson, who is the second? Let him make some comments.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So I just want to. A couple of things I want to say, thanks to Councilmember Durango. First, for walking us through very clearly what the next steps are in this process. And my own my thoughts here that are in here, and I'm not familiar with with, you know, this bar or that surrounding neighborhood. And that's why I believe, you know, I support the fact we have districts and you have an elected representative who who's really task of figuring out the balance between neighborhood, neighborhood needs and business interests. And and so you are the local expert I'm going to defer to on this. But I will say, you know, there a threshold has clearly been crossed. And I want to see that everyone can achieve their dreams. So a process has begun. I encourage you all to engage that process, both the residents and the community, because we've actually never done this process before. We've never revoked a copy in the city's history. So this is the first time we've done this, you know, as a city. And I and I encourage it. We're all learning here. So I want you all to kind of go through this process and let's see what happens. But ultimately, you know, this is really about making sure there's a balance between neighborhood interests and community needs. And and frankly, when businesses make it easy for the city, businesses make it easy for the city council when they work out a lot of this stuff before it even gets here, frankly. So so those are my comments. And again, Councilmember Ranga, I'll be somewhat supportive of your motion.
Speaker 1: Councilwoman Mungo.
Speaker 2: For development services. What was the date of the original initiation and notice to the bar owner related to the first violation? And how long does the bar owner get to correct the issues? Madam Councilwoman, I don't have that information with me. There were some previous meetings that did occur between business license, police special events and development services with the property owner. Excuse me, the business owner. I don't have the specific information on the first time it was it occurred. But then we did send a formal letter announcing the potential conditions, violations in June of this year and asked them to immediately comply with those conditions. And we have not heard a response from them to date. So typically we give a first meeting and longer than 60 days before it comes to this body. Typically, we have many more interactions. And do you give property owners and business owners the opportunity to come into compliance when there are continuing issues, though, we continue to move towards a process of revocation but are absolutely willing to continue those discussions up until the point of a hearing. So if within the last 60 to 90 days they had become in compliance, you would not be recommending this. Go to the Planning Commission today. That is correct on the CFP, but there are also business license issues as well. So we would have to look at that as well and. I would say that assuming that all of the land use conditions under the cap come into compliance, there would need to be continued compliance and not relapses because those those also have a tendency to occur as well. What is the process look like? If this body did not vote to move this to the planning commission, what would be the next steps? So the CFP revocation would still go to the Planning Commission. They see their business license revocation, if it were to proceed, would actually occur at this body and not at the Planning Commission. So this is actually giving an opportunity for a consolidated, more streamlined process for both those in favor of and those against it. Yes, ma'am. Okay. That makes a lot of sense. And I think that that is a good recommendation for actually both sides, that they wouldn't be leverage to come to two bodies to make their cases. So I'll be supporting this motion.
Speaker 1: Councilman Andrews?
Speaker 0: Yes. Thank you, Mayor. First of all, I'd like to thank everyone who's coming out tonight to really support Mico and Amber, because the fact that maybe I should have to, you know, even withdraw from this, because the fact that I've known Michael ever since she was a little child, I know the father. I know the whole family. And the biggest part about all of this is what I'm hearing is that here's the young lady and her group is trying to start a business and make her life better. And I think that's what all the American dream is, is to try to open up a business or get yourself a home and do something is right for you and your family. And what I'm hearing tonight is that, you know, seems like the two sides, you know, the the landowners and the the individuals, the business owner. And I think somehow along the way, I know Michael has done everything she could to try to keep these things in order. What happens outside? I've been there many, many times. This is where I go when I get off from work in the evening, and I've never seen any problems in that place. Now, the other things that happened, I'm not there, you know, 24 seven, but when it's open, I'm there. And I've been there many, many times and I've enjoyed being there. And I think it's a safe haven for many, many people, and especially people of color, a place to go and sit down and enjoy themselves and really, you know, do something that we haven't had a chance to do. I've been here for 70 years, and I know that we've only had three bars of people of color. And most of them, you know, like you say, they have their problems here and there, but nothing like some of the problems I've seen and heard of in the city of Long Beach. Michael, I know you know what you have to do in order to keep yourself in compliance with what they're telling you to do. That has to be done. You know what? We know it. I would just hope that you and your your community can get together and really sit down and try to solve this problem because you have a great business. This business shouldn't have to be closed because of the outside elements that's causing the problems. It's not your business. It's that outside elements. And I know the people who live in that district there. They should understand that, you know, we have problems all over. I would just hope that this would be able to be resolved somehow before we get to the point of telling that you really have to close your business. I would hate to see that happen, and I'm hoping that everything works out. And with that, I just hope things work out. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Council member Pearce.
Speaker 10: Thank you, Mayor. I also want to thank everybody for coming out today. It's moments like these when when we want to support minority owned businesses as much as possible, especially women owning businesses. And so I want to follow suit with Councilmember D and just urge that in between now and the time that we move forward, that there's some community dialog between you guys and the residents of folks who haven't talked to the owner, you know, trying to sit down and figure out where we're at and how we can get into compliance quickly and be good neighbors together. And it's these moments that are really tough, that really take kind of putting some of our pride and some of our assumptions aside so that we can figure this stuff out. I did have a question when will this be going to the Planning Commission? Should we vote to move this?
Speaker 2: We have not yet scheduled a hearing date and it will be sometime in the next couple of months. Okay. Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you. But just what? Just a pressure thing there kills me.
Speaker 0: If.
Speaker 1: You're. There you go. Okay, Councilman.
Speaker 0: I just have a question. Mrs. Wodak, if it go once it goes to the planning committee, how long do they have in order to, you know, make a decision? Or do they make a decision? And does it come back to us for us to make a decision.
Speaker 2: On the CFP revocation, the planning commission would be the deciding factor. Their decision could be appealed to the City Council on the Business License revocation. I believe that is also the case. Charlie. Excuse me. City and Mr. City, attorney.
Speaker 0: That is correct. It could be appealed back to the city council. Also the decision of the hearing commissioner then could be decided in front of this body. So in other words. So in other words, during that time, they would have a chance to really get together and take a lot of.
Speaker 2: These notes or that would really need to happen before the hearing.
Speaker 0: Yes. Yes.
Speaker 2: Before the compliance needs to be before the hearing and it needs to be absolutely consistent.
Speaker 0: Yes. Michael, where are you? You understand that? Thank you. Yes. Thank you very much. Yes.
Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you. And just to clarify that point, I think it's important for everyone that's here. I know the neighborhood folks here, the owners of the bar and patrons. So the process is if this goes to the planning commission on both the license and the Cup issue, but a planning commission makes a decision and if they choose on that decision, what they decide on can both be appealed and it will end up back at the council anyways. Is that correct?
Speaker 2: It could be, yes. Okay.
Speaker 1: So just to. So essentially it goes planning commission. If the planning commission makes a decision one way or another, I'm assuming.
Speaker 2: That is correct.
Speaker 1: So regardless of the of of the vote of the Planning Commission, whether it's one way or another, it will come it can come back to the city council if it's appealed. So there's two steps to that. I just want make sure everyone's aware of the process so that everyone understands that process. Councilman, your.
Speaker 8: One last comment based on what I've heard so far. There is a window that we have between now and the date that it's scheduled to go to the Planning Commission. I want to offer my office to mediate a meeting between Nico's and the community to come together so that we could start making some progress on this. Because the last thing we want to do is to break anybody's heart, break anybody's dreams, what they want. And I'm sure that the D.A. is is wants to make sure she has hers. But we also have a neighborhood that wants to live in peace. So I think that if we could do this between now and a planning commission and come up to a mediation, that would be wonderful. Otherwise, the process will continue because we've already set this in motion. So I ask again that my colleagues support the motion to go to the Planning Commission, but I want to also emphasize that between now and then that I hope we can get together and come up to a solution that would be amenable to everyone.
Speaker 1: Okay. There's a there's a motion in a second to send the this issue to a planning commission hearing, which is the first step in this type of process. And so with that, members, please go ahead and cast their votes.
Speaker 2: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Okay. The council has voted. We're going to we're moving on to the next item. We're actually, I believe let's see, it's seven, which we're going into the budget hearing now because we had a time certain for that. So we'll go into the budget hearing and then when we come out of the budget hearing, we'll go back to the regular agenda. Thank you. And we're just going to take just a one minute recess so that we can get set up for the budget hearing. And we'll be right back. You guys.
Speaker 0: I know. I know what I. And I'm like, Yeah, I don't think I want to. We don't. I would like to tell them that. Oh, yeah. Like a little boy. Okay. I mean. So a presentation that do. Yes. Education.
Speaker 7: Something.
Speaker 1: We're going to go ahead and start the council meeting the hearing again. Can I please get a roll call?
Speaker 2: Councilwoman Gonzalez. Councilmember Pierce. Councilman Price. Councilmember Surinam.
Speaker 0: Councilwoman Mango.
Speaker 2: Councilman Andrews. Councilmember Muranga. Councilman Austin. Vice Mayor Richardson. Mayor Garcia.
Speaker 1: I'm here. Thank you. We're going to go right into the budget hearing for fiscal year 2017. So I want to turn this over to Mr. West. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to appoint Planning Commission as the Hearing Officer, in accordance with Long Beach Municipal Code 2.93.050, for the purpose of conducting a revocation hearing for the revocation of a business license issued to Damitresse Yancey, dba Miko’s Sports Lounge, and for the commercial industrial business license issued to the Ronald L. and Peggy C. Mackey Trust for the operation of a business located at 710 West Willow Street, as well as a hearing on the revocation of the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for 710 West Willow Street based upon violations of the Conditions of Approval associated with the CUP pursuant to Long Beach Municipal Code 21.21.601. (District 7) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_08092016_16-0718 | Speaker 2: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Okay, thank you. And next item is 20 I'm sorry, 12.
Speaker 2: Communication from Councilmember Supernova Councilwoman Gonzalez, Councilmember Pearce and Councilwoman Price. Recommendation to request that the city manager and airport director make the FISA feasibility study publicly available at least 15 days before scheduling any city council meeting to discuss the study and provide sufficient time before the scheduled City Council meeting to conduct a fourth Council District community meeting
Speaker 1: . Thank you, Councilmember Superdome.
Speaker 12: Thank you. And I'd like to thank my colleagues. Price piercing. GONZALES Sounds like a law firm for supporting me, and I think it's pretty self explanatory, pretty straightforward. We'd like 15 days to examine the study when it comes back. The one part that I do need to clarify is the the item states that we want to make time for a fourth Council district meeting. And that meeting will be, for lack of a better term, city wide. Everyone will be invited, but technically we have to label it a fourth district meeting. So I think that's the only issues I have here. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Councilwoman Pryce coming to the second year.
Speaker 4: I support Councilman Super nine. I think public input is very important in this process and this should be a data driven decisions. So I thank you for bringing the item and asking me to sign on.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 2: I think Councilmember Rubinoff for clarifying that it's still a citywide meeting. I think that the fourth district is a good central location. I know we've done cross marketing for things in the past, and I think that the 15 day minimum is sufficient. But I believe that I'm sorry, is is a good number to put in a in a council item. However, I believe in discussions with the city manager over the last several months. The planned period is actually significantly longer. Is that correct?
Speaker 0: The plan is not to bring it to the council for at least 15 days. We certainly plan to bring this to the Airport Advisory Commission and also the Economic Development Commission before it gets to the council. So it will be longer than 15 days, but we'll try to do it as soon as possible.
Speaker 2: So it's my understanding from previous discussions that the report period for the consultant whose name escapes me at the moment, was originally going to be concluding, was it September 30th?
Speaker 0: I don't recall what when it was supposed to be completed, but the firm's name is Jacobs. Thank you. And they'll be bringing this in sometime in the the first ten days of first week or two of September.
Speaker 2: And so through that, then there would be several meetings, including the community meetings in the fourth District.
Speaker 0: We'll have the fourth District meeting and any other community meeting that a council district decides to have as well. And then but of course, we definitely are going to have the Jacobs Company be at the Airport Advisory Board Commission and also the Economic Development Commission before it gets the council.
Speaker 2: And are those dates of the potential airport advisory commission and the potential Economic Development Commission meetings known to us? Or when they are known, will they be given to us in a TFF?
Speaker 0: Yes, they're not known at this time. But Will, as soon as we get an idea on the date that we're going to receive the study, we'll schedule those meetings immediately and let the council know.
Speaker 2: Wonderful. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 3: Thank you. I'll be brief. I think this is an excellent item. I want to thank Councilmember Supernova for bringing it forward. When we had the community meetings prior to the the consultants actually initiating the study. It was it was we heard loud and clear from the community that this is something that they wanted. And so to actually effectuate it here at the City Council on an agenda item I think is great. My only concern is that reading this item and those in the public looking at this would walk away from this thinking that that the only community meeting is going to be in the fourth District. And I can tell you that that probably won't be the case. There will be plenty of opportunity for community input. I know I have a lot of residents in my district who are very, very who are paying close attention to this item as well. And so, yes, the eighth District, we will have a community meeting and we will seek the resources and input from city staff as well as the engineers to explain the study. And. My my my my question also is a, would this be considered or is community meeting be considered a study session? And maybe you can answer that question, Mr. City Manager.
Speaker 0: No, I would. We would talk to the city attorney, of course, but I just envision this as community meetings to. Take the report out on the road with our airport directors and and get input from the community before it comes to the city council.
Speaker 3: And you mentioned that it would actually go to the Airport Advisory Commission, would they would there will be to make a recommendation or or to just the receiving report filed a report.
Speaker 0: That they would do more than receive. They would receive and file. But also we would take the comments from the from that advisory board and bring those to the council as well as from the Economic Development Commission. So they're not specifically making a recommendation per se or be asked to make a recommendation, but we're certainly going to ask them to review it, listen to the comments from the audience or the public, and then provide any feedback that they want that will relate to the city council.
Speaker 3: Well, I do appreciate the fact that we are looking to proceed with caution and involve our advisory group groups, our commissions in the process. There's no need to rush. I don't think it's in the interest of the city to do that. Anyway, I've said that all along, and so to have a process that engages our residents is a good thing. And so I'll be in support of this on.
Speaker 1: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Councilmember Pearce. Computer.
Speaker 2: Did you guys make it on there? Yeah.
Speaker 10: Thank you, guys. I just wanted to thank Councilmember Sabrina for asking me to sign on and thank all the council members who have been a part of the process over the last 18 months. Obviously, the airport is a critical city asset in making sure that residents from throughout the city have an opportunity to engage in this conversation . It's important. And so we'll definitely come to your guys meetings and and utilize the meetings that are already in place. But just wanted to say thank you for the time to have this important discussion.
Speaker 1: Concern for Superyacht.
Speaker 12: Yeah. Just just one point of clarification. While the agenda item reads a fourth district meeting geographically that that was not my intention. We could certainly go back to the gas department and hold the meeting there for efficiency if we wanted to hold just one meeting. The other point and Councilwoman Mongeau just mentioned it to me about let's look at this calendar now because I wanted specifically a short time frame so we don't get into the holiday season. So, Mr. West, can you give us can we look at this in terms of the item coming back and then going to two different or a commission and a committee? And really, what data are we looking at here for this thing to come back to council?
Speaker 0: I don't know. I'm I'm interested to hear what you're saying. Your intent is to bring it back. Sooner than later. We can certainly have special meetings of the Airport Advisory Commission or Economic Development Commission, so we don't have to wait on the schedule. We create something special if their meeting just didn't line up within, you know, two or two weeks of their report coming out.
Speaker 12: Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Councilman Mungo.
Speaker 2: Thank you. I just wanted to ensure that. I think that many of us are planning to be with the community on November 8th, Election Day. While it has not yet come before this board. I had heard rustling in the community that we might cancel the council meeting on that night, so I would hope we would not plan to bring it back where the community would have to choose between celebrating their presidential candidate or attending and giving good feedback. So that was just another component of this. But I know that you'll make a good decision. I know there's lots of meetings that need to happen sometime between when the report comes back, hopefully on time, September 30th. And I think the most important component is enough time for community input. And I think that this item addresses that with the minimum amount, but I think that very definitely it could be longer. So thank you for that.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Any public comment on this item saying nonmembers, please cast your votes. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request that City Manager and Airport Director make the Federal Inspection Service (FIS) Feasibility Study publicly available and posted on relevant City websites at least 15 days before scheduling any City Council meeting to discuss the Study; and further provide sufficient time before the scheduled City Council meeting to conduct a Fourth Council District community meeting for the purpose of receiving public input on the Study and the proposed FIS. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_08092016_16-0719 | Speaker 2: Motion carries came.
Speaker 1: Back to item 13.
Speaker 2: Communication from Councilwoman Gonzalez, Councilmember Supernormal. Councilwoman Mongo and Councilman Andrew's recommendation to request the city manager to create a comprehensive plan to recruit and include Long Beach businesses in all contracts and purchasing agreements.
Speaker 1: Councilwoman Gonzales.
Speaker 4: Yes, thank you. I want to first thank my colleagues for joining me on this item. Councilmember Super Councilwoman Mongo and Councilmember Andrews, I think this first came about for a couple of different reasons. You know, Long Beach. First, I remember we put together the project labor agreement and we asked for a certain percentage of local hiring for our residents. And we also did the first source agreement that was also any city dollars that went to projects. We wanted to ensure local hire was important in.
Speaker 2: That as well.
Speaker 4: Now we're looking at what I'm intending to do with this item, is to research other policies and ordinances that other cities have done in relative to businesses.
Speaker 2: So as we've done with.
Speaker 4: Local hiring, just to ensure that we're also allowing local businesses to have the first chance at doing city work in the city with the city they love and have invested in. It'll strengthen our Long Beach economy and hopefully we'll also get local jobs as well. With this. So I'm hoping that we can get support in looking at these different cities. The one that I have liked and I think that they have a lot of metrics in as well as Pasadena. They have quantified their success by measuring measuring local procurement dollars and, of course, local jobs. I was also happy to see that the you know, about a couple of weeks ago, we were able to include three Long Beach businesses in one of the the projects and contracts that we had put out for public works. And so I want to thank our city staff for really being committed to that and just listening to, you know, the things that I had been saying and then implementing that. So I appreciate it and thank you very much.
Speaker 1: Thank you.
Speaker 2: Councilwoman Mongo has a business advocate who spent much of our business advocacy meetings over the last eight months working on a business's first component of the county of Los Angeles. I think this is the right time where the city of Pasadena is. Plan the county's plan, Burbank's plan. All the different local plans have been reviewed. And a lot of key things stand out to me as as priorities, certain things that small businesses need when dealing with large governments. And I do mean dealing with we work with constituents, but sometimes we deal with government. Right. This city of Long Beach is a more business friendly city. However, governments as a whole get a reputation for being hard to work with and to be slow at paying their bills. And so one of the main things that when we went out into the communities of L.A. County and asked businesses, why don't you do business with the county? Why don't you bid? They say the same thing about their local city government, which is it's very hard and confusing. The requirements for insurance are high and it takes a long time to get paid. I don't have that kind of cash flow. So specifically, I'd like us to look into quick pay price, preference and support for onboarding our new businesses to become partners. Furthermore, incentive criteria should probably include if the business is headquartered in Long Beach, if their main location providing the service or product is in Long Beach, and then specifically, a lot of our Long Beach businesses are great, but they're on the border of our city. And I'm council district along with my colleague Vice Mayor Richardson, where a lot of our our border city businesses recruit, but they don't necessarily only recruit Long Beach residents. And I think we should give a reward to those who employ our residents, because those are the people who we are looking to bring up and support and take care of. And so I would like to look at we do a annual reporting on your business license of how many employees you have. I think that categorizing how many of your employees are Long Beach residents versus how many total employees is is a big deal, too. And I think that increasing those percentages over time that perhaps we could put in some of those incentives again. So I think this pairs up nicely with the prior item we did about a year ago related to putting new businesses into the city. A lot of those new businesses, as they've spurred up, have even chosen not to take the refund of the business license because they're very happy, even though it's a one page, super simple plan, they're just super excited to be a local new business and they're focused on their business and less on the paperwork. So whatever we can do to support that, I think this is a fantastic start in the right direction. And I know that as business friendly as we are, we have to keep reminding people how much we've changed from 20 years ago and how much we're not the same as some of the other governments in the area because we are different. We are Long Beach, so come up in a business here.
Speaker 1: Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 10: Yes. I just wanted to thank everybody that put this on. And thank you, Councilmember Gonzalez. The comments that Councilmember Mongo made definitely support any local hire that we could do on this. It's pretty interesting to look at some of the multiplier effects that happen whenever we employ local residents, whenever we make sure that we're contracting out with local businesses. And so as much as we could do. Looking at some of the multiplier effect numbers, whenever we're talking about how how many local businesses that we're trying to bring in would be really helpful. But yeah, just really thankful for this item. Good job.
Speaker 1: Councilman Price.
Speaker 4: I want to echo the positive comments. I think this is a fantastic item. I commend my colleagues for bringing this forward. I do think it's very, very important to promote and encourage growth of Long Beach owned businesses while at the same time making sure that the companies that are selected are those that can provide the best quality product for our residents. And I think that that balance can be had if we give a more stringent eye to recruiting local businesses for projects. So thank you for bringing this forward. And I think this is just a fantastic item things.
Speaker 1: Councilwoman Gonzales.
Speaker 4: Yes. And I just wanted to clarify, and I think my council colleagues for their support. You know, I had mentioned in here that it will review.
Speaker 2: Current request for the request for proposal process preference points for.
Speaker 4: Businesses located in the city of Long Beach.
Speaker 2: Preference points for businesses who are certified California small businesses as well. So I just wanted to make sure that we.
Speaker 4: Are clear on that. But thank you all for the wonderful comments and I hope we can proceed. And I've asked for this to come back in 120 days.
Speaker 1: Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 3: Just want to chime in and say congratulations. Good job on this is an easy, easy item for me to support. I would just say, you know, the more we can recycle our dollars in Long Beach, the better. You know, when people have an incentive to move their their headquarters here or if they're, you know, have an incentive to hire more people and do those things, it really has a multiplier effect in our whole community. So thanks for continuing this focus. And I do want to acknowledge you're absolutely right. Play was a focus on local Long Beach. First was a focus on local and this continues that thread so so thank you for couching those together so that the community does see this is yet another thing the city council's leading on to keep things local. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Local.
Speaker 0: Linus, I want to call you from now on.
Speaker 1: It's better than disaster. Made me major disaster. Whatever that was. Listen, I actually love this I love this item. So thank you, Councilwoman Gonzales, for this. Can you can we can you also, Pat? So when the council passed its local point preference program for for non professional services. And correct me if I'm wrong here. This was I know a few years ago that we did do some kind of point preference program that's different than this, because this I think this is also speaking to professional services in all types of services. Can we review if that had actually any effect on local hire? The last the last time that the council passed something similar to this, by the way, that was much less in scope. And I think what this is being proposed. But can we look at that? I don't know if it's possible to get that data or not, but it'd just be interesting to see if that actually had an impact of hiring more Long Beach folks.
Speaker 0: Sure.
Speaker 1: Okay. Thanks. Any public comment on this? Great Castro votes.
Speaker 2: Motion carries an. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Manager to create a comprehensive plan to recruit and include Long Beach businesses in all contracts and purchasing agreements. This should include but not be limited to; a review of current Request for Proposal process, preference points for businesses located in the City of Long Beach, preference points for businesses who are certified California Small Businesses, small/micro businesses, etc. Examples of existing programs throughout California include the "Pasadena First Buy Local" program, the City of Los Angeles "Business Inclusion Program - Local Business Preference", and the City of Oakland's Local & Small Local Business Certification Program.
This program should be brought back to the City Council for review in 120 days. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_08092016_16-0721 | Speaker 1: 15.
Speaker 2: Report from City Clerk Recommendation to receive and file the City Clerk's Debrief Report on the 2016 City of Long Beach Municipal Election Citywide.
Speaker 1: Kim. Adam Quirk.
Speaker 2: Good evening, mayor and council members before you as a debrief report on the 2016 City of Long Beach municipal elections. The report highlights administrative outcomes of both the primary and general elections, including the election administration, polling place. Consolidation and recruitment. Candidate Processing. Poll worker recruitment and training. Vote by mail services. Early voting. Voter education and outreach. Online services. Election Day. Operations. Canvass of returns and Voter Turnout. For fiscal year 2016, the Office of the City Clerk was budgeted 2.1 million to conduct the primary nominating and general municipal elections. Of the 2.1 million, we estimated 1.2 million for the primary election and 900,000 for the general municipal. The actual cost of the April 12th primary election was approximately $1 million, resulting in a cost savings of approximately $189,000, which will be used to cover the cost of the general municipal election should it exceed the original budgeted amount. We are awaiting the billing from the Los Angeles County Registrar Recorder Clerk's Office. So the actual cost of the general runoff election is not available at this time. Approval of the suggested action at this time would allow the City of Long Beach to begin planning and preparation for future municipal elections. This concludes my staff report. I'm available to answer any questions.
Speaker 1: Councilwoman Pierce.
Speaker 10: Thank you and thank you very much for the report and the conversation we had just kind of going over how the elections went both in April and June. I think it's great that we were able to consolidate and see that instead of a 14 or 25% turnout, we were able to reach a 40% turnout citywide, which is fantastic. Really looking forward to working with you in November and working to see how we can continue to increase those numbers while saving our city dollars. Yeah. I'll leave it at that. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzales.
Speaker 4: Just want to say thanks as well. I know it's a big feat to be able to take on all of this. And so you do a great job. And so it was great working with you on the Elections Oversight Committee.
Speaker 2: I pass it on to you now. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. And I just wanted to thank all the hardworking members of the city clerk department. I honestly I don't remember the last time Long Beach had that high of a voter turnout in any election. And I was trying to look and I actually couldn't find it. And so maybe you guys can can can look through the records, but to go and have that level of voter participation. Obviously thank you to you, but also to the public, because they went out and voted and they were engaged, I think to at least to me, there is there is no question that the consolidation of not having to do two separate ballots at two different tables had an impact on people's ability to go through the process. I'll also say that because this was the first time that we did this, it was new for a lot of people. So there were some there were obviously some challenges as far as not having immediate direct access to the clerk, because obviously it's through the county. I think you and I spoke about. I really missed the fact that we used to stamp the the ballot, which I know you've mentioned that that's not possibly something that we could do and add. So I just I would ask you and your team to see how look at ways with the election, with the new elections oversight committee and how we could make the process even better for the next time. That would bring some of the kind of Long Beach familiarity of the process, the pre consolidation, like the stamps and things that people like, but continue on that, you know, amazing voter turnout. We've got to keep that going. That that's one of the best voter turnouts that anyone had like, you know, locally. So I think that's really I was rereading the Press Telegram Press Telegram editorial about how how terrible it was the last time. And so it's nice to see the change. So with that, any public comment for this item? All right. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 0: Guess.
Speaker 2: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next item, please. I believe it's 17. We did 16. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to receive and file the City Clerk's debrief report on the 2016 City of Long Beach Municipal Elections. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_08092016_16-0727 | Speaker 2: Item 21 carries report from Long Beach Gas and Oil and Financial Management Recommendation to adopt a resolution authorizing the city manager to execute a contract with Coble. Pipeline Services for furnishing and delivering pipeline stopper fittings and perform tapping and stopping services for natural gas pipelines greater than 12 inches in diameter without advertising for bids in an annual amount not to exceed 400,000 citywide.
Speaker 1: There's a motion in a second. Okay. Is there any public comment seen on Councilmember Pearce?
Speaker 10: Yes. I just had one question. I'm not putting this out for a bit. How are we sure that this is, in fact, the only company that does this and forgive me for being the new guy. Just ask.
Speaker 0: Bob.
Speaker 6: Dylan, director of.
Speaker 0: Gas and Oil. Answer that.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Sure.
Speaker 1: These services are well known in the Southern California area.
Speaker 0: There are only four companies that perform this type of activity.
Speaker 1: As are aging pipelines.
Speaker 0: We replace more and more of them.
Speaker 1: There are fewer or fewer of these companies. One resides in the Bay Area. The other two do not perform the operations in the manner that the city approves of. So that leaves us with just.
Speaker 0: One company to perform those services. Okay.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 1: There's a motion and a second. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 2: Councilmember Price. The motion carries. | Resolution | Recommendation to adopt resolution authorizing City Manager to execute a contract with Koppl Pipeline Services, Inc., of Montebello, CA, for furnishing and delivering pipeline stopper fittings and perform tapping and stopping services for natural gas pipelines greater than 12 inches in diameter without advertising for bids, in an annual amount not to exceed $400,000, for a period of two years, with the option to renew for two additional one-year periods, at the discretion of the City Manager. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_08022016_16-0687 | Speaker 0: I'm taking two items. First, which is item 12 and 24, and then we'll move on to the regular agenda, item 12. Madam Clerk.
Speaker 2: Communication for me or Garcia recommendation to receive and approve appointments to the transactions and use tax Citizen's Advisory Committee.
Speaker 0: Thank you. In front of you, you have five appointments to our measure a citizen's oversight committee. I particularly want to thank Councilmember Darrell Supernova. I want to thank Councilwoman Stacy Mongeau, who led efforts. I know that Councilwoman Pryce and others also are very supportive of this, but particularly to Darrell and and to Stacy. Thank you for for leading efforts in getting us moving this forward. I also want to thank the five members. I think we have an All-Star group of people, many of whom were on vacation. But I do see Judy Ross, who's who who was here in the audience or maybe one or two others in the audience, or they're on their way. But I want to go ahead and mention a little bit about them. We have a Jane Netherton who, as we know, has been a banker in Long Beach for over 25 years and formerly the CEO of International Citibank and who's been involved on the Long Beach State Foundation in a variety of organizations. And she brings incredible decades of experience in finance. We have Judi Ross, who is here, who's a former executive director of the Long Beach nonprofit Partnership. She also has worked for the United Way and a variety of other organizations, and she's been involved in every possible community group you could think of across the city of Long Beach . And she is here, and we're very thankful for her service. We also have Steven Neal, who currently serves as a civic engagement advocate at Molina Health Care. Steve is a North Long Beach resident and formerly a council member on this body, and he's been involved in the Pacific Gateway Investment Board in a variety of programs across the city. We have Mary Stevens. Mary is the vice president of finance and administration at Cal State Long Beach, where she manages the entire finance and real estate portfolio. She's also been the vice president of business and finance at Cal State. Stanislaus is involved, is on the board of Adobe and again, very active and is a downtown Long Beach resident. And finally, we have Joel Yuhas, and Joel is the CEO and chief executive at St Mary Medical Center here in Long Beach. He was the CEO before. They're managing a variety of issues, including budgets and finance. And he serves on the board of the Chamber of Commerce, as well as the Hospital Association of California. And they live in East Long Beach and are from Long Beach as well. Him and his partner. And so I want to congratulate all five members. I see. Judy, if someone else is here that I didn't see. Let me know. Oh, and I see Steve over there. Thank you. Thank you, Steve, for being here. And with that, I'd like a motion any second, please. I just need. I just need a second. It was Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 8: Just wanted to chime in and say how proud I am that we are making up this commitment to our residents by putting forth a tremendous committee. When I saw this list of names, I couldn't be more proud. You've got folks representing nonprofit sector, business sector, former government leaders. And I do want to take a moment just to acknowledge my friend Steve Neal, who is in the audience, who's being appointed tonight. And this is tremendous, as you know. This is you know, I know that he's going to do a good job. Let's just say I know the guy. And and so those are my those are my comments. But I think this is a tremendous committee. So so, Mayor Garcia, good job on making these appointments. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 2: I'm just so excited that this came to fruition. I know it just started as a dialog and behind the scenes of what we could do to ensure that taxpayers know that we're going to be held accountable. And this oversight committee is an exemplary group of individuals that I'm proud to know and support, and I look forward to hearing from them throughout the next several years. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Any public comment on this? Please come forward.
Speaker 6: Oh. Good afternoon. Warmed Lisowski Long Beach resident. I was reading the Grozny Gazette the other day and Henry Salts Graves's article. He wrote that such appointments are seldom challenged. Well, I suppose that he must mean today, because I'm here to challenge these appointments. As a Long Beach resident and taxpayer, I specifically object to each and every one of these appointees. Why? Because while each of these five people seem like fine, upstanding citizens, they are not the people being affected by measure sales tax. Let's look at their job titles and roles. Council Member. Community Lobbyist. Chairperson of the Board. CEO of a National Bank. University Vice President, Mr. Mayor. And Council Members. CEOs and presidents are not affected by measure sales tax increase. The poor and working people are most affected. And Mr. Mayor, you have neglected to put a single member who is a poverty advocate, a poor children's advocate, not one representative of the citizens and the residents most affected by the sales tax increase. I find this arrogance indicative of your overall attitude towards the sales tax increase and the business as usual attitude of this mayor in this council. The measure. A sales tax is the most regressive type of tax. Let me cite the Internal Revenue Service website. Understanding taxes for students quote. How does a regressive tax impact lower income groups? Question A regressive tax takes a larger share of income from low income groups than from high income groups. A regressive tax may at first appear to be a fair way of taxing citizens because everyone, regardless of income level, pays the same dollar amount. By taking a closer look. It's easy to see that such a tax causes lower income people to pay a larger share of their income than wealthier people pay. So, Mr. Mayor, even according to the IRS, the measure, a sales tax that you so proudly trumpeted is a penalty on the poorest Long Beach residents and children. So when those kids are hungry, you can thank yourself for making it just a little bit harder for their parents to put food on the table. That's why I object to all these appointments.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. And again, I want to thank the five. Larry, if you're going to be coming down, please. Anybody else, please? Okay, Mr. Goodyear. Good.
Speaker 1: Very good. Quick as the address. Unfortunately, the previous speaker just doesn't seem to get it. The people you spoke of. Don't contribute money. To Mr. Garcia. That's the only way you can catch their attention. All right. If you don't give them money, it's paid for by. All right. He could care less about the people that you referred to. All right. We need to understand that.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Any of their public comment? Seeing none again, Judy. Steve, thank you. And I know both of you personally are here. Long time advocates for the poor and those in poverty. So I want to thank you both for your work in that area. There's a motion and a second. Members, please cast your votes.
Speaker 2: Motion carries. | Appointment | Recommendation to receive and approve appointments to the Transactions and Use Tax Citizens' Advisory Committee. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_08022016_16-0701 | Speaker 2: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. We're going to go and take item 24, please.
Speaker 2: Communication from City Attorney Recommendation two one received and filed a report from the City Manager regarding the potential impacts of the voter petition measure to adopt a resolution calling for the placement of the Voter Petition Initiative measure on the ballot. Three Adopt a resolution providing for the filing of primary and rebuttal arguments relating to the voter petition measure. Four Adopt a resolution calling for the placement of a tax measure on the ballot to amend and update the city's existing marijuana taxes. This will require a unanimous vote of the City Council pursuant to Proposition to 18. Five. Adopt a resolution providing for the filing of primary and rebuttal arguments relating to the city tax measure on the ballot to amend and update the city's existing marijuana taxes. Six. Adopt a resolution requesting the consolidation of a citywide special municipal election with a statewide general election on November 8th, 2016 and seven. Adopt a resolution requesting the Board of Supervisors of the County of Los Angeles provide specified services to the City of Long Beach relating to the November 8th, 2016 election.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And I know, Vice Mayor, before I call you up, I think there's going to be a staff presentation by Mr. Parkin who's going to kind of go over some some of the items here and we'll turn it over to to Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 9: Thank you, Mayor. Members of the council before you this evening are a number of article, a number of items that we are going to be asking or were asked to prepare and bring back to you for your consideration. The first is is a report, and obviously the staff could city management could give a report on the proposed impacts of the Citizen Voter Initiative. The second item calls for and places the Voter Initiative on the ballot for November 8th of 2016. The third item requests argument ballot argument writers for and against the Citizen Initiative. The fourth item was requested by the City Council for the City Attorney to return with a placement of a tax measure on the ballot. The fifth item would call for the valid argument writers for and against that tax measure. The sixth asks the County Board of Supervisors to consolidate our election, our special municipal election with the statewide general election, and the seventh item request that the County Board of Supervisors provide specific services and includes our reimbursement to the county for those services for that election item. At that time, that concludes my report and staff is available to talk about the first item, which is the initiative petition if there's a desire by the body.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Before I turn this over to Vice Mayor Richardson, just as a as a reminder, I know that we we discussed this last week, and we have a series of motions to make. We'll take public comment as one which the city attorney said we're able to do. But then we've got to go through a series of motions, one of which is to actually needs a unanimous vote of the council to put the tax measure on the on the ballot. So we want to make sure that that's very clear.
Speaker 9: Thank you. She's correct, Mayor. That is the third item. And I would point out that the third item that the mayor just mentioned did have a revision that was just emailed to you. It was a change to the language of the actual ballot question that will be placed on the ballot. The fourth item was also I'm sorry. The third item was a call that was a change for the citizens initiative. We had a typo on there where we called it the City Initiative and it was the citizens, the Kelton measure. So we corrected that. The fourth item was an oversight, or we had a change in the what was presented to you as one of the drafts of the questions, and we corrected that. So that's the final question. And the fifth is that same correction in the call for ballot arguments. So the motion would amend those three resolutions to make those particular changes. And I'm available to discuss those or to answer any questions. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And first, I just want to thank staff we it was a big ask that we made when we leveled this this motion. And there was a very stiff timeline. But it's been tremendous work and a lot has taken place. So I do want to acknowledge that. So we did ask for a lot and you delivered a lot. Secondly, I just want to remind the public that this is this measure is intended to ensure that we ensure a public benefit for our city, as well as recover the cost that we, you know, that we believe may be associated with, you know, any any ballot measure that might be adopted. So I want to move forward right now, and I move to adopt the resume, the recommendations that stated in the council letter, including a few slight amendments or revisions to the following resolution. So number one. Resolution number three, correcting the reference to the voter petition. As the city attorney just stated. Number two, resolution number four, which amended the ballot question for the city's tax measure. And resolution number five, amending the ballot question in the call for ballot argument writers. In addition, there's been a lot of discussion on how we can make investments should this tax measure pass. So I would like to request that the city attorney work with the city manager to prepare a non-binding resolution indicating the Council's intent to use tax revenues for public safety, public health, homelessness, and general services for regular for regulation and enforcement. And that is my motion.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you. And just to clarify to vice mayor's motion, motion was essentially Mr. Parkin's motion. He just clarified those points. So there was no change there with the with the addition of the of the resolution, which will come back to council on a separate date. And so that we're not voting on tonight, we're voting on the attorney to prepare it, and then we'll actually have a discussion when that comes back. The second to that was Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 2: Thank you. I want to appreciate the staff for the amount of hard work it took to get us to this point. I think it's really important that as we see this. Ballot initiative through on two November that we have the city resources to ensure the health and safety of the community through whatever the new regulations may or may not bring. It's a very uncertain time, and I think that the way that we can provide that certainty is to make sure that we are able to fund public safety and homelessness and the other components that have been connected to public safety. So thank you for your hard work on this. I think it was remarkable. I know a lot of analysis was done.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And then we have Councilman Price. We'll go to the public and they will take a vote. Councilman Price.
Speaker 3: Thank you. I, too, want to thank staff. You've done a lot of work on this issue over a long period of time, and most recently, as a result of our action, after we voted to put the initiative on the ballot, we asked that you prepare a fiscal and basically citywide impact report and you did that. And I wanted to get a brief presentation from staff regarding what that impact would be, because I think that's relevant to the discussion on taxes.
Speaker 0: Absolutely. Can we please. Mr. West? Can you.
Speaker 9: Yes. Our budget manager, Lia Eriksen, will provide that response.
Speaker 5: Good evening, Mayor, and members of City Council. On July 12, City Council approved a motion requesting an impact report for the ballot measure that will appear on the November 8th election. If the ballot measure is approved by voters, it will require substantial city resources and staffing related to approving and regulating of the station businesses closing or moving into compliance, any unsanctioned businesses and dealing with the expected increase in public health and public safety service demands. If approved, staff members will need to immediately begin working on implementation of the ordinance as it goes into effect ten days after the results are certified by City Council, as detailed in the report. Staff expects 32 dispensaries. Our analysis includes a range of possible cultivation, manufacturing and other non-retail marijuana businesses, as the ordinance allows for an unlimited number of these business types. It is anticipated that city staff will use a team model for administration and enforcement. The initial licensing process does have tight timeframes and will require significant diversion of city staff and other one time cost. However, after that period, we do not envision there to be any major problems with enforcement of the sanctioned businesses. We do anticipate, however, a significant number of unsanctioned businesses. The actual number is unclear, so we included a range in our analysis. It is anticipated that it will take a long time and a team based approach to shut down the unsanctioned businesses or move them into compliance. On the revenue side, we estimate revenues from the ballot measure in a range, but the middle estimate is about 7.1 million. This includes gross receipts for dispensaries and a per square foot tax for cultivation, as well as sales taxes for retail sales. The measure has minimal taxes for the other medical marijuana business types and eliminates the recreational marijuana tax rates. It also prohibits the city from charging a regulatory fee to cover the cost to administer the sanctioned marijuana businesses. On the expense side, we estimate both the direct cost of administration and enforcement, along with potential related public health and public safety impacts. We have a range for that as well, with the midpoint being about 12.2 million. Based on those numbers, the net ongoing cost, which is expense minus related revenues, it's expected to be about 5.1 million. In addition, there are some onetime costs related to the startup, which at the midpoint is about 2.4 million. The actual cost and revenues to implement and enforce the the ballot measure, the Kelton measure, will vary from our analysis as our estimates are based on a set of assumptions that could and will likely change. Staff will be working with City Council if this is approved to fund any expected short falls, and it is noted that this could mean that we have to redirect funds for other purposes or potentially use the city's operating reserves. The Fiscal Impact Report contains more details on our analysis. This concludes the staff report and department representatives and I are available for any questions you may have.
Speaker 3: Okay. So just a couple of questions. The the impact to the departments. Was that figure derived from the department head making an estimate based on, you know, prior experience with this industry, these types of businesses and studying other cities? Or is that is it an arbitrary number?
Speaker 5: Councilwoman Price Using the set of assumptions that had a low number of both sanctioned and unsanctioned businesses, a medium number and then a high number and past experiences. Departments did do their best to to develop these revenue or cost estimates. And it included, as I mentioned, both the administration and enforcement and potential health and public safety impacts.
Speaker 3: And but for the tax measure, what would the funding source be to fund that gap in terms of our ability to meet the ongoing demands of this new business?
Speaker 5: So that and I should note the analysis I just said was the original Kelton measure before you today is a competing tax measure that would generate additional revenues, $2 million additional revenues for medical marijuana only at the middle middle point of the range, an additional 4 million at the max. And then if there was recreation, an additional 6 million at the midpoint and an $11 million increase at the max. So those those resources would be able to cover these costs, these estimated cost, if not for that competing tax measure, we would need to come to city council with some other options to fund the cost in 17 . And then we would have to build the shortfall directly into the 18 budget. And so it would be competing with other cost of general city services.
Speaker 3: So without the tax measure, what is our anticipated shortfall, the first year of operation?
Speaker 5: So for our first full year of operation, it's 5.1 million, plus an additional 2.4 million of one time costs.
Speaker 3: Okay. So we're looking at about a $7 million shortfall for the first year without the tax measure.
Speaker 5: That's correct.
Speaker 3: And that money would have to come from cutting from other departments and other services that we provide to our residents.
Speaker 5: That is correct.
Speaker 3: I have a question for the city attorney. Perhaps it's the city attorney. What is the feasibility? Or is it even feasible to have some sort of a call for service fee? So similar to, for example, people who have a home alarms. If the alarm goes off a certain number of times beyond what's allotted, then there may be an administrative fee that's put for cost recovery in terms of, you know, the fire department having to respond to your home, could there be something like that in regards to calls for service? So after ten calls for service, let's say there would be an additional that there would.
Speaker 2: Be a fee.
Speaker 3: A significant fee.
Speaker 9: Councilmember I'm shooting from the hip here a little bit, but the the initiative itself prohibits certain fees and it limits the ability to for the city to collect fees. But, you know, I don't think that it eliminates, you know, all fees or regulatory fees. But in this particular case, we'd want to take a look at that scenario. But as I read the Citizens Initiative, it prohibits those type of fees.
Speaker 2: Okay. Okay.
Speaker 3: Thank you. I have nothing further at this time. I'd like to hear from the public.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Council Member Pearce.
Speaker 5: Thank you. Thank you, staff, for putting together a dense and exciting report to read. I just wanted to clarify this and I think you guys just said it. This is a competing measure to the Kelton measure.
Speaker 9: It is qualify that as a competing measure. It conflicts only in the area of taxation. Both measures discuss and set taxes at different rates. The city has no regulatory portion to our ballot measure, so there is no competition or it does not compete in the area of the regulatory ordinance. So we have looked at this and believe that they would coexist and in the area in which it competes, the if the cities measure were to receive more valid votes than the Kelton Citizen Initiative, then the city's tax regulations would go into effect. And their regulatory ordinance, if it passes, is going to go into effect.
Speaker 5: Great. Thank you. And my second question is, in regards to coming back for a nonbinding resolution on the plans for spending the funds, what's that timeline to come back?
Speaker 9: That we could probably come back in a couple of weeks or so to come back with. It'll be a range or options, and I think what I'll be looking for is some direction from the council to see if those are the specific items that you would like to identify and then take your input. And if it's acceptable, they could move forward that night or if not, we would take it back and refine it until we have the what the council would look for.
Speaker 5: Great. So it's not a quick short timeline. Thank you. Appreciate that.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. Public comment on this item. Please come forward. Please come forward. Everybody, if you can, just please line up. We're trying to be expeditious tonight. Just give your name for the record and begin.
Speaker 1: A good career as it is adamantly opposed to the concept of marijuana on its very face. And as a as everybody knows, a medical marijuana card is as easy to obtain as a political promise from a political pipsqueak during an election period. I was just informed that Washington, D.C. has something that. Might help. Prevent the disaster that would befall us if we move forward with this motion as it is that they have. There are only two to. Doctors. Which can issue the prescriptions and the medical marijuana. That is something we should follow. Absent that absent that, I would figure out whatever. The direction we need to go or whatever method to place a tax. On if it's measured in terms of grams or ounces. I do not know. But $500 a gram, $500 a year out, period. The. Criminal element, the cost in terms of enforcement and the crime that will ensue. Well, this city will not be able to absorb. So I think every single ounce of effort should be used to forestall saddling us with this disaster in the making. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please. Take your place.
Speaker 1: Stephanie Dawson, so a resident of Second District, previous to working in the marijuana industry, I actually was a legislative director for the First District, and as a result, I kind of gained an M, if you will, in looking through patois. Usual method of destroying legislation and programs in which he did not like. One of the main examples of which he would do this would be not providing comparable data from cities that would be more relevant to the piece of legislation in which he was actually being asked to discuss. In our particular situation, from the marijuana perspective, looking at other cities in California and Oregon who have property tax deregulated, this particular commodity would be far more relevant to Colorado, which as I see the sale older style of regulation, which was not going to apply inside this inside of the state. We have a healthy new supply chain that's going to be going that's going to be going throughout the entire state. Thus we're not going to be relying entirely on an indoor grows, especially from a local area. The other method that he would be using that uses frequently to destroy pieces of legislation he doesn't like would be adding maximum costs without any citations. An example of this can be found in the way that he basically glommed on nine state costs under the universal pre-K initiative, as well as a no no kill shelter initiative from 2015, which he somehow was able to price out beyond any sort of recognition it when it comes down to it. 20 additional code enforcement officers would actually be great for controlling the slumlord problem that we have inside of the city. But is a long term strategy or necessity for regulating the marijuana industry? This wreaks absolutely no sense and has no basis in reality. The reason that I bring this attention to you and frankly, you know, is because you you as legislators, regardless of where you stand on this issue, need objective information from a nonpartizan source. With no pit, with no reason to stand for it has an established record of of destroying targeting of this industry and lying to you, the legislators, about this specific issue. And it goes back to when Robert was on the council. The reason that the last ordinance failed was not because of the legislators on the dais, and it was because of a city bureaucracy that took it upon themselves with no direction from the city to be able to attack this industry at every single, every single part. That will cost the city billions in litigation fees that are unnecessary and puts patients in danger. Be careful about weed taxes before you before you know all the regulations. Say, for example, medical growers are going to be based in the city, of inner city, are going to be highly regulated from the state and federal authorities. The county recently withdrew their their their 10%, their homeless tax, which is going to be assisting us. But at the same time, we are still looking at businesses that with iris to 80 are going to be taxed in an effective rate from 50 to 80%. While I'm running out of time here, the issue of unsanctioned businesses, look at that data from L.A. and Santa Ana. Those are created by incomplete legislation where secondary were illegal. Secondary markets for manufacturing or growth were created simply because they were not included in the original legislation and there were not enough dispensaries meet adequate demand. Thank you and have a good day.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Evening, Mayor City Council. My name is Gary Hetrick. I reside in the fourth district. I want to speak just briefly to the nonbinding resolution. I want to put something on the table so that as we come back to this, I think this is an important issue. And I think the previous speakers sort of raised this. And this is building in a process of community engagement so that the residents of Long Beach themselves can can weigh in on in a decision making process in terms of how this this this new revenue is going to be spent. Rather than having that come from the council, I would like to see, for instance, participatory budgeting process, which we already use in Long Beach as a as a way to engage residents, assuming this goes forward in how they want to see this money spent, it may be spent along the lines that we're already thinking. It may not. But I think this is a way to really engage residents in a meaningful way around money that's going to be coming from the residents. And so I want to put this on the table. When we come back to the non-binding resolution, I would like to see some form of community engagement built into this. And participatory budgeting is something that's already been used. It's something that's sanctioned by or not even sanctioned, but identified as a best practice by the White House for HUD Community Development BLOCK Grant Program. So it's got a fantastic track record and creating a mechanism for residents to have meaningful decision making power over taxpayer money. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Yes, sir. Mayor and City Council. My name is Steve Updike. I was a drug addict. Marijuana was my gateway drug. And thank God to the Church of Scientology. They got me off dope. That's the only reason I'm here. I'm not dead. It's a true story. Go ahead and laugh. But it's true. Anyway, the truth of the matter is, you will never be able to get enough tax money or money for this problem of dope in our society. You're going to kill our people. You're going to be responsible for the deaths of people. You know, I know people laugh. I finally came out of the closet and said, hey, dope is for dope. Okay. And you're talking to a guy who was on dope, almost died from dope and got off dope, thank God. And the truth of the matter is, it's poison. A poison that screws up your mind. And that's the God honest truth. And you know it deep down. I know you like to get high people. I know you like to feel good. Sure. Have a drink, smoke some pot, do some dope. But you know what? It's temporary. It's not going to solve your problems. I know you're doing dope to solve your problems. It's not going to do it. What you're doing is you're killing yourself. And now we're going to. And you'll never make eye with the chief. You're never going to make enough money to fix the society when it goes into shambles. You think it's bad now? It's going to be a lot worse. And, you know, it really does kill people. I know I grew up at a time when my friends, the famous and others were dying as a result of dope, all kinds of dope. And so, you know, I was there. I did that. I know for a fact because I was there. I was one of those people who had a needle in his arm. It's not the way out, people. It's not going to help you. Dope is not the solution to your problems. You can sit there in your high and mighty positions and you can make your billions of dollars. And I know you're greedy and you want it, but it's going to cost you more than you can afford. And another lifetime from now, you're going to if you survive, you're going to find out the cost in public lives, the destruction of the minds of our children and our people and our our future. It's going to be a major problem. And you know that somewhere deep down in your soul, you know that drugs are a poison. I'm talking dope. I'm talking heroin, marijuana, anything that leads to getting high like that. People don't need it. They don't have to have it to survive. And it's poison. And this game you're playing with, Oh, we're going to make all this money. You're going to spend every penny you have and more than you can afford. And the lives are going to be ruined as a result of this dope is going to be you're not you have no idea what you're doing. You're like, it's a big mistake and you have a chance to turn it around before our society goes down the tubes. And that's exactly where it's going.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Mr. Next Speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Tough act to.
Speaker 6: Follow. My name's Larry King, the seventh District. I served on the Medical Cannabis Task Force. I helped on the Kelton initiative, and I was chosen by Mayor Foster to work with former Councilperson Chips Key to write the argument against in the 2014 tax measure in the election. I'm for taxing. I'm for regulation. I've worked as a consultant in other states. I was a legitimate operator here. There is no place in this country that does not bring in a good a lot more revenue than than the costs in medical marijuana.
Speaker 1: I mean.
Speaker 6: If this is going to be the same fiscal report that we're going to read that we received on the task force, it's a joke. It's based on the only thing accurate in it is that they say it's based on guesswork and it's based on bureaucrats who don't know anything about this business or this industry. And they don't have to look too far to see that it's worked in other places. So I'm looking for that report. But again, it's going to be more of the same. They hired a shadowy figure named The Revenue Whisperer to to base all their facts on. And we pretty much shot it down in a task force, but nobody was listening then. And I'm sure nobody is going to listen now. So this is going to be on the backs of the patients and the sick and the people who have been deserving and waiting for the last seven years to get this in our town . Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Price. You queued up and looked at the queue versus the next speaker, sir.
Speaker 1: Hi. Dave is Keith. I'm a resident here in Long Beach. And I just want to say that I oppose to this medical marijuana, let's call it for what it is is drugs, is dope pot. It is not good for our community. That's what it all boils down to. I work with kids and I and I work with high school kids, too. And it breaks my heart to have my kids come to my classroom and they're high as a kite. In much of it that they get is from the so-called medical marijuana, from their parents or whoever the situation is that they get access to it. It's no good for us. Just like the gentleman said back here in regards to. This drug ruining community and its pot. And the thing is, is that people are able to get access to it and there is nothing wrong with them. I'm not saying not all of them, but there are some people who get access to it and they go to the doctors, so-called doctors, and they get the prescriptions written up and then they're able to get access to it. I know of a person who was Muslim. Absolutely nothing wrong with them. But he smokes weed every day. He had a problem getting it. He was buying it on the streets. Well, he figured out that he was able to go to a doctor and get a prescription. And he did. And now he smokes weed every day and he gets it legally. But there's absolutely nothing wrong with them. And I told him, I said, Man, you're Muslim. You're breaking all the rules. So I'm just going to advise you guys to think of this long and hard. Where I live in Long Beach, Oliver Chestnut on the third floor, I look over my balcony and I see some of the people because I'm right next to an alley. Hiding in a corner. Getting high. Doing drugs. And that happens maybe about once a week. Just footsteps away from the police department. Think about it. It gets into the hands of the kids. Even if the the dispensary is miles away from the schools and the parks, trust me, it doesn't mean that it can't travel back to the neighborhood to where the children are. If any of you guys have children, think about it. Because your child can be a victim. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Any other speakers, please? Looks like it's our last speaker. Last one. Okay, I'm closing the speaker's list, then back to the council. Please.
Speaker 2: Good evening. Diana la genes. I would like to answer just a couple of things. I noticed the last gentleman was talking about the access that people have to it now. Well, yeah, because it's a black market. It's easy for kids to have access now, but it is much more difficult for them to have access when it's regulated . Take a look at alcohol. Same kind of thing. It is harder for them to get alcohol than it is for them to get marijuana because it's regulated because nobody wants to lose their license over selling to a minor. So I'm just saying. And in the states where it's been decriminalized or legalized, teen use goes down. It is a fact. The irony and that's the irony of it. The other gentleman that was talking about his addictions thing is. I'm I'm sorry if he has an addictive being. But people that are going to be addicted to something are going to find something, whether it be opiates. In fact, opiates right now are the biggest are the most abused drug in the nation. Now, do we stop our prescription drugs because prescription drugs are the most abused drugs? No, of course we don't. And if we want to talk about that and saving money, we could talk about the alcohol in Long Beach. We have almost 900 liquor outlets in Long Beach. And yet I know just about every I've seen every single person on this council drinking liquid drugs. So if we're going to stop something, let's stop that. Okay. So I did pass out something regarding children and that is really important to me. And do I have children? Yes, I have three children. I have five grandchildren and I have five great grandchildren. Do I care about children? You bet I do. And I'll tell you what. I passed out something to you. It talks about a child who uses it to control her epilepsy. It has saved her life. And there have been many, many children who have died waiting in their state for it to become legal in their states. So if we're worried about the children. Let's make sure it's available. And to tax medical, I think is pretty sad. If you want to tax recreational, I don't have a problem with that. But to add to the burden to people who are sick, who really need it, who cannot go to their insurance companies and ask for their to be reimbursed, it it's really very greedy. And I hope, you know, again, recreational fine. But if you're taxing it where it becomes a burden on people who are truly sick and really need it, I think you better rethink it. Just remember, if Jesus was standing here, what would you really tell him and how do you think he would react? You're welcome.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. That closes public comment will now go back to the counsel counsel woman price.
Speaker 3: Thank you. So I want to make a couple of comments to clarify a few things. First of all, I want to thank our speakers, especially those who spoke against the marijuana initiative. And the reason for that is sometimes it's very difficult to come in and speak, especially when I mean, I've been on this council for two years now, over two years now, and there are very few groups that actually will come in and heckle when they don't like what they're hearing. And unfortunately, this is one of those groups we have, you know, legitimate business leaders who will heckle because they don't like what they're hearing, which is a really unique way of fostering a long term relationship with the city entity. So I it's a strategy I've never really understood and calling out the, the city manager and everybody is as being, you know, crooked and, you know, not doing their work is just in my opinion, that's not really a spirit of let's do business together for the next few generations. The bottom line is that we as a so I appreciate the people who came forward and spoke tonight because I know that's very difficult to do. I will also say, however, that it is not this council that is initiating marijuana dispensaries in the city of Long Beach. This has come to us by way of a petition that was circulated, and they have earned the right to be on the ballot, and that is a right that they have earned. And that's a right that I respect. And we have voted to put the initiative on the ballot because we are in a democratic process and they have done the work to earn their spot on the ballot. And that is something absolutely I respect. It's part of our system. So when people come and, you know, I appreciate people coming and telling us the harms that this is going to cause on the city, I would say to them, watch the council meetings where this has been on the agenda for the last two years. And you will find very quickly that your concerns have been shared by some on this council. The concerns that I have is based on talking with the police department when we did have sanctioned marijuana dispensaries in the city and illegal operations showed up, some of my colleagues, some of whom are on this council, some of whom are no longer on this council, but were at that time were some of the most vocal demands of service by our police department, requiring them to do everything that they could to shut down those illegal dispensaries because they were having such a negative impact on the quality of life of the residents. And that's just the reality. I mean, you can heckle if you want, especially if you don't live in the city, especially if you don't take hundreds. Of calls and emails from residents every day you can roll your eyes and say it's stupid. But at the end of the day, when there's a medical marijuana dispensary that's not supposed to be there and it's impacting residents lives in a negative way, that's a real issue we have to deal with. It's not an issue that we can ignore. It's not an issue that we can say is silly. It's a real issue for our residents. And we, every single one of us is required to do everything we can to protect the quality of life of our residents, the children who are trying to sleep with the lines outside the door, the people who hear noises from the nearby businesses, whatever the business is, we have a duty and a responsibility to respond to the residents. So you can heckle all day long. You can be unhappy with the decisions that impact your interests in a negative way. But the bottom line is we have a duty to make decisions that are in the best interests of our residents. The medical marijuana industry is an uncertain industry everywhere. When people say, look to the you don't have to look far to find this and that, there are all sorts of statistics and data. I was recently at a nit's a study, I nit's a conference in D.C.. I sat next to the chief of police from a jurisdiction in Colorado. Trust me, you can find data everywhere that supports whatever you're trying to to convey. The bottom line is it is a drain on resources. And I want to give kudos to our city staff for doing their best to come up with the estimates. We can sit here and criticize it all day long. But you know what? They're not investors in this industry. They are not investors in this industry. So, yes, they don't have intimate familiarity with the inner workings of the industry, but they are looking around and and doing the research. And let's not forget, they're comparing the data to to what we experienced here in the city of Long Beach. It's not operating out of a vacuum. And their analysis shows very negative impacts, impacts of this measure. If it were passed, if the if the measure passes, it will be a substantial increase to our responsibilities and result in large decreases in our ability to function efficiently, effectively and safely. It's going to place an undue and unsustainable burden on countless city departments, from business licensing to code enforcement to the city attorney, the prosecutor's office to police to fire to our health department, and yes to our school district, because our school district unfortunately does not agree with Miss. Our last speaker in regards to the positive impact that this is going to have on our youth. In fact, they they conclude to the contrary. All of this means we're going to have less police response, a lower of quality, lower quality of life for our residents who may call and get a response from the police department that this is a low priority call and long processing periods for non marijuana related businesses. We are trying to be a business friendly city. The report explains in great detail the significant financial costs that the measure is going to cause and for both short and long term analysis. Although the goal that I'm sorry, although the stated goal of the measure is to allow patients with serious health issues easy access to medical marijuana, the effects of the measure go well beyond the issue of patient access. I think even patients undergoing cancer treatment would agree the multimillion dollar net losses the city is projected to sustain are bad for everyone. The increased demand for police response due to the huge number of illegal businesses and statistically likely crime that are associated with legal and illegal marijuana. Businesses are bad for our residents. Extended approval and permitting times for businesses and licensing is bad for our residents. And extending by weeks the ability of code enforcement to investigate code and safety violations is bad for residents. And when we say you don't have to look too far. The city of L.A. has 135 legalized medical marijuana dispensaries. They currently have over 1000 dispensaries operating in their city. That's not too far. And we're looking there. The measure provides for between 26 and 32 dispensaries to be open citywide. However, the measure goes much farther than just allowing for dispensaries, which would benefit patient access and includes allowing all marijuana related business types to operate in Long Beach with no limit cultivators. Testing manufacturing, distribution and transportation all have no limits on how many can be in the city. Additionally, the measure was poorly written with some ambiguous language that could result in legal challenges, which would place another burden on our city city attorney's office. This information is not based on some political ideology. I know it's easy to blow it off and roll your eyes and think that's what it is. But we have a thorough report that is provided to us as a decision making body by department heads who have come to the city through extensive searches with extensive backgrounds and resumes . These are respectable, educated people who have been tasked with the purpose of trying to decide what resources they're going to need to live in this new reality. This is a cost benefit analysis that's put together by the city managers and department managers assessing the rational and likely result the measure is going to have by requiring more city resources and staff, time and energy and increased demands on our already stretched thin emergency response units. This assessment puts in clear numeric values the severe effect this measure would have on some of our most important city departments. Financial losses are one thing for a city to sustain, but a virtual guarantee that this will create an unmanageable burden on emergency response units that are already hugely understaffed. It is unrealistic to think that the city can shoulder the increased burden. This measure places on numerous departments and staff members without there being significant decrease decreases to responsiveness and quality of service at every level of the city of Long Beach. In terms of what we're able to provide, this is, in my opinion, a very detrimental measure because of the fiscal impact. That is why tonight, however, the measure has every right to be on the ballot. The voters have every right to to make that choice. The initiatives the authors of this initiative have earned that right. And I respect. That. But our voters need to have some options. This is why, from day one, I've been saying I want a competing initiative to give our voters options. I would have liked an initiative that allowed for patient access and didn't have all the other components that go well beyond access. But I did not prevail in that argument with my colleagues, and I appreciate that it's a democratic process. But at this juncture, we have the opportunity to recoup some of the costs associated with this industry. So I am in favor and I will be voting in favor of a tax measure tonight. However, I want to make it abundantly clear with my colleagues, in terms of my intent, our number one priority in any tax revenue generated should be cost recovery. Our police departments, our business licensing, our health department, our fire department. They need our city attorney's office. They need to recoup the money that they are going to be using from their departments to help fund this industry if it passes. Beyond that, I think we need to think about public safety as the number one and business licensing as the two big hits that we're going to be taking as a result of the analysis that was performed by our city staff. So so my position is this isn't this like slush fund? This money needs to be used specifically for cost recovery. And we need to ensure and make a commitment to our residents that that is what the money will be used for. And if if we have that kind of commitment as a council, then I am going to be voting for this tax measure. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. With that, we now have a motion and a second on the floor. We're going to take separate votes. We've done public comment for all of them. We're going to take separate votes. Again, let me just reiterate some of what was said. It's incredibly important for the city to have the the necessary revenue to be able to deal with both the public safety and the public health needs, particularly on the cost recovery of general services side for this measure. And so it's important that this moves forward. It's important that voters have a choice to be able to pass the city, at least the city piece of this, which is going to be one of the measures on the ballot on this item. And so I strongly recommend that. And with that, I support the vice mayor's motion. It's on the floor. Members, please cast your vote. First, going to take the first part of it, which is receive and file the medical marijuana initiative analysis. Please cast your vote. | Resolution | Recommendation to:
1. Receive and file a Medical Marijuana Initiative-Analysis report from City Manager regarding the proposed initiative petition entitled Regulation of Medical Marijuana Businesses;
2. Adopt resolution calling for the placement of a voter-petition initiative measure on the ballot for the November 8, 2016 special election to repeal the City's ban on medical marijuana businesses; adopt new regulations to permit and regulate medical marijuana businesses; to repeal the City's current recreational marijuana business license tax; and to reduce the City's current rate of medical marijuana business license taxes; | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_08022016_16-0690 | Speaker 2: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next item, please.
Speaker 2: Item 15. Communication from Council Member Pearce and Council Member Super Nan. Recommendation to request the City Manager to have Parks, Recreation and Marine and the Public Works Department review the list of trees approved for planting in public properties and report back to council with a new list of approved trees.
Speaker 0: Council member, Peter.
Speaker 5: Thank you. This item came up through the discussion of how many trees we were going to be trimming and possibly the trees that we would be removing due to the drought or just the fact that they're old and we have an outdated list of trees that we would like to ask for, a new list that includes drought tolerant, that also considers historical context and neighborhood context. So it's a simple request.
Speaker 0: All right. Motion in a second. Councilman Mongo. Okay. Councilman Price.
Speaker 3: Thank you. I want to thank my colleagues for bringing this item. I think this is a fantastic item. It's something that an issue that comes up all the time. I know that the city is currently undergoing a bike history policy. Is that right? The ficus tree policy.
Speaker 9: I'm not aware of that.
Speaker 3: I think, Mr. Beck of ficus tree policy.
Speaker 1: Councilmember Price, I think you're referring to a recent action taken by the city's tree committee relative to focus trees in the public right of way. And basically the committee took action that that looked at removing ficus trees from the right of way because of the damage that they caused to sidewalks and to storm drains and other utilities . So I apologize for the interruption, but the Tree Committee basically felt that there are other trees that are more appropriate for the park, for the parkways, besides effects.
Speaker 3: Okay. Thank you. Well, that's a that's an exact makes my point. Exactly. We have a lot of trees that are planted in medians that later turn out to be visual obstructions or require too much irrigation for medians. And I know we have reoccurring issues on sidewalks, so I think this is a great agenda item. I want to commend my colleague, Council Member Pearce for bringing this item and Councilman Super now for signing on. I think this is some this is this should help guide us in the future when we're planning new park spaces and medians because we I cannot tell you how many calls our office gets about landscaping in the public right away. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 10: Yes. Thank you. A question for staff. Do we already have a list of what's released? That actually speak to this motion already?
Speaker 1: Yes, Councilmember Austin, there is an existing approved street tree list. It was last updated, to my knowledge, in 2012. So I think it would be worthwhile to look at it again. I don't have the number, the exact number in front of me, but it's somewhere in the neighborhood of 70 to 90 different species of trees.
Speaker 10: Okay. Well, our interns actually did did some research and came up with the list. And I think that's that's about accurate. But I think I see about, you know, at least 15 or so drought tolerant trees in California, native trees. Um, have there been new trees? Kind of. Created since 2012. That's the question.
Speaker 1: I don't have an answer to that. But again, as staff, we're more than willing to look at the tree list. And if there's updates necessary to bring forward, we'd be happy to do that.
Speaker 10: Okay, I'll make sure that my colleagues get a copy of this list as well.
Speaker 0: Councilman. Gringo.
Speaker 9: Thank you. The only one concern I would raise is that in my district, we have Christmas tree laying. And there are trees already in. Who have lived their their lives and are at the end of their longevity. And the neighborhood in that area, the association and the Wrigley Area Neighborhood Alliance, are very concerned about those trees. If they were to come down, what would they be replaced with? Obviously, there's discussion about replacing them with like trees, however, that those trees are highly, highly. High maintenance in respect to what they require. So if we do the study, I would want to include some kind of tree, if you will, as an alternate that would serve a purpose of a Christmas tree lane. Well, maybe not a a similar tree to the ones that are there now, but at least something that would provide the same type of environment and the type of of celebration that we have every year with the Christmas tree laying. Now, there is some discussion taking place in regards to funding for that type of tree. We know that it's going to be expensive and we're going to be looking at that. We've been in discussions with the staff at Parks and Recreation to look at what are our options and what are going to be some of the the costs involved. So not that I want to separate myself or separate the Christmas tree limb from from the study. However, I want to make sure that there is some kind of sensitivity to that particular stretch of street to ensure that we can continue to have the great celebrations that we've had year after year in the past.
Speaker 0: Councilmember Pearce.
Speaker 5: Yes. Thank you, Councilmember Yanga. In the discussion section, we talk about the historical context of trees, definitely recognizing Daisy Lane and the history that's there. And so we want to make sure that in this approved list of trees that we take into consideration those neighborhoods that might have some historical context. So definitely including that.
Speaker 0: Public comment. CNN members, please cast your vote.
Speaker 2: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Q I'm going to try to move that. I know we're trying to get the national night out, which is probably not going to happen, but I'll try. I will try my best, please, if we can. Item 23, please. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Manager to have the Parks, Recreation and Marine Department and the Public Works Department review the list of trees approved for planting in parks, parkways, medians and other public properties and report back to council with a new list of approved trees. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_08022016_16-0707 | Speaker 2: Communication from Councilwoman Gonzalez, Councilwoman Price and Councilwoman Mongo recommendation to receive and file a report from the Department of Health and Human Services on their outreach and response regarding the recent outbreak of meningitis, particularly with the LGBTQ community.
Speaker 0: Councilman Gonzales.
Speaker 7: Yes, thank you. I want to thank Kelly for being so patient with us, and I'd like to request a staff report from you, if we could.
Speaker 11: Good evening and thanks for the opportunity to share with you our efforts around the meningococcal disease. Just a little bit of a background. So the disease is caused by a bacteria called Neisseria and it can be found in the nose and throat. And often people carry it and they don't even realize that they're sick. The meningococcal disease is transmitted from one person to another where there's direct contact either through or sorry saliva or through coughing or sneezing. Close contact, living in the same household or sharing utensils, food or drinks can really can spread. So if you're in large group situations like dormitories and other places like that. Your symptoms include things like high fever, bad headaches, stiff neck, nausea and vomiting, confusion, low blood pressure and just muscle pain. Anyone experiencing these symptoms should see their medical provider as soon as possible. It can be treated with antibiotics. And then we also encourage the vaccine. And the vaccine kicks in after about 7 to 10 days. What we've found so far in in L.A. County is that there have been 20 confirmed cases in the past few months in L.A., Long Beach and Orange County together. Seven of those cases are in Long Beach. And to put those in perspective, we've only had one between 2011 and 2015. So seven is a much higher number. Four of those seven cases have been identified as those among gay or bisexual males. And there were two deaths, both in Orange County, because of the disproportionately high prevalence of the disease among men who are gay or bisexual. It's now recommended that for all gay or bisexual men and anyone who is HIV positive, regardless of any individual other risk factors, that they should be vaccinated. Our efforts so far is we're really partnering closely with L.A. County and Orange County in our work and also with our community providers. We've collaborated with the LGBTQ center in Long Beach. We offer two Saturday clinics, free vaccinations, and we're able to give 122 vaccinations total between those two days. We're offering free vaccines at the health department so anybody who can come in, make an appointment and we'll provide a free vaccine. We've given out 139 total. Beyond that, the other places that are providing the free vaccine are also the AP Health and Wellness Clinic at Saint Mary's and Age founded Health Care Foundation on PCH. We're providing up to all of our health care providers so that they're like we're letting them know about the vaccine recommendations, guidelines, reporting and other outbreak information. And we're also working with local providers if they need to get ahold, if they need some vaccine, we're working closely with them to make sure that they have it. So overall, we're really we're tracking on this. We're partnering very closely. We're in conversations with the CDC, with the state public health and our partners, and really outreaching and educating as much as possible to make sure that people are vaccinated as appropriate. That's the end of my report if you have questions.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Oh.
Speaker 0: Sorry. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Councilwoman Gonzales, there's an echo in here. Thank you. Sorry. I just wanted to thank you, Kelly, for bringing this forward. I wanted to make sure that we had another educational forum for residents to learn about this meningitis and what they can do to prevent this disease. And I want to thank your staff and you for being so committed. Also working with the center to be able to provide vaccines to our communities. I have a couple of questions. As we've had this outbreak and I don't know if it's now titled as an outbreak, but what is our like how is our community outreach? I mean, what are we what is our normal process? I know you said you connected directly with the LGBT center, but are there any other outlets that you use for communication?
Speaker 11: Yeah. So at play and also the AIDS Health Care Foundation, we're reaching out through through those populations, through those organizations as well, as well as all health care providers. So anyone who goes in and is being seen and has concerns that they know about the vaccination and how that can occur.
Speaker 7: Okay. And then is there a point person at the health department in your shop that is working on this directly? Or who would that person be normally if there is something similar that would or if this grew for any reason, unfortunately.
Speaker 11: Yeah. So Dr. Marotta, who is our acting health officer and as well as Josh Jacobs, who is our clinical supervisor, the two of them are really participating in those outreach efforts. And then our epidemiology group, John Holguin, is leading the tracking and the investigation portion. So if someone comes in and is diagnosed, we do reach out to those who they've had contact with to make sure that they if they have the illness, that they're on antibiotics immediately.
Speaker 7: Great. And I would also just suggest that going forward, if we do have something similar where we can reach a specific demographic like the LGBTQ community, perhaps we can look at other areas. Like some, you know, the maybe billboards that we can put up that, you know, say, hey, get vaccinated, this is where you go here. Or some places like, you know, that maybe the LGBT community frequents a little bit more often. So I'm just thinking of those additional ways to to outreach. Yeah.
Speaker 2: But yeah, so.
Speaker 11: I just it just on our website, we do have frequently asked question pages. The L.A. County also has a very good website about different clinics that are offering the free vaccine and other information. If anybody needs additional information.
Speaker 7: Great. Well, I think 139 vaccines to our community is just tremendous. I want to thank you again your team. I want to thank Senator Laura. We had an event with also thinking council member Pearce for for being there and supporting. And I also want to thank my co-sponsors, Councilwoman Pryce and Mongo, for also being committed to to seeing this through. So thank all of you.
Speaker 0: Great. Councilwoman Pryce.
Speaker 3: I just want to thank Councilwoman Gonzalez for bringing this forward and Kelly for a fantastic staff report. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Yes, Kelly. Excellent. Always excellent work. Thank you. Public comment saying yes. Please come forward. Come on down. If you don't have a comment, line up, please.
Speaker 1: That was my jog down to get my 3 minutes started.
Speaker 2: So, Counsel, thank you very much. And thank you very much to the health department for taking this meningitis outbreak seriously. The LGBTQ center is incredibly proud to partner with the health department to offer free vaccinations. We are incredibly thankful to Senator Laura and Councilwoman Gonzalez for hosting an event along with Hamburger Mary's and Long Beach Lesbian Gay Pride that.
Speaker 1: Raised funds for our organization to be able to.
Speaker 2: Provide outreach from a community perspective. One of the things I can absolutely tell you is I have owners of our LGBTQ bars asking if the health department has capacity.
Speaker 1: To bring out mobile units.
Speaker 2: To provide vaccinations. While the center is.
Speaker 1: Always happy to provide space.
Speaker 2: To provide vaccinations, we're really fortunate we can provide vaccinations. They can provide vaccinations. The more we can get folks out in the community where they're congregating, where there's going to be an easy access point is going to be a win win to get folks.
Speaker 1: These.
Speaker 2: Vaccinations. So, you know, we're really looking to work with the health department on what we can do to increase that capacity to especially reach our gay and bisexual men who are most at.
Speaker 1: Risk for contracting meningitis.
Speaker 2: We are also here to serve as a partner.
Speaker 1: In order to.
Speaker 2: Share information. Heaven forbid there is another there's another outbreak of something contagious impacting our community or any community. We want to be there to be able to get information that is accurate, listing vaccination sites out as quickly as possible, especially with an illness that can be prevented by vaccination. It's not enough to provide information. It's critical that information on where folks can be vaccinated is included in those preliminary messaging and talking points that.
Speaker 1: Are sent out to communities.
Speaker 2: But we are again incredibly proud to partner with the health department to offer resources to our community. We're incredibly thankful of.
Speaker 1: The support.
Speaker 2: Of our city council on taking this issue seriously. And thank.
Speaker 1: You very much for.
Speaker 2: Your consideration and thinking about the meningitis outbreak happening right now.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Good evening. Miguel Gutierrez, health care consultant. Today, I'm speaking on behalf of an organization I work with, APL Health. The new federally funded health center has been seeing dozens of persons and vaccinating them, thanks to the effort of the Department of Health, the LGBT Center. And in addition to some of the outreach events that have been occurring, championed by Councilmembers Pierson, Gonzales and State Senator Latta, there's been a pretty good social media campaign going on as well. And again, those vaccination clinics were pretty effective. One of the things that I wanted to say is actually we're taking notice that even persons from outside of the county boundaries are coming in, taking notice of the lead that we have here in Long Beach on this issue. And I really wanted to commend the organizations for that. Know, as a consultant, I did speak to Kelly just very briefly. And one of the things I recommended was that, you know, the future report contains some type of correspondence. We have two large hospitals with EHRs as thousands of persons every year. We have several large physician groups that represent hundreds of physicians. And in addition to that, we have a health plan with multiple clinics here in the city. It would be good to get written correspondence from those organizations, considering they take care of thousands of Long Beach lives and just get an understanding of really what actions they're going to take with respect to outreach, notifying the patients that come through their doors, letting them know what the risk factors are. In addition to that, what are their plans for vaccination? Are they going to bring on vaccines or are they going to refer to a partner that carries some of the free county vaccine? Again, these are, again, some just recommendations, not a criticism at all. I just had a little more time to think about it over the last few hours. But again, I thank you again for your consideration.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: Good evening. I'm very impressed. You guys are all still with us at this point. And so congratulations. My name is Ace Robinson. I'm a new resident of City of Long Beach. I'm in the third district. I serve as the executive director of Care Program at Dignity Health in St Mary's Medical Center. For the past 30 years, as you may well know, CARE or the Comprehensive AIDS Research and Education Program has addressed medical and social needs of people living with HIV entities such as care that primarily serve people living with HIV historically and presently serve people who are often co-infected with other bacterial and viral diseases due to their compromised immune system. Therefore, diseases that are normally rare can often become more prevalent in their social communities, even if their friends or their loved ones are not living with HIV. Due to the recent outbreak of meningitis in L.A. County, inclusive for Long Beach Care's clientele must be highly diligent to ensure that meningitis is not, in fact, more people without hindrance. They not only rely on the care program, but also the mayor, the city council and the Department of Public Health of L.A. and our Health and Human Services Department to support them. HIV disproportionately impacts gay and bisexual men, thus to the high rates of co-infection of people living with HIV and meningitis also disproportionately impacts these same populations such as myself. In order to accomplish the shared goals of the Long Beach Department of Health and Human Services and the Memphis City Council. Care fully supports the Council members recommendation to receive and file the report outreach in response to the recent outbreak of meningitis, but also to strongly recommend a thorough review of the amount of culturally tailored.
Speaker 1: Outreach.
Speaker 6: To communities disproportionately impacted by meningitis. That includes people living with HIV, that includes gay and bisexual individuals. That also includes our street involved individuals, whether they're chronically or transitioning house and active drug users. We can't actually address all these preventive needs unless we have that tailored type of outreach and the resources allocated to deliver culturally competent and medically accurate information to communities at risk for meningitis. Of the 89 people that we delivered the vaccine to, I would say if I had to guess, maybe about 10 to 15 of them actually knew how meningitis could be transmitted and if they were at risk. And a lot of them had those types of questions as do I need to get a booster? Is this something I already had? So and so forth. So we need more information. And so finally cares. Committed to providing the competent, timely care to all of our populations. And I look forward to your support. Thank you for your type of time and attention.
Speaker 0: Thank you. See no other public comment. We're going to go ahead and back and take a vote. Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 7: I just wanted to thank all three of you, Porter and Miguel Ace, for being here and your expertize. And I know that Kelly and I are taking notes and we'll certainly work together to get some of those suggestions implemented. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Council member Pearce.
Speaker 5: Yes. I just wanted to say thank you, Kelly, for your report back and definitely want to encourage us to think about how we are being culturally sensitive and doing outreach to places that we might not typically do outreach to and say that I'm here as a resource for you all and any outreach that you guys might need . Thank you.
Speaker 0: Councilman Austin.
Speaker 10: Thank you. I think this is a great item, is very responsible. I think that the last speaker actually made some some great points. And I'm not exactly sure that that that his points are actually codified in this language. Are we going to do outreach to the homeless and the street population as he he recommended? I think that that that is very, very important that we include that in this. Would you be open to a friendly amendment to do that?
Speaker 7: Oh, sure, absolutely. I think. Kelly, are we doing that at this point or I mean, I know it's. Kind of new. I don't.
Speaker 11: Yeah. Currently we have not been doing that as much, but I've taken notes on all that came through and we'll be going back to work with our team to address this, as well as with the other partners who are in the room that we've discussed and other partners in the community.
Speaker 7: Yes, absolutely. And thank you, Councilmember Austin. Thank you, Kelly.
Speaker 0: Thank you. With that, please take a vote. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to receive and file a report from the Health and Human Services Department on their outreach and response regarding the recent outbreak of Meningitis in Long Beach particularly with the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer (LGBTQ) community. The report should include statistics on cases in Long Beach and Los Angeles County, existing outreach and programming in Long Beach, specific outreach efforts with the LGBTQ community and next steps for reducing the number of new cases in Long Beach. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_08022016_16-0692 | Speaker 2: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Item 17.
Speaker 2: A report from Economic and Property Development and Development Services recommendation to adopt specifications for the purchase and development opportunity at Pine Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway. Declare the city on property as surplus and execute all necessary documents with any court pick for the sale of the property in the amount of $370,000. District six.
Speaker 0: Mr. Kent Do you want to do that report first? Mr. WEST Because I'm hearing a few things from the audience, and please, we got to refrain from that. So, Mr. West, Mike Conway.
Speaker 1: Mayor Garcia, members of the City Council, this item relates to a future development.
Speaker 9: Property located at the northeast corner of Pine and PCH, formerly containing the recycling center known as Cache for cans.
Speaker 1: An RFP was released seeking proposals for the development of the property. Two proposals were received. Of the two proposals, the.
Speaker 9: Selection panel unanimously preferred the proposal submitted by Scott.
Speaker 1: Pitch, which proposal provides for the development of.
Speaker 9: A retail center containing.
Speaker 1: 5500 square feet.
Speaker 9: With that, staff stands ready to answer your questions.
Speaker 10: Councilman Austin Certainly I stand in support of this. Councilmember Andrews was wasn't able to be here. He had a he could be here. So he asked me to stand in support. Obviously, PCH is a critical area for economic development and this property has been vacant for a long time. And so this is progress for the sixth District right there, PCH and Pine. And so I'd ask for your support.
Speaker 0: There's a second by Vice Mayor Richardson. Is there any public comment?
Speaker 9: Once again, we have a sale of another of public land that's not necessarily being used here for a public good and it's not being used for affordable housing. We again questioning the Surplus Land Act by the state of California, which requires municipalities to, in good faith, provide opportunities for affordable housing developers to make bids on these properties and to develop them a priority for affordable housing. And again, we're just not sure that that's happening and it hasn't been happening with a large number of sales or redevelopment lots. And given the affordable housing crisis that we're facing in the city, with vacancy rates hovering at 2% and lower rents that are going up over 10%, the largest rent increases in the state of California, the second largest rent increases in the entire country. That with the shrinking housing stock, perhaps we should be looking at using these lots for affordable housing, or at least looking at if the Surplus Land Act would benefit us in using and using that to develop these properties for affordable housing . I just want to go on record as housing lobby, questioning whether or not we're following the Surplus Land Act. Thank you very.
Speaker 1: Much. And may or may be a.
Speaker 9: Direct response to that. Sure. If Josh would like.
Speaker 1: To look at the towards the bottom of.
Speaker 9: Page three on both staff reports and compliance with government government code section.
Speaker 1: 54220.
Speaker 9: Chapter 621 Statutes of 1968. On June 1st.
Speaker 1: And December 8th, staff notified the state of California.
Speaker 9: That the.
Speaker 1: Successor.
Speaker 9: Agency was declaring all future development and sale.
Speaker 1: Properties as surplus.
Speaker 9: Yes. And it's a it's my question is, is what are our requirements with regards to how we go about selling the surplus property? Are we prioritizing affordable housing? Because that's my understanding of the Surplus Land Act. Surplus land requires a notification to the state, which we complied with. What about to the affordable housing developers that these sites are for?
Speaker 0: So, so. So. Thank you. So obviously this is not option for the back and forth. But what we are clearly there's some questions, Josh, that you might have about our process. So, Mr. Conaway, can you just make sure you connect with Mr. Butler offline and just tell him the process so what we do? My pleasure.
Speaker 1: Thank you.
Speaker 9: I appreciate it. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Speaker 0: Sure thing. Okay. There's a motion to say and the other public comment saying non, please cast your votes. | Contract | Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFP EP16-129 for the purchase and development opportunity at Pine Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway (1814 Pine Avenue/101 East Pacific Coast Highway), Assessor Parcel Numbers 7209-016-900 -901 (Subject Property);
Declare the City-owned Subject Property as surplus;
Authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute any and all necessary documents, including a Purchase and Sale Agreement with Mkott Pich, LLC, a California limited liability company, for the sale of the Subject Property in the amount of $370,000; and
Accept Categorical Exemption CE 16-177. (District 6) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_08022016_16-0694 | Speaker 2: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next up is item 19.
Speaker 2: Report from Public Works Recommendation to award a contract to United Stormwater to provide storm drain, routine maintenance and repair for a total contract amount, not to exceed 345,000 citywide.
Speaker 0: There's a motion and a second. Is there any public comment saying, please cast your vote, please come on down.
Speaker 6: Good evening, Honorable Mayor and City Council. My name is Ed Perry and I'm the president of United Strong Water and also United Pumping Service. We're a family owned business. And as I referred to, just the two of us, United, we're a family owned minority business, which next month will be celebrating 45, 46 years in business. We provide jobs for about 150 families, including quite a few families here in the city of Long Beach. We are the incumbent for this contract. We've been doing this work for the city of Long Beach for about ten years. And from all the feedback that I hear, we're doing a very good job. And if we weren't doing a good job, we would not have been given the the other option optional years winter at the time as we have been in the past. There was some protest by by the runner up ocean blue and and I just so I really don't know how that turned out. And that's why I'm here tonight, just to to speak up for our company. But our company is a much larger, much larger organization. And we have a lot more resources in the way of equipment of people. The contract that they brought up, a concern about response time. Our contract is principally a maintenance contract. And while there is some an R function, United is very much an air contractor. We've been performing emergency response since 1970, actually been delivering on various emergency response contrasting and since 1982. So although there has not been much of a need for the emergency emergency response part of the contract, which might happen if there was flooding due to all the droughts we've been having when that has occurred, we've been Johnny on the spot. We've been right there. Our project manager in charge of the contract actually lives in the area and he's actually often shows up on site before and his city employees to do search.
Speaker 0: Just just to let you know also that the recommendation is you're with United Storm Water. Yes, sir. So the recommendation is to award the contract to United Storm Water. And so there is no other thing we're we're looking at right now.
Speaker 6: Okay. Okay. In that case, to the sector, thank you very much for your patronage. All right. That was just good to the intimate. Thank you very much. No problem.
Speaker 0: Thank you for for what you do for the city. There's a motion. There was a motion in a second. No other public comment. Members, please cast your votes. | Contract | Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFP PW16-131 and award a contract to United Storm Water, Inc., of City of Industry, CA, to provide storm drain routine maintenance and repair, in an annual amount of $276,000, and authorize an annual 25 percent contingency in the amount of $69,000, for a total annual contract amount not to exceed $345,000, for a period of three years, with the option to renew for two additional one-year periods, at the discretion of the City Manager. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_08022016_16-0695 | Speaker 2: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 2: Item 20 Report from Public Works Recommendation to execute seven contracts for as needed Public Works, Construction Management and inspection services under the same terms and conditions previously approved by the City Council under RFQ. P.W. 16 Dash 115. Citywide.
Speaker 0: There's a motion and a second. Any public comment saying Please cast your vote?
Speaker 7: Oh, yes. Thank you to our public works staff. So Craig and Pat West and Tom and Charlie, I want to thank you for you know, I had mentioned it in the last meeting and the fact that we're able to add seven more businesses, three of which are from Long Beach, certainly, I think is is a step in the right direction. So I appreciate the work. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilor Austin.
Speaker 10: Yes. I want to also thank staff for being responsive to the questions and adding local businesses and that with this staff report, I really especially appreciate getting the breakdown of companies with local employees and where they live and local jobs. It means a lot and it shows that that we are certainly looking out for for folks who are going to give back to our local economy. So thank you and thank you all Councilmember Gonzalez for for champion this issue.
Speaker 0: Okay. There's a motion in a second, please. Any public comment, please cast your votes. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute contracts with Berg & Associates, Inc., of San Pedro, CA; Griffin Structure, Inc., of Irvine, CA; HDR Construction Control Corporation, of Long Beach, CA; Michael Baker International, Inc., of Irvine, CA; P2S Construction Management, of Long Beach, CA; The Alliance Group Consulting, of Los Angeles, CA; and Totum Corporation, of Long Beach, CA, as part of the list of firms for as-needed Public Works construction management and inspection services, under the same terms and conditions previously approved by the City Council under RFQ PW16-115 (three years, with the option to renew for two additional one-year terms, total aggregate authority of $39,000,000 for all firms). (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_07192016_16-0660 | Speaker 0: Great. Okay. Madam Clerk, if you can go ahead and read the item, please. Which is item number 19? Yep.
Speaker 1: Communication from Councilmember Richardson, Councilwoman Gonzalez. Councilwoman Mongo recommendation to request the city attorney to prepare all documents necessary to place one or more possible ballot initiatives on the November 8th ballot related to the taxation of recreational and medical marijuana, and. Or to prepare and return a competing medical marijuana regulatory ordinance for placement on the ballot.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. I'm going to go out and turn this over to Councilmember Richardson.
Speaker 11: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So last week, the city council voted to submit a petition driven ballot measure to the voters in the in November 2016 regarding the regulation and taxation of medical marijuana businesses in our city. In that measure, there are provisions that will repeals taxes previously adopted in 2010 by city voters related to the sale and cultivation of recreational marijuana and significantly reduce the voter approved taxes on medical marijuana. In addition, a statewide initiative regarding recreational marijuana is qualify for placement on the November 2016 statewide ballot. That measure permits local governments to establish local sales and use taxes related to the sale of production. Recreational marijuana if passed. Tonight, we have an opportunity to make sure that our taxable structure is set up in a way that we capture tax revenue with both medicinal and recreational cannabis in order to offset our own costs as a city, and that we have the resources to ensure a public benefit. Therefore, I move. Here's a vote. I'm making a motion and I'm submitting this motion to the clerk to share with the council, should they if they want it. The motion is to request the city attorney to prepare and return to City Council all documents necessary to place an initiative on the November 8th, 2016 ballot related to the taxation of marijuana businesses. At its August 2nd meeting, which does the following number one. Establishes a gross receipts tax of 6% on medical marijuana dispensaries and delegates authority to increase that tax to a maximum rate of 8% by a majority vote of the city council. Number two, it establishes a gross receipts tax of 8% on the non-medical sale of marijuana for adult use and delegates authority to increase that tax to a maximum rate of 12% by a majority vote of the city council. Number three establishes a gross receipts tax of 6% on any business located in Long Beach that engages in the manufacture, testing, processing, distributing, packaging or labeling of marijuana or marijuana containing products, medical or non-medical for wholesale to other retail marijuana businesses that sell those products to customers and delegates authority to increase that tax to a maximum rate of 8% by a majority vote of the City Council. If such a business conducts retail sales, the gross receipts tax identified above on retail sales in Long Beach will apply in lieu of the tax in this section and then finally establish a tax of $12 per square foot of space dedicated in the cultivation of marijuana over the canopy area and delegated authority to increase that tax to a maximum rate of $15 per square foot by majority vote of the City Council. So this motion applies only to the taxation of marijuana and leaves untouched other sections of the regulation of medical marijuana businesses initiatives that qualified for the ballot through signature gathering. So again, this approach is balanced, it's modest. It assures that the tax revenue is captured to ensure that the city of Long Beach does receive public benefit. Should the voters move forward with adopting this this marijuana ordinance? I urge support. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. There is the motion and a second on the floor. I'm going to do public comment first. Or Councilwoman Price, do you want to go next? Councilman Price was asked to go to public comment first.
Speaker 10: I have a question. I just had a question.
Speaker 0: Oh, sure.
Speaker 10: Councilman, is this considered a competing initiative.
Speaker 7: Vice mayor or members of the council? It would be a competing measure as to the taxing portion of the initiative. We would make it clear in this if it were approved by the council when it came back, it would make it clear to the voters that this would compete with the tax portion of that initiative. But the rest of the regulatory ordinance it would not compete with. Okay. Would not invalidate the regulatory ordinance.
Speaker 10: Okay. But in regards to the taxes and things, there's direct, direct differences between what's proposed and what this competing initiative.
Speaker 7: That is correct. And under the election code, in order to be successful, this initiative, this proposal would have to receive more votes than the other initiative.
Speaker 10: Okay, great. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I see no other council comment. Any public comment? Please come forward. No.
Speaker 5: Go ahead. My name is Stephanie Dawson, so I'm a resident of the second district. I will say that the taxes that are being assessed for are proposed on this measure with pursuant to manufacturing distribution are entirely within line, reasonable and balanced within the retail sector. However, I will warn that they are that in anywhere with above 6% is going to be high. If a in a collateral bill from the county also passes, which is going to assess a 10% sales tax on top of that, especially pursuant to the four medical patients, is going to be extremely problematic because one each has passed a 10% sales tax on her own just for the city. Combine that with the inability for any of these retail businesses, especially to deduct any of their business expenses because of the federal prohibition on it. And you're going to be tapped out. You're going to be making retail outlets essentially unable to function, potentially. You're going to have ones that are going to be well-financed and ready and willing to open, willing to provide good union, local jobs that frankly, will not be able to operate with an effective tax rate. You know, just adding these all up in my head at this point, you know, they could be anywhere from 50 to 75% with inclusion of the problem from the feds. So please do not tax retail, tax manufacturing, feel free to tax cultivation, distribution, any of those things. But at this point, wait until the county is going to be making clear how much of a bite they're going to be taking on the front end. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 12: I am Francis, Emily Tyson Harris and I reside in District one. And I don't really have a lot of background in terms of the details of all this, but I will share this much. I've watched different programs where they speak about the taxation, and there is a concern about persons that have medical problems and the tax level for medicinal marijuana and the problems that will create like financially for them in terms of paying this extra money. And the other thing has to do with I don't know if you can answer this at this particular time, but I'm kind of a bit concerned to see, I understand about the taxing allowance, tax benefit that the state of California is going to have to pass out. But this extra money that the money that the state is giving, what's the plans with the state? How do they plan to spend the money? What are they going to do with this extra money and. I didn't hear anything mentioned was just a good thing about home delivery, a marijuana type service, which I don't believe that's on the plate. But when he mentioned about the federal government, that's a major matter of concern because some of the programs and different conversations I've had and just trying to search to get more knowledge about the matter, there's a concern about with the federal government receiving money and there's collectives in other states that literally cannot make purchases with credit cards, debit cards. It all has to be done by cash. So there's a major problem with tracking the money. So I don't know what is in line with this, but I really, really, really seriously think that something's going to have to be on the have to be established in terms of how the money's going to be tracked. So thank you very much. And I can't say that I approve of all of these levels because I find it somewhat problematic. I reason I understand why you have it here, but there's still to me, a lot of questions are not answered. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: Thank you. Surely researching or consultant Pastor Schwab Group and Associates as we're sitting here tonight, I need to remind us that as we as you're about to vote, a vote is being cast in heaven because God is watching each of you. And you represent not just the city. You represent each of your family members. So while you're voting in this year, you're saying to your family members and those who are unborn that I support you starting to either smoke marijuana. I support the wave of the fumes in the park. So I support being with you when you go by the buildings. I supported the people who are sitting in the cars. The smell of it. I am supporting. True story. When I was not here from 2012 through 2014. The beginning of 2015 is when I returned back to the city of Long Beach. I was starting initiative services for homeless in Ventura County, helping to augment their services. That is where I have been. When I was out before you, I was recommended by a parent who was her son. Ventura County sheriff officer said, I want you, my son, to work with your organization. The son had a heroin problem and he was now going through rehabilitation to get off of heroin. And so as a pastor and both as a volunteer coordinator, his mother wanted him to work with me and I had a chance to ask him. I said, I have not done drugs. I have not cigarets alcohol is not a part of my daily. So I need your honest opinion. Young man, 21 years old, having come through Cordon Blue Chef training, but he couldn't even use the skill because now he was hooked on heroin. I said, Where do you start? I said, I'm hearing talk that marijuana is the gateway drug. I need your personal opinion. 21 year old now sitting in front of me needing help. Where did it start? He said Marijuana. I started smoking marijuana. And then after you do that, somebody comes along, you know, they're putting Primos, right? They're mixing the cocaine with the marijuana. And then we have a had our chief in his absence. I don't see him anymore. But I remember Suzy asked in the chief are we have can handle the the the the outside carriers or distributors or manufacturers of the product. And she said no, we can handle it. So now we're voting it in anyway any power that is God puts it in office. So he had your chief and all the other police officers tell you we cannot handle this if people who are not authorized to sell this product began to make it illegally. So you're voting it in in spite of hearing your chief. So why are you doing that? Understand that God is saying, okay, all of your family members, somebody is going to be end up with a drug habit and they're not going to stop at marijuana. Prophetically, you are giving this order of the day. Thank you. Due process.
Speaker 0: Time is up. Next speaker is our final public speaker. It looks like I'm going to close public speaking after dark after councilman tauranga and then the speaker's close.
Speaker 1: Next speaker thank you, diana. La genes. And by the way, welcome to janine piercer, our newest. Yeah, i would actually like to answer that very quickly. Marijuana is not a gateway drug up. In fact, actually, it's used quite often for a gateway drug out of heroin and out of alcoholism and out of those things. So it is actually an effective drug gateway out of those things. And what I would also say is 600 churches just recently came on board saying that we need to legalize and deal with it as a as a health issue. Now, speaking of being God given. Now, medical marijuana is a miraculous God given herb. This was given to us by God. Thank you. And it treats a myriad of illness ailments that includes cancer, multiple sclerosis, epilepsy, PTSD. And I think you've heard me say these things before, but you need to get it, because what I hear is that it you know, I keep hearing you say things that, you know, well, it's this or it's that. These are myths. Don't perpetuate the myths. It's discriminatory. You've had the opportunity to create a reasonable ordinance, but you failed. You had the citizens put forth their time and money and effort. And now you want to undermine this this effort. And it's totally disrespectful. Now, here we're talking about taxes. Okay. So you're talking 6 to 10 sales. 6 to 8 gross grow. 12 to 15 square foot on the grow. That's besides the 10% that the L.A. C Los Angeles County is putting forward. The state is charging 15%. The state board of Equalization starting charging 10%. Come on, people. How greedy can you be? I mean, this this showing nothing but greed. Discrimination against groups is wrong. Yet this council and government continues to demonize and degrade people who are sick and disabled that need this medicine. You've got 900 over almost 900 liquid drug outlets in Long Beach. And yet you demonized this this God given plant. So your constituents have voted time and again for in favor of it. It needs to go. You had your opportunity. Let it be. If you want to do something good, bring it back and make it into law now instead of sending it to the voters. In the end, we're all have to answer to a higher power. And, you know, I really wonder how this deliberation would go if Jesus Christ himself was standing here. I think he'd be ashamed. Anyway, you're supposed to be representatives and leaders, and we'd like to know when will that start?
Speaker 0: Thank you. And our last speaker. And then we're going back to the council.
Speaker 1: Tony was the wrong address on file. I just want the council to use the utmost caution and be as conservative as possible when it comes.
Speaker 6: To medical marijuana. If it was my preference.
Speaker 1: I would not tax medical marijuana at all, but put the burden on recreational.
Speaker 6: And I think, you know, we can't.
Speaker 1: Go to my sister who has who has a husband, had stage four colon cancer. She couldn't.
Speaker 6: Go to take her Blue Shield card.
Speaker 1: And get compensation or pay for that medicine. The Rick Simpson oil that that relieved.
Speaker 6: Him I think it was Simpson oil something like that.
Speaker 1: That really helped to.
Speaker 6: Alleviate the pain. She couldn't do that.
Speaker 1: She had to cash in her retirement so that she wouldn't see her husband suffer. He ultimately took care of it by his own hands.
Speaker 6: And it was unfortunate, but the pain he was going through was just too much for her and for him.
Speaker 1: So it's not like you can just go to your insurance company and say, hey, this really is something that helps and that is proven. So I would ask for you to reconsider. At least take a look at it and make sure that you are you have some.
Speaker 6: Consideration, sympathy for those people.
Speaker 1: Who actually use this to alleviate their pain and to use it because they need it. And it is an economic burden as well as a physical one.
Speaker 3: And again, I would prefer that medical.
Speaker 1: Marijuana is not taxed at all and that all the burden is put on recreational.
Speaker 3: But I know it's up to you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Okay. Speaker list is closed. We're going back to the council for a vote. Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 10: I have a question about this tax. Is it one of the things that I agree with, with one of the comments that Shirley made? Our police chief has indicated very publicly that our police department cannot handle the additional responsibilities that not the legal operations, but the illegal operations would bring. And what we've seen is in the city of L.A., for example, there's 135 legal dispensaries and over 1000 illegal ones. So it is going to place a strain on our police department. That's just a reality. So the question that I have is, is it possible for us similar to things that we've done in the past to indicate whether it's tonight or at some point down the road, an intent to spend the money on public safety so that the money that's generated through the taxes goes back into enforcing the operations. Because I'm sure that even the legal operators will want the police's assistance in shutting down the illegal operators. So we're going to need to have some money in enforcing the operations. And could this tax be used for that?
Speaker 0: Mr. City.
Speaker 7: Attorney. Thank you, Mayor. Members of the council, the tax revenue and the way I understand the motion, that the motion would come back to you as a general tax, which would go to the general fund and then allocated by the Council as the Council deems appropriate. If if there was a desire to dedicate the proceeds to, as you said, law enforcement or code enforcement or other services necessary, you may create it as a special tax, which would require a two thirds vote of the people in order to pass. So I think you have to be very careful on how you allocate or where you would say you would dedicate it. Similar to Measure A, there was a resolution non-binding that was advisory on the council for that. Something like that could be done, but generally speaking, it would be a general tax come to the Council for allocation
Speaker 10: . So the resolution, would that be something that could come to the council after tonight?
Speaker 7: That is correct. It could come at any time.
Speaker 10: Okay. So I would make a friendly amendment that we asked the city attorney to look at a resolution that would express the intent of the council to spend any tax revenues, to cost recovery for any operations associated with medical marijuana enforcement, which would probably be for the illegal operations, which I think are the biggest concern for all of us.
Speaker 11: I would so number one, I would say that I think there is a there is a conversation about, you know, from a legal standpoint, how to what are the implications of when we place this on the ballot and dedicated? Does it require a higher threshold to be adopted or are there some steps that we can consider? So I think I think a good friendly should be to inquire if the city attorney can come back with options on, you know, what are the implications of one or the other. Because what I don't want to do is, you know, we're kind of under a deadline to make sure we meet the appropriate, you know, timeline for the to make place on the ballot. So if you're willing to make your friendly more broad come back show some options for how we can dedicated obviously I think the city council would support if there was a resolution about public safety, but there might be other things in place and we just need to broaden it a little bit.
Speaker 10: Sure. Sure. And just to clarify, I mean, I know we're under the gun, which is why I had suggested we start discussing a competitive initiative a couple of weeks ago. But I understand we're under the gun and I'm not asking for a resolution or anything to come back at the next council meeting. I'm just saying at some point in the future, so so we can word it as broadly as you like. Maybe we can say at some point after this item, the city attorney to come back with options on how the city council can basically declare their intent for how the tax money. So as long.
Speaker 11: As they declare the. Sure, that's fine.
Speaker 5: Sure.
Speaker 0: And and as part of that city attorney, I think what Councilman Price is is is asking, is that a process that we put in place similar to Measure A where the council very clearly said where the intent was. But obviously, the you know, the measure itself was a general tax, but there was resolutions and there was other materials that were that were adopted that the council showed pretty clear intent about where the tax revenue would go.
Speaker 7: We can do that for you. But it is my understanding that that resolution of that option won't come back on August 2nd. It'll be some time after that.
Speaker 0: Okay. That's perfect. Thank you. We're going to. Councilman Pearce.
Speaker 2: Just want to thank you for being here. Guys, can you hear me? Thank you, Vice Mayor, for bringing this option to us. I just want to stress that I would also want to have that conversation about where the money goes to. I have one question for a city attorney. Can you clarify the county tax? Should that pass? Where would those funds go to where Long Beach have to apply or is it automatic?
Speaker 7: And I may ask the city manager to add in here. It's my understanding that these those funds will not automatically come to the city of Long Beach, that they will be dedicated special tax for homeless. And I believe that the city maybe there may be opportunities to apply for certain grants, but there is no guaranteed source of any revenue coming to Long Beach from the proposed county tax.
Speaker 2: Okay. And then I just want to stress I mean, I want to thank Tony Razor for her comments. I think looking at the state level around, you know, the lowest tax possible for medical is something that, you know, when we continue this conversation, looking at how many funds would come in, should we lower that amount to even a 4%, even though that that is something that's not in the original ballot measure? So I just wanted to make that comment.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. So we have a motion in a second on the floor to approve the motion by Councilman Richardson, as I stated with the friendly by Councilwoman Susie Price. Members, please go ahead and cast for votes.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Okay. Excellent. Thank you very much, counsel. We're going to go ahead and now move on to the next item, which is there's a request from Councilman Gonzales. What item would you like to hear? I'm sorry. That related to Harvey Milk Park, you said. Kick. Madam Clerk, item number nine. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Attorney to prepare and return to the City Council for its consideration, all documents necessary to place one or more possible ballot initiatives on the November 8, 2016 ballot related to the taxation of recreational and medical marijuana; and/or request City Attorney to prepare and return a competing medical marijuana regulatory ordinance for placement on the November 2016 ballot. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_07192016_16-0645 | Speaker 0: Kick. Madam Clerk, item number nine.
Speaker 1: Report from City Manager Recommendation to approve the scope of work for the outdoor office in Harvey Milk Park and Equality Plaza, District one.
Speaker 0: Councilman Gonzalez.
Speaker 10: Yes. And Arturo, is there a staff report to please.
Speaker 5: Yes. Good evening, Mayor Garcia. Members of the city council, Arturo Sanchez with the city manager's office. The item we have before you is per the council request, to return with a revised scope of work that is inclusive of the elements that were important to the Harvey Milk Park Committee. Staff has had several discussions with the committee and we developed, I believe, a scope of work that is reflective of maintaining a strong identity related to Harvey Milk, the legacy that he brings, as well as the memory wall in the wall recognizing civic leaders related to the LGBTQ community in Long Beach.
Speaker 10: Great. And I just have a couple questions. Arturo, thank you very much for your work in this and working with the committee as well as my office to really create a better understanding of what the grant will comprise of. Can you go over how many meetings you've had with the committee so far?
Speaker 5: Yes, ma'am. Through the chair to Councilmember Gonzalez, we have had three meetings, I believe, and several discussions via email with the leadership of the committee.
Speaker 10: Okay. Great. And just an overview, if you could. I understand there will be an outdoor office space. Like what other key elements can you describe in this scope of work so people can really understand what this will become very soon?
Speaker 5: Yes, ma'am. In the attachment page one, under the opportunity to summarize the project towards the tail end of that description, if I could read a few sections from there it will say it is of paramount importance that Harvey Milk Promenade Park and Equality Plaza continue to serve as a memorial for Harvey Milk and other leaders in the LGBTQ community. As more users are drawn to the outdoor office, more people can be exposed to the life and legacy of Harvey Milk. In this way, the message of the park is amplified beyond the existing memorial. It is the city's intention to consider reorienting the park, enhancing LGBTQ elements and or add a commemorative element of Harvey Milk so as to incorporate the message and meaning of the park into the added amenities in ways that are respectful, creative and inspiring amenities and or elements such as increasing redesigning the space for plaques of local LGBTQ, creating and designing a creative dynamic and visual representation of LGBTQ heroes at the Park and Equality Plaza. Representation of the LGBT and Mr. Q their pride colors by creating and or designing a representation of pride colors that is artistically and visually impactful that transcends day and night. Creating and designing some imagery of Harvey Milk at the Park and Equality Plaza and potentially incorporating the history of Harvey Milk and history of local LGBT. Next, another Q Movement. Finally, the programing of the park must intentionally and specifically include programing for LGBT communities and its allies. One of the important things to point out here is that, of course, it's a $300,000 grant and there will be decisions that will need to be made about how these elements are included. And the committee is committed to working with us. In fact, they've already designated three members to work closely with us on with the rest of the community stakeholders that will be pulling together now to really start the serious work on this project.
Speaker 10: Great. Again, I really want to thank you very much for your work on this because I know it's so very important for the downtown community, the LGBTQ community. We have Vanessa, Deb and Raul that are here from the Harvey Milk Park Committee. I also see Craig Cogen as well, who had been involved with so many things in downtown, of course, of being the CEO and thank you to city staff as well. I think this is going to be a impeccable project for including more local LGBTQ honorees, but also enlivening the life of Harvey Milk. And so I see that coming together beautifully. And thank you all very much for being here. I appreciate it.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Are we at the second of that motion was with was Vice Mayor Richardson.
Speaker 11: I just wanted to chime in and just say that I've been following this this project for a while now. In fact, I was you know, we're trying our best to emulate the outdoor office concept at Highland Park. But I just wanted to say that tremendous work has been done here. And and I know that is sometimes difficult to pull together different interests and and make something happen. So this is really, really a good testament to your leadership. Council Member GONZALEZ So thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next up is Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 10: Thank you. I, too, want to express my support for this project. I think it's really great. The most impressive part of this process for me was staffs working with the community to get it right. So whatever the process was at the outset, I only read about it in the paper, but it wasn't ideal. And the fact that everybody kind of came to the table and made the process right and made it something that the councilwoman is so happy with is really a great thing to witness. And obviously something that all of us with different projects in our in our districts can relate to. Just making sure that that process is good so that the the project, if it's successful, is successful not just because of the end product, but because of the process, too. So this is great. I wish I wish I had an outdoor office to work in every day. I think it's going to be a great asset to have. I did try to suggest it to some of the stuffy lawyers I work with and they laughed and said, Dream on. So I look forward to watching other people working in their outlets or outdoor offices as I drive to work. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman Pierce.
Speaker 2: Yes. I just wanted to say what a great job Councilmember Gonzalez, Councilwoman Gonzalez has done. And congratulations to the committee that's worked on this. One of the first times I spoke at council as a resident was supporting the creation of Harvey Milk Park based on everything that he's taught our community about courage. And so it's great to have this celebrate Harvey Milk, but also have it as an opportunity to invite others into that space that might not know who he is. And so I just want to congratulate everybody for really working together and hopefully it's a model for how we can work on future projects. So thank you, everyone.
Speaker 0: Thank you. With that, we have any public comment. Please come forward.
Speaker 5: Larry, would you click as the address? I would request that this city take judicial notice. Of the staff report when this. Subject to change a little too. It came up the last council meeting of the meeting before when they pointed it out that Long Beach is the only the only the only city in this country. To have a plaza named after Harvey Milk. Or the mayor of the of San Francisco. Related to that. The only reason we have this here is because of the despicable conduct of a photo addicted political pipsqueak that thought he could make political hay out of the unfortunate and tragic, tragic deaths of two individuals. By naming the park after a person who had no connection to this city whatsoever and in so doing, gave the middle finger. The Long Beach residents that were within that community. That does not speak well for the character of this city. And it does what I'm saying does not eviscerate some of the comments some people have made here tonight. But the genesis of this. Is what needs to be. Worked out eradicated. It may have to be completely taken down and shipped back. And it's particularly devastating to the city's image when it comes with what's happening when combined with what's unfolded in the last three, six months. Pimping out. Teenagers. In an attempt to get a selfie with the first lady. And also in solving her. By suggesting her character was such that she would like to come down, she would allow herself to be come down and be seen as elbowing her way into a situation where more people or local residents were more qualified. To have a library named after a period. That's an insult to the first lady of the United States, all orchestrated in the final analysis by a political pipsqueak who will be by the end of the year, in prison. I suggest you again take judicial notice of the fact and ask yourself why no other city in the country has it. It does not speak well for the character of any individual on this council. That does not.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much.
Speaker 5: For coming back and redo it.
Speaker 0: Excellent. A related message to the six neighborhood organizations who all unanimously voted to endorse naming their local park after Harvey Milk. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: Thank you. When I. Now. Did some study on the Harvey Milk legend. I noted that he had fought for all minorities, not just the LGBT. Not just the. The. Same sex community and. Somewhere in there I thought, Oh, the homeless fit in there. So while we are closing out Linkin Park. And I've thought about this for a while. The homeless have nowhere to go. They don't have a park. So that's how Harvey Milk fought for all minorities, all people who were outcast. He fought for the outcast. Is it feasible as we're closing out Lincoln Park for the redevelopment? To now say to the homeless community, here is a place where you, too, can gather. Outdoor office. What does that mean? Maybe there would be some people sitting out door in that office on staff who could. Help facilitate the homeless who are part of the same sex community. Harvey Milk didn't just fight for the same sex community. He fought for those who were of the outcast IV service, those who were of the same sex transferring into another outward gender community. And when you're homeless and you're trying to go from a man to a woman or a woman to a man, it's much harder. But if that if if the park that Mr. Miller fought for embraces all of the outcasts, which includes the homeless. And then we have the, the, the same sex community and the transferring into another outward appearance community embrace the homeless. You're bringing all of the outcasts together. Now we have to ask ourself. If the same sex community is looking down on the homeless, what really is going on here? If the only park we have is for the same sex or the transfering out of my God given gender into another outward appearance community. Then. Then we're having a park, but we're we're leaving another whole community out of the accommodation of the park that is named after the legend who fought for all of the outcasts. I need you to think about it. Where are the homeless community community going to go? When you get up Linkin Park. Abe Lincoln would probably want to know.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Mr. Sir. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Really? Mayor Council City staff. First of all, congratulations to Councilmember Supernova De Andrews and Al Austin on the reelection and congratulations, Jeanine Pierce. It's especially nice to see you up there. Thank you very much for your continued support on this project. I was here about three weeks ago when the grant needed to be approved and the committee is has been committed to this project since the initial days in 2012 with then Councilmember Robert Garcia. And we continue to work with Councilwoman Lena Gonzalez and city staff. So we appreciate the support and we will continue to work with the city and on behalf of the committee. Again, thank you very much for your continued support.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: Vanessa Romain. I sit on the Harvey Milk Committee and I'm also part of the new ad hoc.
Speaker 3: Committee that be working.
Speaker 6: Much closer with Mr. Sanchez in making sure that things go the way that the committee has seen and supported and and youth city council members have supported.
Speaker 1: Harvey Milk Park is our part. And I say our.
Speaker 6: Our.
Speaker 1: Community.
Speaker 6: Doesn't matter what your language should look like. We've got people staying over there now and we haven't even done anything that are homeless at that park. We haven't had the.
Speaker 3: Police chase them away.
Speaker 6: We are in support of the outside office. What it's going.
Speaker 3: To develop into.
Speaker 6: Be it's not just a park, just sit around. It's park for work. So, Miss Price, you're welcome to come visit our outdoor office at any time that you like, because it will be there. And it will be there as long as the community understands that.
Speaker 3: Harvey Milk made a difference. We on the committee in a part.
Speaker 6: Of this city are truly.
Speaker 3: Going to continue to make a difference in this community. So thank you for supporting the concept.
Speaker 6: Thank you to Mr. Sanchez for sticking by us putting. He said he was three meetings. I could swear there was 12 meetings, but, you know, he can't count. So we don't need to worry about that. But the reality is we have met with him continuously. We've stopped, had coffee to kind of touch basis and understand one another and where we're coming from. So I don't think that there's any other staff member that you could have assigned to this duty.
Speaker 3: To do what he has done to bring the LGBTQ community together, along with the city's.
Speaker 6: Ambition to make Harvey Milk Park a little different.
Speaker 3: So thank you again for your support.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Thank you all. See no other public comment. We're going to go ahead and take a vote.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 5: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Now we're going to go to due to the public comment for tonight. And again, I apologize for tonight's moving around of a lot of stuff which I know is unusual. Let me list everyone that's up for public comment in this order. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to approve the scope of work for the ‘Outdoor Office’ in Harvey Milk Park and Equality Plaza. (District 1) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_07192016_16-0653 | Speaker 0: Okay, next item.
Speaker 1: Please report from Public Works in Parks and Recreation and Marine recommendation to award a contract by TEC Construction for the El Dorado Nature Center Improvement Project for a total contract amount not to exceed 759,000 district for.
Speaker 0: Do you? Can we clear the board? So. Customer Super and I can do this.
Speaker 5: Thank you.
Speaker 0: There's a controversy, Cipriano.
Speaker 4: If the technicians could put up a photograph rather than speak. I'd like the photograph to speak for me. If that if that's possible to do right now is item number 17. There you go. There's the gym of the fourth council district. I don't think I have to add words to that. Let's invest in this beautiful facility. Thank you. And and if I may add that it's from a local photographer, Victor Ladd, who took that shot. And if you'd like to have a print of it, you can contact my office. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember. There's a motion in a second, and I'm going to make a friendly that all future comments are just photos.
Speaker 5: Of the councilmembers. Okay.
Speaker 0: So would you accept that friendly amendment councilors, you or not?
Speaker 4: Absolutely.
Speaker 0: Okay. There's a motion and a second. Any public comment? Please cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Your next item.
Speaker 1: Communication from City Attorney Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code all relating to marinas. Read the first time and lead over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for Final Reading Districts two and three. | Contract | Recommendation to adopt Plans and Specifications No. R-7058 for the El Dorado Nature Center Improvements Project; award a contract to Bitech Construction Co., Inc., of Buena Park, CA, in the amount of $660,816, and authorize a 15 percent contingency in the amount of $99,122, for a total contract amount not to exceed $759,938; authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to enter into the contract, including any necessary amendments thereto; and
Accept Categorical Exemption 15-034. (District 4) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_07122016_16-0617 | Speaker 2: Okay. Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Item ten.
Speaker 2: Item ten. Item ten. A report from Economic and Property Development Services and Development Services. Recommendation to adopt specifications for the Purchase and Development Opportunity at 203 232 Long Beach Boulevard. Declare the city owned property as surplus and execute all necessary documents with broad Broadway block for the sale of the property in the amount of 7.8 million District two.
Speaker 1: Thank you. There's a moment in a second. Mr. West?
Speaker 12: Yes? I have a quick staff report. Our Economic and Property Development Director Mike Conway, and our Deputy City Attorney, Rich Anthony. Mayor Garcia, members of the city council, the city and the redevelopment agency were the owners of the entire Broadway block, bounded by Third Street on the North Broadway on the South Long Beach Boulevard on the West and Elm Avenue on the East. The block was aggregated into four sites site A, which includes acres of books and the vacant land to the north. Site B, the subject of tonight's agenda item, which includes the half block along Long Beach Boulevard, south of the acres of book site site C, which includes the art exchange building and the parking lot immediately to the south and site D, which includes the remainder of the half block along Elm Street Avenue to the south. Prior to the approval of Longridge Property Management Plan on October 21st, 2014, City Council authorized the sale of city owned land within site D to City Ventures for the development and construction of 40 residential units. After approval of the Long Range Property Management Plan on June eight and on June 23, 2015, successor agency authorized the sale of the remainder of Site D to City Ventures to complete its proposed residential project. On November 3rd, 2015, City Council authorized the sale of sites A and C to Reykjavik Properties for development of construction of a mixed use project and preservation and restoration of the art exchange on the acres of books buildings. The remaining property within the Broadway block is site B. Site B is categorized as future development in the long range property management plan, which was approved by the state on March 10th of 2015. Future development properties are disposed through a request for proposals process with selection based on best value to the city rather than on the highest purchase price. On April 8th, 2016, an RFP was released seeking proposals for a development concept. On site B, site B is a vacant lot containing 50,000 square feet and is being temporarily used as a parking lot. On June 17th, 2016, five proposals were received. A selection panel consisting of representatives from the Departments of Development, Services and Economic and Property Development and the city's real estate economics consultant Kaiser Marson Associates reviewed reviewed the five proposals and the five proposals offered a variety of development concepts, some of which were included partnering with Cal State University's Graduate School of Fine Arts and providing affordable housing to students and teachers along with creative office space and Programable outdoor courtyard space. The review panel preferred the development concept proposed by Broadway BLOCK LLC and recommended Broadway BLOCK LLC as the buyer of Site B. Broadway BLOCK LLC consists of the same entities that now control site A and site C, which are joined the subject property to the north and includes the acres of books building selecting Broadway BLOCK LLC as the buyer would result in a desirable assembly of a half a block of land promoting enhanced synergistic and thoughtful development opportunities. Land, assembly and preference to adjoining landowners are goals promoted in the long range property management plan. The development concept, proposed by the buyer for Site B, envisions a seven story structure containing 141 residential units, including studios , one bedrooms and two bedrooms. Additionally, the concept includes 12,285 square feet of commercial space, including 3200 square feet of multipurpose space for the university, 5200 square feet of retail space, and 3800 square feet of flex space. The concept also includes 6200 square feet of outdoor courtyard, networking and meeting space. The parking requirement for the development concept is 190 parking spaces, and the development concept assumes 10% of the units would be set aside as affordable. The buyer's development concept for Site B integrates with buyers development concept for its northerly adjoining property. Insight A The concept for a site A includes a 21 storey 234 unit market rate, residential tower and 21,459 square feet of commercial space, which includes repurposing the acres of books. Building the concept includes parcels and courtyards to connect site A and site B, further activating the public space and building on the synergy and energy of each site. And the parking requirement for this development concept is 321 parking spaces. The combined combined development concept for sites A and B envisions 375 residential units, of which 14 are set aside as affordable 5700 square feet of creative office space, 3800 square feet of flex space. 19,587 square feet of retail space. 6000 square feet of loft space. 1300 square feet of art exchange space and 3200 square feet of university space. The parking requirement for the combined concept is 511 parking spaces. The buyer's development concept identifies 524 parking spaces, which are 13 spaces more than what would be required by code as conceived. Onsite parking exceeds code required parking. The buyer proposes to purchase the property for $7,850,000, which is the highest price offered for the property. The development. Concept also identifies a total development cost of $154 million, which includes the adjoining site A, which is the highest development investment as well, together with the affordable component and the creative synergy achieved through assembly and joint development. The review panel believes the proposal submitted by Broadway BLOCK LLC offers the best value for the city after execution of a purchase and sale agreement. Due diligence is anticipated. Take 90 days. Entitlement and secret clearance is anticipated to take a year with close of escrow, not more than 18 months from the opening of escrow. After issuance of building permits, Buyer anticipates 24 months to complete project construction. And as these timelines are estimates, staff requests some flexibility for unanticipated delay delays. It is important to note that the project, as previously described, is a proposal only and that tonight's action does not in any way constitute city's approval or entitlement of the proposed project. Tonight's action does not commit the city to close the sale of the property until the Sequa process is completed, including the potential imposition of mitigation measures and alternative uses of the property. And with that staff request that City Council adopt specifications number RFP Pep 16 Dash 130 declared the city owned property has surplus authorized city manager and designee to execute all documents necessary with Broadway BLOCK LLC for the sale of the subject property and accept categorical exemption. CD 16 Dash 159 And this concludes my staff report.
Speaker 1: To Vice Mayor Lowenthal.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and thank you, Mr. Conway. I wanted to thank you and the team for the time that you spent vetting this property and the right developer. This parcel is very near and dear to many of us in Long Beach, and it's important to sell to a developer that appreciates the need to include this creative space, the pedestrian nooks and outdoor activation in this mixed use property. I want to thank the team for giving me a walk through today of the art exchange process and the art exchange project for being extremely patient. Those of you who are involved in art exchange from the beginning, this dates back 16, 17 years of being very patient and diligent while we worked through this very long process. So while this may not be something that a lot of people remember, I know the original proponent, Steve Elicker especially, has been waiting for the city of Long Beach to be able to partner and bring this project forward of this type of a project for nearly 17 years. And so I want to thank you for that. The visit today was great. I can see the potential through all of what seems like it's broken in those buildings, in those adjacent buildings. But I know that there is something down the road that will be absolutely beautiful. So I'm happy to see this project moving forward and hope that my colleagues are, too. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. And there's a second by Councilman Gonzalez. Is there any councilman are you do you want to go any public comment on this project? Please come forward. If you're going to speak, you've got to get lined up right now and we're going to go to the vote.
Speaker 12: Larry, good to clear as the address, if this is. Such a fantastic project. I would think that you would have here an endorsement by the city auditor if if there is not one. May I suggest you postpone this until such time as that auditor is? The auditor makes their her professional analysis of it. Unless. Unless there's something you're trying to hide. A process, a project this long in the making and this long that it will. Certainly they're not going to break ground today or tomorrow or within the next month. The auditor should be able to come back and give you the report that you need and really should have.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 10: Hi. Good evening, counsel. My name is Jenna Kincaid. I'm a law student from UC Berkeley. I wasn't planning to speak tonight, but I saw this on the agenda. And I wanted to specifically ask the city attorney if you're aware of whether this complies with the California Surplus Land Act. This is a California statute that requires that any land owned by a city or government agency before being sold must first be offered to affordable housing developers for the purpose of affordable housing, as well as for the development of parks and other recreational spaces. This right here doesn't appear to comply with that. It looks like you went through an RFP process, but unless you specifically offered it to for affordable housing developers first. It would not comply with this act just given the turn around. I'm not sure if that was the case. And if not, like this is this would be an illegal landfill. So you're declaring it a surplus property. That means it falls within the scope of the act. And so the requirements of the act. I started off notes for you, but yeah. So first it's making, making these offers are going through this RFP process and then any developer, assuming that no affordable housing developer comes first and they are given priority. So if someone puts in a competitive an affordable housing plan, they should be given priority over any developer. And that's the developer that offers the most affordable units at the deepest level of affordability. If that's not the case, then you do sell it for market rate development. There's a requirement that 15% of any units developed for housing must be affordable to like low for low income housing. I'd like to see that presented here as part of this plan. If there are plans to do this that, you know, please share that. But by any means, that's like the catch. All right. That that's only if. An affordable housing developer hasn't already come forward with a plan. So, like, show me the plan. Show me the fix you sent to the affordable housing developers. This doesn't look like it complies with the Surplus Land Act. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. And we're going to go ahead and go to a vote. I don't know if you want to comment on that quickly.
Speaker 12: I'd be happy to comment. When the long range property management plan was approved by the state of California. All of the properties were processed through the Surplus Land Act to ensure that we would be able to proceed with these sales.
Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you. There's a motion and a second. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 2: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you. Next step is we're going to do item number, is it that was 16. So I could do item 16. We'll try to get through these as expeditiously as possible. And there's going to be a a motion that's ready to go here. | Contract | Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFP EP16-130 for the purchase and development opportunity at 200-232 Long Beach Boulevard, Assessor Parcel Numbers 7281-017-902, -903 and a portion of -900 (Subject Property);
Declare the City-owned Subject Property as surplus;
Authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute any and all necessary documents, including a Purchase and Sale Agreement with Broadway Block, LLC, a California limited liability company, or affiliate, for the sale of the Subject Property in the amount of $7,850,000; and
Accept Categorical Exemption CE 16-159. (District 2) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_07122016_16-0620 | Speaker 7: Excuse me, sir, you know, you've already been to the diocese. You can't come back and so on. Yes. Okay. Thank you very much. So. All right. So, city manager, we've already voted on this. Okay, fine. So we'll go to the next item. I want to thank everyone for coming out tonight. We appreciate your. Passionate consideration. Thank you again.
Speaker 5: 13 1337.
Speaker 7: Next item, please.
Speaker 2: Item seven. Communication from Councilwoman Gonzalez, Vice Mayor Lowenthal and Councilman Austin. Recommendation to request the city manager to review issues associated with parking impacts to neighborhoods adjoining the Deukmejian courthouse and returned to council with a report within 60 days.
Speaker 7: Any public comment on the item? Mr. Shelton. Right down.
Speaker 12: Good evening, Mr. Mayor. Pro tem. I don't know. Are you vice mayor yet? And rest of the city council and staff. My name is Gary Shelton. I live a couple of blocks a year. Chestnut and third in this proposed district. I hope I'm talking on item seven anyway. Last couple of times I've talked on other items and what I meant to you know, what I'm what I'm really hoping is that this is such a unique neighborhood where this parking preferred parking district is is proposed a study for it that I hope we don't have anything of of a boulder type that would maybe apply to other parts of town that don't have high rises with two or 300 people in a quarter of a block that don't have schools with with very little or no parking, that don't have huge public facilities, that employ thousands of people, that and draw other thousands of people on a daily basis into the neighborhood who are unused to it. Folks who are coming to court, having to be there at 830 in the morning. They don't even know that. We have one way streets downtown. They're driving around looking for parking. And it's not necessarily that they don't find parking right now. I'm not sure if we're short parking or if it's just hard to get to or if it's underused or just what it is. But I'm hoping that we have an actual study of the conditions that are on the ground here in this area brought back to you folks. So you have an opportunity to look at what are your options are in fact, parking meters an option? I'm not sure they are because people come to court, for example, and they're going to be there for more than 2 hours, either from 830 in the morning till 1130. And then they don't know what's going to happen the rest of the day. And smart meters, I believe you can't feed and we'll probably have smart meters. I wanted to also mention that there are you know, when it comes to housing and it comes to parking, they're clutch together. They always have been. We always look at the amount of parking versus the amount of housing that we have and there's a need and a demand there. And part of housing includes special needs families. And if you've ever studied or ever read the city's housing element, you'll understand that we pay special attention to the special needs families , which include families which are made up of seniors, large families, female heads of household, disabled members of families and others. These folks all will have special needs. And in this parking impacted neighborhood of mainly lower income and very low income and extremely low income people, you will find those families in abundance. They need to be looked at. And finally, I would I would wonder if the county can't be inclined to come up and step up to its responsibility to provide the parking that its own courthouse is creating a need for. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Mr. Shelton. I see item eight and nine has been withdrawn.
Speaker 3: Oh, I would like to speak, if I may. Thank you, Gary, for being here. I know you've been very patient with us. And so the reason for me bringing this item forward was merely because, of course, so many downtown residents have been impacted by parking. And so I wanted to make sure that we were super focused on a specific area that I get many calls about, which is the area around the courthouse, the Westgate Gateway neighborhood, as Gary has mentioned. And it also this item also will bring context to the courthouse and what exactly it means, because the courthouse in, you know , when in its inception is supposed to bring over 55,000 individuals to the area, every day I pass by there, there is an influx of people just looking for parking. You can even sometimes get a Starbucks because there's, you know, everybody's parking parked up and there's nowhere to park. And I feel for these residents in there and the impact that they're feeling every single day. I lived there myself for a few years as well, but hopefully I know I've talked to Craig Beck many times and I know he's truly invested in parking. He's worked on parking before, and I know that will come up with some good solutions, whether those are smart meters in some cases, whether they are opportunities for parking district, if that's an opportunity. And also looking at ways to alleviate some some impact for residents, of course, that's the whole motive for this item. So I want to thank the residents, want to thank I see Craig Cogen as well, who I know is invested in this issue. Also, I've talked to him many times about this, so thank you very much for being here as well, Craig. And then also to the other Craig Public Works. I don't know if you wanted to share any information as of now. Craig back. If not, we. I know we have 60 days to do that.
Speaker 6: Yeah, Councilman, I just. I would.
Speaker 1: Echo your.
Speaker 6: Comments, and we support your effort here.
Speaker 13: We'll go through and do our analysis and provide a report on some options.
Speaker 3: Wonderful. Thank you very much.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Comfortable in price.
Speaker 3: I have no comments. Thank you.
Speaker 7: No. Councilwoman Munger.
Speaker 10: Just as a comment to Gary, the courthouse was transferred to the state and so it would be more of.
Speaker 4: A state discussion now than a county discussion. But if you want to.
Speaker 10: Link up with our state representatives, many of us do capital on a corner where those state representatives are present and available.
Speaker 4: Thank you.
Speaker 7: Please cast your vote. I mean. Yes. Motion carries by 1989 has been withdrawn, will go to item 11. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Manager to review issues associated with parking impacts to neighborhoods adjoining the Deukmejian Courthouse, including but not limited to the areas bordered by Broadway to the South, 4th Street to the North, Cedar Avenue to the East and Golden Avenue to the West. Solution to consider include preferential parking districts, additional street parking meters, off-site parking options and additional enforcement. Return to Council with a report within 60 days. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_07122016_16-0632 | Speaker 2: Abla. Was it withdrawn?
Speaker 7: Of. You know, keep on. I. Yes. She said was withdrawn. Okay. We'll go out in 15.
Speaker 2: Report from City Clerk Recommendation to adopt resolution declaring results of the general municipal election held on Tuesday, June 7th.
Speaker 7: Any public comment on this item? Do you have a second, please? Could I get a second? Finally, we have a second. Any comments on. Conspiracy. I see.
Speaker 9: No. I moved to take the OR accept the certified election results and be occupied.
Speaker 7: Councilwoman Gonzalez. But. Okay, can we please get your votes?
Speaker 2: Motion carries.
Speaker 7: Item 16. Have we done that? Yes. Okay, fine. Okay. Now.
Speaker 6: So.
Speaker 12: Mary, of public comment and the last public comment. | Resolution | Recommendation to adopt resolution declaring results of the General Municipal Election held on Tuesday, June 7, 2016, relative to the runoff election in City Council District 2 and City Measures A and B. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_07052016_16-0603 | Speaker 0: Perfect. Now back to you. Item 12. I know the clerk already read the item. So we're on item 12. I'm going to turn this over to Council Member Richardson.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So tonight, I'm proud to begin a discussion about taking our commitment to equity to the next level as a city. I want to thank my co-sponsors, Councilwoman Gonzalez and Councilmember Durango Ranga. I just want to acknowledge Vice Mayor Lowenthal, who couldn't be be here. But she she was well aware that this is she signed on more so in the second District as the incoming second District council member is very active on this issue as well and has committed to take this up and and move forward on it. I want to thank the community members and the entire council who have sort of put Long Beach in a position to lead around work work like this. We wouldn't be able to have this conversation if it weren't for the groundwork being laid over the years. So we kicked off this conversation last Monday where members of the community came together to explore some new or innovative approaches that cities have taken across the country to address issues of equity. So I want to start with a recap of last week's community meeting right now. Welcome. Welcome to our community conversation. And our theme today is Innovating for Equity. I am council member Rex Richards. Thank you all for joining joining us here this evening. And we're going to have a very interesting conversation that will hopefully turn into a good dialog of it actually works as a community. We are here to talk about equity. Talk about social justice and ways that we can innovate to do better as a community and achieve those things. We know that violence is now considered a public health problem. So we've established a citywide violence prevention plan to address a broad safety agenda. We know that boys and men of color need a greater focus. So we created My Brother's Keeper and recently launched our local action plan. We know that we're the second most culturally diverse city. So we created a language access plan. We know these things, and we're taking steps in our city to address these things. But what do these things have in common? They all help to achieve equity. They all have a common denominator. But are we doing all that we can to make sure that we speak the same language? And are we doing everything we can to innovate, better achieve equity, and to make sure that we connect all the dots and.
Speaker 6: We're talking about equity. There's a really large conversation right now going on at a national level around health equity. So everywhere that we stand, equity is the key focus of it. And so we start to think about what that really means. The things that really lead to health in our community is under social conditions over have 55% of health in a community is based on the social conditions in which you live. 30% are based on the behavior that you undertake. Only 10% is health care. When we're looking at this, we are looking at the entire area. We're looking at our air quality. We're looking at our crime rates or looking at our income. Everything matters. When you're looking at health, which is why I'm looking at all of it, if I don't look at all of it.
Speaker 0: I can't move a community forward, regardless of how.
Speaker 7: One might define.
Speaker 5: Equity. It is based.
Speaker 7: On the context in which you live in the life experiences of that, that guide you, that inform your view of the world. And when we think about equality, while everyone is given the exact same starting point, there's the assumption that we all will reach the same ending point. But it doesn't take.
Speaker 5: Into account those differences.
Speaker 7: That are inherent among us. There's a photo that has three.
Speaker 5: Individuals in.
Speaker 7: Varying heights who are.
Speaker 5: Attempting.
Speaker 7: To peer over a fence.
Speaker 5: Looking over into a baseball field. One is tall.
Speaker 7: One is of medium height, one is.
Speaker 5: Short, and a tall individual can already see over the fence. The median person.
Speaker 7: Medium height person, cannot buy the short person. Not at all.
Speaker 5: And so in the next frame, there is a photo with three boxes.
Speaker 7: Just three boxes.
Speaker 5: Tall person is already.
Speaker 7: Thank you and said the tall person is already able to see over there given a box they can see even further.
Speaker 5: Over the median person is able to see over the third.
Speaker 7: Person still cannot. It doesn't take into account the fundamental distinctions that people have.
Speaker 2: Oakland is a lot like Long Beach and so many of the issues that are confronting you here.
Speaker 6: We've also seen in Oakland. But I want to talk a little bit about the presentation that was made today, because I think that there is a critical component that needs to be said. You can now have a conversation about equity without talking about race. When you look at all the evidence.
Speaker 2: Presented with respect to the health department.
Speaker 6: The social conditions are really euphemisms for race. When you look at all of the data, if I looked at your city and I look at the data, white population is doing pretty well. People of color are not. And so you have to have an intentional conversation about race in order to get to equity. There's an intersection in just about each and every one of the issues that were presented. And it is race. When you talk about. And we talk about it every day when you talk about educational disparities. When you talk about health disparities, when you talk about the technology gap and all of those gaps, those are euphemisms.
Speaker 2: We're talking about communities of color.
Speaker 6: And they've somehow made us believe that that there is something deficient in us and that if we only found.
Speaker 2: The right program, if we only found the right program.
Speaker 6: That somehow we would change the outcomes when in reality, there is a systemic culture. A systemic culture that has to be changed. Privilege of leading the for the city of Seattle, what we call the Race and Social Justice Initiative. It's 12 years old. It was the first in the country. And its premise is, is that we are working to dismantle institutional and structural barriers in order to achieve racial equity within city government and across our communities in Seattle. You can imagine that 12 years ago that was a mighty vision, and it still is today, because despite all of our effort, despite all of our work, we are still struggling with what's racism and how it impacts every area of our life. And we heard about health disparities just a moment ago. But there's health disparities. There's criminal justice disparities. There's educational equity disparities. And what I have found in my two and a half years of being in this position is that people love to talk about equity. People love to talk about how equity is within our grasp. But what people do not like to talk about is racism. And if we don't talk about racism, we will never achieve racial equity.
Speaker 7: Thank you. So the idea tonight. Thanks a lot. The idea tonight around equity is that equity involves attempting to better understand the context, the systems, the barriers that prevent an individual from enjoying full and healthy lives. It means acknowledging that while there are a number of factors that contribute to inequity, systems do in fact play a role as well. And we are in a direct position to do something about that. So why is it important that we place a greater focus on equity here in Long Beach? First, let's take a quick look at a few different statistics by zip code in Long Beach. The first slide shows the poverty rates across 11 zip codes. The right side of the graph shows a much different picture than the left side of the graph. The highest poverty rates can be found in a number of zip codes with upwards of 46%, while the lowest are as low as 5%. So that's over 40% disparity. Then if you look at life expectancy for one year old in different zip codes across Long Beach, again, this graph shows a tale of two very different communities in Long Beach. Among these Long Beach zip codes, there's a seven year difference between them. When we look at the two zip add to zip codes that are very different side by side, the disparities are even more apparent. Take a look at some of the indicators in one in one zip code, 106 people out of 10,000 are likely to be victims of violent crime, while only 13 in another zip code are in one zip code. There are only 0.26 acres of open space per 1000 residents, while there's 8.774 thousand 8000 residents in the other zip code. So why are these statistics so different? What makes our what makes some of our neighborhoods healthier than others? These conditions, these statistics are all tied to what's known as social determinants of health. These are complex social and economic circumstances in which people are born. They grow up in, they live in, they work in. These circumstances are shaped by a wider set of forces, including economics, social policies, politics. You can see from this slide that among the social determinants of health are public safety, violence and trauma, which are not always thought of as health issues. But some of you, as some of you and most of the people in this audience might know, the CDC and many large public health institutions now categorize violence as one of the major public health issues facing our nation in modern times. And while crime increase increasing while crime is increasing across the state of California and recent reforms to the criminal justice system such as realignment, now is the time for local cities like Long Beach to double down on violence prevention and treat violence as a public health epidemic . Epidemic that it is. And by giving it a permanent home in our health department and establishing a dedicated office in our city, we're doing just that. Now, we as a city are already tackling many of these issues. We're one of only three cities in California with our own public health department that has 30 programs working with community partners focused on improving the health of people in Long Beach, including equity work. We just adopted a comprehensive My Brother's Keeper Local Action Plan that addresses disparities of boys and young men of color. We have a commitment to violence prevention with our comprehensive, safe Long Beach violence prevention plan, which we've adopted in 2014 and the cities. And as as the second most culturally diverse city in the nation, we've adopted a language access policy to make our City Hall more accessible to all communities. And we are a city who values human dignity, equality and civil rights. So what does all of this vital work have in common? Like I said, they place a lens on equity for our city, and equity is there is all of their common denominator. So while Long Beach has had a commitment to preventing violence and creating better outcomes for our residents, the efforts are fragmented across departments. My proposal tonight is demonstrate that Long Beach is serious about equity, violence, prevention and diversity. By taking the natural next step of providing these critical areas of focus, a real home in our city, realignment of our realigning our complementary initiatives and creating one central office and health department will bring a number of benefits to our city, including expanding our capacity to serve our residents, allowing for more coordination of efforts, and increasing our ability to leverage our limited resources for grant and philanthropic dollars. If we truly believe that Long Beach is a city where all of its constituents of any race, gender, age, sexual orientation deserve to live in a community that is healthy, safe and thriving, that we should take this natural next step. We've passed resolutions. We've crafted programs. We've written grants. But the next critical step to making this commitment is by reorganizing our government and establishing to an office dedicated to placing an ongoing focus on these issues. So while I'm taking the privilege of making the motion tonight, I want to clear clarify some direction to staff. So, number one, the focus of the proposal is to is to realign existing funded programs into one central office. This includes our safe Long Beach work, which includes My Brother's Keeper. This includes our language access work and much of the health equity work that's already taking place in our health department. In second, with respect to timing, I would amend the motion to say that the fiscal evaluation we want that is completed in the next 60 days so we can evaluate any potential budget considerations through the FY17 budget discussions. In terms of actual implementation, it would be unreasonable for this report, for this new office to be established by the beginning of FY17. So I would like for the visit feasibility report to provide an implementation timeline based on implementation sometime within the period of the entire FY17 fiscal year. So that's it. That's my my motion and I urge a yes vote. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. There is a second I'm going to turn to Councilmember Ringa.
Speaker 2: Thank you. I want to thank Councilmember Richardson for inviting me to participate in this and this motion more than 18 hours. I think equity has been a very important conversation that we've had for a very long time here. And aligning these programs excuse me, in one office, I think makes sense. It certainly makes sense to include it in the health department. They certainly are very adept and well versed and capable of maintaining many of the grants that will be going in there, as well as being able to apply for others. So I totally agree with the motion and I hope that I can get the support of my council colleagues as well. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman Mongo.
Speaker 12: Yes. I want to thank Councilmember Richardson for bringing a well-researched and thought out item to council. I think that there are a lot of efficiencies in our government that we have not yet explored. And I think that having this young and innovative council that has a new look on the way things are operating really has been a big asset to the city. I think that looking at specifically the social, social determinants of health, no matter where you are, no matter what you believe, everyone knows and understands that public health and the health of our communities is the top priority. There is nothing more important than health and safety of the communities. And so I think that this is a great step in the right direction. I think that we will be better able to leverage federal and state grant funds when we consolidate. And so I look forward to hearing what the proposal looks like and I look forward to staff spending some good time on it. I know that there's a small revision to the 60 days. I know our staff is miracle workers and I wish them the best of luck with that and I hope that it comes back as well thought out as the Councilmember intends. And if there are additional components that take more time, that at least we have a timeline for that, because I know we've had a couple of 60 day turnarounds, 120 day turnarounds that we've kind of. Made the mark, but we could have done a bit more. And I know that summer's challenging, but I think that this is something worth the time and effort. So I look forward to seeing what that looks like and I'm very supportive of this item. Thank you. And thank you all for being here.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 3: I just also want to say thank you to Councilmember Richardson for bringing this forward. I think it's certainly long overdue. As he mentioned, the city is doing so many different things and we're really piece mealing a lot of this. So we've we've worked on language access, we worked on LGBT issues and and rights, and we work to push women's issues. We've done a lot of symbolic gestures to remain in support of many of these things. And now to have these condensed and consolidated into one office is really a really great step in the right direction, in my opinion. I'll look forward to see what this report will bring. I know that this could only do nothing but positivity for us here in Long Beach in of Austin is doing it. Portland is doing it. Seattle is doing it. These are all cities that really in many cases, we're at the forefront. We're actually doing a lot of things that mirror what they're doing, but they're actually doing a lot of things that we're doing as well, a lot of things and having the opportunity. And I think Councilmember Richardson, again, for bringing potential counterparts from Seattle and from Oakland to Long Beach to talk about how their office looks like was a really great option, an opportunity for many of us to to see what we can do here in Long Beach. So I look forward to this coming back, I think every single one of you for the work that you do every day, because I know that once if this does pass down the line and we do get this office, that many of you will be working very closely with us. So thank you so much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilman Andrews.
Speaker 11: Thank you, Mayor. I would also like to thank Councilman Richardson for bringing this item forward. You know, the idea of having one office with all of these resources and services available to the community I think is wonderful. And I would also look forward to seeing the magnificent work of the Department of Health and Human Services. It's going to bring to our community hope that the office, you know, also and truly I'm seeing this in all honesty, that the office also at Aging can be implemented as well, because I think that's very important. And thank you again, you know, Councilman Richardson, for this item.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 10: Thank you. I also want to thank my colleagues for bringing this forward. I believe that equity should be part of our core mission. And as a city and in public safety is what we do as a government. We should that should be a priority, the health and safety of our residents. But hopefully this this office will be looking at housing access and education and access to public services and jobs and aging and understanding that it's going to be a big job. It's going to be a big job. And I think it's going to require more than one person to actually accomplish this and do it well. One thing that I'd like to just just. Ask our council to do is is focusing on doing something. Well within the last few months we've. Brought forward the violence prevention plan. We brought forth My Brother's Keeper. We brought forth a language access program that that has not a lot of those programs have even had an opportunity to work yet. And so I like to make sure that that in doing this, that, that it makes a lot of sense to realign and in focus. But I'd also like just to ask the maker of the motion as well as the rest of the council to to look at not just prescribing necessarily maybe one position or one office, but look at realigning and allow our city staff to to come back with some options. I remember very vividly when the City of Long Beach established its Citizen Police Complaint Commission. That was a charter in our city charter. It was a it was a bold move that that that went to the voters and the voters in the city approved that. That that commission had made it part of our charter, but they put it under the office of the city manager to give it a lot more robustness, strength. And I think some of the issues and not to be critical of it, but some of the issues that that could be facing the the the implementation of these these programs in a department could also be challenged in another department outside of the office of the city manager. And so I'd just like to say take that into consideration. And of course, I'll be supporting this.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you very much. With that, I'm going to go to public comment on the item and then we'll come back to council. So if you have public comment, please come forward and line up. Make sure you say your name, please, and your address or residence for the record and we'll begin. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Great. Thank you, Mayor. Members of the council, we want to really think. Well, my name is.
Speaker 2: Renee Castro, and I live in the third district.
Speaker 7: I want to thank Councilman Rich Richardson for bringing this forward. I think this is a really innovative idea. I appreciate the research that's gone into it, particularly the fact that there are areas of the city, obviously, that have very different health outcomes. And I appreciate the focus on.
Speaker 2: Prevention and access as well. I think that's really forward thinking. I work with a lot of foundations, both locally, as well.
Speaker 7: As national funders like Kresge for others. And as Kelly Colby said in in the video, I mean, this is where all funding is moving, both at a government level as well as foundations are looking.
Speaker 2: At access equity prevention. So it really.
Speaker 7: Allows us to become more.
Speaker 2: Eligible for a lot of funding as well. So and I also just want.
Speaker 7: To speak as the chair for the Long Beach Gang Resistance.
Speaker 2: Intervention and Prevention Program that, you know, as was said in the video, violence is a public health issue.
Speaker 7: And I think placing it in the health department is the right thing to do. So thank you so much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Good evening, honorable mayor and council jeanine pearce and I am councilmember elect in the second district and I was asked to speak tonight by my soon to be colleague. I want to thank everybody for your hard work. But I first want to ask everybody in the audience that supporting this item to stand up. Stand up, everyone. Because you guys are the ones that have been on the front line every day for the last several years, working on these issues of equity, working on these issues of violence prevention, making sure that we're working with our council members on on issues of immigration, women's status, raising the wage. And I know that this office, while it's one office that we're hopefully getting to and that it's going to be housed under the health department, which I'm.
Speaker 3: Hugely supportive of.
Speaker 1: Gives us the opportunity to have one lens as to which how we close that gap. In my district, the two zip.
Speaker 3: Codes that I have in my.
Speaker 1: District are that zip codes, those zip codes that have the highest life expectancy and the lowest life expectancy with that seven year difference in between. And so it is a great honor today to be speaking.
Speaker 3: In support.
Speaker 1: Of this. I was at the table with the California Endowment in 2013 when we started having this conversation. We looked ahead and said, Do we think we could ever do this in Long Beach? Could we ever have an Office of Equity in Long Beach? We thought, sure, it's going to be a while. And so you guys beat us to it. I definitely am inspired by the work that you guys are doing today, and I hope that we move with a thought about every single person that could be impacted, whether it's around youth, whether it's around violence, sexual assault, immigration, wage theft . All of these issues are things that we can have a a lens which we are asking questions about equity. And that's the first step. If we can ask questions and have a shared definition, we can get a lot of things done together. And so thank you guys very much for your leadership.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: Hi. Good evening. Dr. Jane Galloway, Third, Third District. Good evening to all of you. I'm happy to speak to this measure. When I was teaching victimology in the 1990s at Cypress College, we learned from both L.A. and Orange County sheriff's departments that the policy of rehabilitation had officially been replaced with one of punishment, and that this spanned the lifecycle from children and parents finding themselves engaged with child's product protective services to middle school, dropping out housing, food scarcity issues and the myriad elder concerns. Nothing happens in a vacuum. We're all products of our environment, and the consequences of economic inequality are graphically detailed in that really great Health and Human Services presentation. I have a concern when when symptoms are criminalized and causes seemingly not connected to outcomes. We aren't getting at the root of human suffering. And this is tragic and less than who we are capable of being as the human family. Combining the strong teams who are already working on elements of the larger challenge under one umbrella as an Office of Equity is a great move toward a holistic solution that is up to the standard of our great city. I strongly support the measure. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: Karen replied. I live at 714 Pacific Avenue and I'm a community activist and I want to commend you all for taking the foresight to bring this forward and have this community discussion. It's way past time that we break down the barriers for all of our community and not just afford certain aspects privilege of living in a clean air environment and having healthy housing. I'm. The conversation about race and social justice needs to happen as well as the ageism. And I support wholeheartedly this movement to bring all of these humanistic functions under the health department where they really belong. And it's going to be really important, the people that work on these issues that they understand and care about our community and about people as individuals. So, again, thank you for bringing that discussion forward. Councilman Richardson and the supporters look forward to continuing the dialog.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker.
Speaker 3: Hi. Good evening.
Speaker 1: Dr. Ilene Bernal. 1364 Grand Avenue. I live in the fourth district. I know the new doctor.
Speaker 0: She just she actually just defended her dissertation a few months ago. Yes.
Speaker 1: Thank you. And and my my degree literally just.
Speaker 3: Posted like two weeks ago.
Speaker 0: Yeah. I hate to embarrass you, but Dr. Bernal is one of the new leading people in science to I mean, I love seeing a woman in science in what you're doing teaching chem and so many folks at Cal State Long Beach. So congratulations. It was a big deal for you. So thank you. Thank you. And a fourth district.
Speaker 1: Yes. Go forth. Thank you. So I teach at Cal State Long Beach, and I'm also a commissioner. And thank you for having me here this evening. And I fully support the establishment of the Office of Equity, Access and Prevention. And what I look forward to in the creation of this office is the coordination of multiple commissions currently in the city of Portland. You have the Disability and Human Rights Commission working together, and in Seattle you have LGBT disabilities, human rights as well as and women commissions, all working together within the same office. And with that, and I think when you assemble a team with that common purpose, there is a level of accountability involved in making sure that we have the feedback that we need from our constituents to better inform us of what we can do to ensure that we are all serving everyone equitably. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: Sabrina Sanders. I've moved to Long Beach because it was such a diverse city. I value ethnic, cultural, sexual orientation, gender identity, ability, socioeconomic, and so many other diverse characteristics that make our community so special and sometimes so complex. Having lived in various parts of Long Beach, the sixth District in central Long Beach, the ninth District in Lawrence and North Long Beach, and in the historical California Heights area and engaging the broader city, I've also seen the disproportionate level of access to resources and services by the city in these communities. Past conversations like The Atlantic Corridor Project Rethinking Greater Long Beach in the State of Black Long Beach by Building Health Healthy Communities, highlighted these disparities throughout, highlighting the data, the disparity found through the data as it relates to health, violence, employment opportunities, education and poverty can be delineated in citywide presentations. Some of these disparities are so significant it can be considered a crisis leading to a civil rights issue. As a community, we need to be accountable to these issues of equity in our city. As we look at economic development opportunities, we're at a crossroads of a perfect storm to acknowledge, embrace and call them out or to turn a blind eye. We know that we're addressing them all in all the ways that we work and manage our city. But the mentality that all boats will rise in addressing an issue does not address the specific communities that are facing the fortunate treatment and the issues of equity. I think back to when the city passed the Office of Sustainability and I mean, we all should be saving water planning, planting drought tolerant plants, looking at our behaviors as it relates to sustainability as a city. But until we moved forward with an office that brought together all these departments that was specifically accountable for this mission with strong leadership support and a team of community leaders financed by the city, did it change the mentality and significant change take place in our city? We see this affects in the change of culture and our priorities as a sustainable city all around us. This is why I'm committed to the commitment of the Office of Equity and Access and Prevention and commend you for this discussion today. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Dr. Sanders. Next speaker.
Speaker 1: Hi. Good evening, Mayor Garcia. City council members. My name is Nicole Ababa. I'm actually on the Human Relations Commission and I'm also a community organizer with the Filipino Migrant Center, as well as the Coalition to End Wage Theft. And I to I would like to applaud our city council members, particularly Councilmember Richardson, Gonzalez Lowenthal in your UNGA for taking this initiative on this issue around equity. When we assess how our resources are distributed in the city, we need only travel from the south end of Ocean Boulevard and Alamitos, Martin Luther King Avenue, which changes into California Avenue, Bixby Knolls, or even go from the west side of Willow to the east side of Willow towards Studebaker, and really see the disparities for ourselves, our neighborhoods and the health of our city are really largely shaped by our local economy and the local policies that are passed here. The heart of our economy is really the workforce, the working families that make this city run. But what we continue to see today is an inequitable economy, a tale of two cities where poverty, unemployment and wage theft is a daily reality for local residents, particularly in communities of color. For women, the formerly incarcerated and immigrants, equity is about social justice. It's about fairness. And what's unfair is to let workers get robbed of their wages every single day from their employers who face little, if any, consequences to endure a state process that takes 1 to 2 years and still to come out empty handed. 83% of people who actually win their wage theft cases never see a dime. And Long Beach can and must do better. And this is an opportunity, I think today is very much so a positive step forward in considering this Office of Equity. But we also have to consider that workers every single day are denied their meal and rest breaks, denied their overtime, denied payment at all. And so while we applaud this positive, positive step forward, we know that early January, the city council made a commitment to ensuring local strong wage enforcement. And we expect that the City of Long Beach will continue to pass more equitable policies to ensure workers collect the money that's owed to them, protect workers that are actually retaliated against, and to also invest in fully funding a wage enforcement officer bureau. If we want the city to really take equity, public health and violence prevention seriously, we also need the city to partner with local residents, community based organizations and consider policies that lift up all workers and all families. And together we can really create and shape that equitable city that we're talking about. Thank you. Good evening.
Speaker 6: Council members. Dr. Garcia was here a second ago. Sorry. My name's Stella Su, second district resident president at Green Education. I chair the neighborhood's workgroup for building healthy communities. And I'm a member of a board member of the LGBT center of Long Beach. Thank you for this opportunity. On all of these roles, I have been part of an effort to create healthier communities, environmentally healthy neighborhoods, good jobs, and a city that lifts up working class families. So thank you, Councilmember Richardson, and all the council members that are in support of this recommendation for producing the recent Community Conversation Forum, innovating for equity, and for bringing these subject matter experts from Oakland, Seattle and our own Health and Human Services Department to talk about an issue that is so broad, yet so critical to creating a vibrant and equitable city. In the presentation, we learned about the serious disparities between zip codes, between neighborhoods in education, health care, life expectancy, open space, poverty for the LGBT community. We are really excited about this recommendation because LGBT community members face more barriers to accessing services due to existing existing discrimination. LGBT people of color face higher rates of violence. Trans women of color experience higher, highest possibilities of hate, motivated homicide.
Speaker 1: Homeless homelessness, HIV and poverty.
Speaker 6: Affect LGBT.
Speaker 1: Folks at a disproportionately.
Speaker 6: Higher rate for LGBT older adults, a lifetime of employment, discrimination and other factors have contributed to disproportionately higher poverty rates. Seniors in the LGBT community sometimes do not have support systems access to family members due to not having children themselves or longstanding issues with coming out. We need to ensure that our burgeoning senior community is safe, has access to equitable and affordable housing and medical services. And for all of these reasons, we believe that Councilmember Richardson Richardson's recommendation is a very timely one, and we wholeheartedly support this effort. And like any great organization, we need to ensure that our city's values are supported by sound systems processes, and that each department and employee understands their role in creating equity across the city. Thank you so much.
Speaker 1: Good evening. Excuse me. Council members. My name is Kimmy Monica's, and I am associate executive director of the California Conference for Equality and Justice. And my family and I are also residents of the Sixth District as well. On behalf of CCJ, I would like to thank Council Member Richardson and the other council members who are supporting this initiative for taking positive steps in the direction of consolidating funding and implementing steps toward a robust equity and violence prevention program in the city of Long Beach. CCJ has served as a partner with the City of Long Beach for over 50 years in promoting equity and preventing violence in our communities through our programs with youth, adults, police officers, businesses and city departments. Most notably, CCJ CO staffed the city's Human Dignity Program and provided training to city departments on an as requested basis. Currently, CCJ serves on multiple committees and Task Force Task Forces through safe Long Beach, My Brother's Keeper and Grip. The need for United, concerted, organized and well supported office that will tackle the complicated issues of equity and violence prevention in our city cannot be overstated. Racism and inequality will not go away unless, unless and until we specifically work to dismantle them. That cannot be done without an organized effort by the city. We strongly support Councilmember Richardson's proposal to look forward and look forward to continuing the partnership with the city and create a place where equity and justice are real and not just ideals for all the residents of Long Beach. Thank you.
Speaker 10: Good evening, Mr. Mayor. City Council Members Derek Simpson, executive director of the Long Beach Language Communication Partnership. I want to begin by thanking Councilman Richardson for bringing in content experts. Last week, which I've been.
Speaker 5: Working in the community.
Speaker 10: For many years, really opened my eyes to the issues and differences between what we speak to as equality and what we speak to as equity, and that indeed, we need to have a common definition of what equity is that transcends not only into the community, but up and down the ranks of our city leaders as well. So that we all speak the same language. We often speak of Long Beach being a very diverse city, and we're very proud of that diversity. And I believe that by establishing an Office of Equity, Access and Prevention, it demonstrates a commitment to what we speak to every day as a source of pride in our community. Not only do the socioeconomic equality issues need to be addressed, but also the equitable access issues need to be addressed. Just as importantly, it demonstrates a real and relevant commitment to the success of programs that we've spoken about already tonight, such as My Brother's Keeper, Safe, Long Beach and Language Access. Violence is indeed a public health issue. As I read the papers and looked at the news to see, a former student in our lab program was killed just last week. It reminds me of just how real and just how close these issues are and just how much more we need to do as a community. And we believe that working at it as a public health issue in a unified department will give us a much more laser focus. And I am 100% behind it, because we work in this community every day, as you do, and we see the need and we thank you for your support.
Speaker 2: Good evening, members of the City Council, and thank you, Councilmember Richardson, for bringing this item forward. The city of Seattle, in their analysis, they have here the equity analysis, page two of the equity analysis. They talk about working to enact policies and programs that allow marginalized populations to stay in their communities. So for the city of Seattle, it goes beyond just, you know, police and violence prevention and language access actually goes to preserving our communities and preserving our diversity. They claim to be the second most diverse community in the United States, and I think that we want to work to maintain that. The Office of Equity is a great idea. Housing justice. Housing Justice should be included in the conversation. The cities that were cited, the cities of Seattle and Oakland have included housing within their agendas for achieving their equity. In fact, on page two of Seattle's equity analysis. They have a displacement risk index and they've been tracking their displacement that has disproportionately impacted communities of color. Long Beach is no different. A displacement that our community has been experiencing has also been impacting our low income communities of color, our Cambodian community, our Filipino community, African-American community. And that is why today, housing Long Beach put a call out for just cause eviction protections in the name of a responsible renters ordinance so that we can work on maintaining our diversity as a community. We can start working to prevent displacement from occurring. All the great things that have occurred in our city are wonderful. But when we're standing in front of a building of tenants who've been kicked out for no fault of their own, and the building next door to them has been sold and they're going to be kicked out for no fault of their own. These are these are people of color who are being impacted in our downtown area. So if we're truly committed to being equal and creating a diversity in our community, then we need to maintain that diversity. So we encourage you to include housing justice in this conversation when we have an Office of Equity. And again, thank you very much for bringing this forward and hope that you'll consider passing it tonight. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Good evening, Mayor. City Council, city staff in our impressive and dedicated audience. My name is Laura Merrifield and I'm a second district resident. I'm speaking tonight on behalf of my organization, Building Healthy Communities, Long Beach. Our mission is to reduce health disparities and improve overall community health through policy and systems change. We are very happy that this important conversation around equity is happening, and we appreciate the Council's leadership on this. In conversations that have led us here tonight, it's been very helpful to hear leaders from Seattle and Oakland share about the work done in their cities and to learn about similar efforts happening across the nation. Building Healthy communities. Long Beach is happy to support the realignment of safe Long Beach and the language access policy into an Office of Equity to be housed in the Department of Health and Human Services. Equity for long beaches, diverse communities is a common thread that connects these programs, and equity should be at the center of our decision making as a city. With the realignment of these programs. We want to ensure that their reach remains citywide and that all departments of the city continue to work collaboratively on their implementation. Equity and programs to better achieve it cannot be compartmentalized. In order to make this work meaningful, we need to be explicit about how race shapes the inequities we see in our city. As we heard at last week's community conversations and referenced in tonight's video. Leaders from Oakland and Seattle said You can't have a conversation about equity without talking about race. And also people love to talk about equity. But what people don't want to talk about is racism. Similarly, in Long Beach, we love to celebrate our diversity, but we shy away from talking about the racial disparities around us. We talk about the seven year life expectancy gap between zip codes, but we rarely talk about how race directly links to that gap. We don't talk about how that division of zip code breaks down to a West Long Beach that's predominantly people of color and an East Long Beach, predominantly white, that enjoys about seven more years of life. We cannot ignore racial disparities as we strive for an equitable city. We also need to be serious about the change we want to see. As this work moves into the Health Department. We need to ensure that we set goals and measure the progress of our efforts. We need the health department, but also you as a city council, as our mayor, as our city manager, as heads of our departments to establish concrete goals for moving towards equity and to track our progress each year. I heard from the dias tonight calls to do this well, to do this thoroughly and that I fully support building healthy communities. Longreach is excited to continue partnering with you to create an equitable city for all Long Beach residents. We look forward to the staff report in 90 days and the fiscal report even sooner to help move Long Beach forward as a model for language violence prevention, inclusive language access and the promotion of equity. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening.
Speaker 2: Honorable mayor and members of the City Council. My name is Myles McNeely and I'm.
Speaker 7: A city commissioner, a Long Beach native and a resident of the second district. I wanted to offer my strong support for this office and thank Council and Richardson and the rest of the Council for their supportive comments about this item this evening. I wanted to help highlight the point that there are numerous disparities in Long Beach when we look at poverty, education, health and a number of other quality of life indicators. And as mentioned in the video presentation, we can't ignore that these disparities are not only associated with race, but are rooted in historical and systemic racism. It's not easy for everyone, but we must try to develop our sense of comfort in talking about race in this context and establishing this office is a huge step in bringing this dialog to the surface. As Long Beach continues to develop. It is more crucial than ever that we enact policy that ensures that everyone has a fair opportunity to be part of the city's growth. It's up to us to act locally, take responsibility and demonstrate that Long Beach can be a little more just fair and equitable. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Evening, Mayor and City Council. My name is Shane Devins, and I'm the first District Commissioner for the Human Relations Commission. A number of my fellow commissioners have already spoken, so I'll keep this very brief. But I wanted to just urge the support of this and thank you all for bringing it. And I believe that this the coordination of these programs and initiatives will let us address further address the disparities in our city. Thanks.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker.
Speaker 1: Good evening. Mayor Garcia, members of the city council. My name is Jessica Quintana and I'm the executive director of Central Cha and also a long time resident of the city of Long Beach. I'm so glad that we have a young city council because I think if folks remember in 2012 when we were trying to move the violence prevention safety plan and the implementation, it started out in the health department. And so I'm so glad today Councilman Richardson and other council members are bringing this forward. But, you know, the need for a reinvestment in our communities to boost health equity is the common thread. Binding the city and community and faith based organizations endeavors to provide equality will realize when all of us have access to opportunities necessary to satisfy their essential basic needs, advance and well-being, and achieve their full potential. For over 15 years, Central CHA has served as as a violence prevention leader, engaged in a number of areas important to Long Beach, such as addressing and preventing community trauma by creating safer communities through reentry job training. Be Safe, formerly known as the Summer Night Lights, implementing youth and parent development initiatives in a walkable West Side Safe Passage program. We have engaged multiple sectors in effective prevention, including community and business sector, and delivering community centered programs and advocacy. Taking Action to prevent violence injury. Our injuries are responsible for countless lost lives, which we've had too many of those here in the city of Long Beach decreased quality of life and substantial health costs. While injuries affect everyone, people of color and low income populations are partly vulnerable. Quality injury prevention is essential to closing the health equity gap and improving wellness outcomes for all. Center Child Bloods Councilman Rex Richardson Gonzalez Roberto Franca for the leadership and supports the establishment of an Office of Equity, Access and Prevention and Strategic Alignment of violence prevention efforts under the umbrella of the Health Department. These efforts under their belt of the Health Department to better align resources and funding opportunities to support better life and health outcomes for all residents in the city of Long Beach. I just especially want to acknowledge my councilman in the eighth District and and, you know, the note that he said in regards to, you know, we can develop these initiatives, but they're as good as they are as if they have teeth into the action. And so it's very important. And, you know, I truly appreciate all the expertize that has been brought to our city from other areas. But it's important that, you know, we really look to partner with community based organizations and really learn to see what some organizations are doing in the city as well. You know, I think what's been missed over and over again is that true partnership with with faith based and community based organizations and the residents and the youth and families who are most impacted by violence in our community. So I really, truly look forward to a meaningful conversation. It's been said over and over again about race. Sometimes we talk about gangs, but the issues that we really, truly have in our city is race. And it's systemic for a very long time. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you so much. Speaker, please.
Speaker 2: So. Good evening, city council and Mayor.
Speaker 7: I would just first say that, oh, my name is Christopher and I would first like to say that I strongly support the city's.
Speaker 2: State Long Beach violence prevention plan because.
Speaker 7: Just today I was almost robbed of my wallet, but we luckily got it back.
Speaker 2: And I come from a north Long Beach and immigrant background, so I notice a lot of these violences and things happening in our city. I have a lot of experience in the melting pot that is our city, and I believe that this is a great step towards making it so that our youth, both ethnic and not, can have equal chances and make it so that we can create a greater, always improving city. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Inexplicably.
Speaker 1: Good evening. My name is Sonia Sanchez. I'm 74 years old. I attended in high school, and I live in North Beach. I. I. I'm sorry. The people. Long Beach is made of people from different race cultures and genders, which makes it more diverse and more open. I prefer the youths perspective, which is most likely similar to mine due to the amount of open mindedness that is my generation. I believe the community should come as one to help each other to make things more fair for everyone.
Speaker 4: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker for you.
Speaker 5: Good evening, Mr. Mayor. And members of the Council. Friends and staff. My name is John Taylor. Effie and I am here to speak on two matters. But tonight for this for this item, I want to speak on the matter of the Pacific Islander Caucus, of which I am the chair, including the area of the Pacific of Melanesia , Micronesia and Polynesia. And so part of our charter and part of our agenda is to support social justice. And this item speaks to the fact of humanity. And so I want to commend Councilman Rex Richardson for having brought this forward. For the record, I'd like to say that we as a Pacific Islander community wholly support this and hopefully to come out will be wonderful. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thanks, Peter, please.
Speaker 2: Mayor. Councilman, I just want to say that I my name is Danny Gamboa, and I live at 5437 Cherry Avenue in North Long Beach. I'm wearing multiple hats, but I'm representing the Coalition for Healthy North Long Beach, which is a grant based and Long Beach Health Department based organization as well, also Empower Communities. And I'm also a board chairman, co-chair of the Walk Bike Long Beach Coalition. I support the creation of the Office of Equity because it is an opportunity to leverage the power of City of Long Beach with community based organizations like myself and our people. Our residents. I think. To do more to do most good. When we examine the city's policies, practices and systems through the lens of equity, we are examining the root cause of health. So I support this and thank you, Chris Richardson, for bringing this up. Thank you.
Speaker 0: And we have our last speaker, actually, Mr. Goodhue, I guess, is our last speaker. So please come forward and close the speakers list. We can get it back to the deliberations. Thank you, Mr. Good. Here. You're the last speaker, correct? Okay, great. Go ahead.
Speaker 1: Shirley. You start. As I listened to the. All the persons who stood I saw the ones who stood and all the speakers who said that they were for this office. And it reminded me in 2012 when we were voting on the moratorium on cremate crematoriums mortuaries. And then we just had the residents who didn't want the planes flying over.
Speaker 6: Their airport, over their houses, because they live near the airport. But when they.
Speaker 1: Got on the plane, no one was concerned about how loud the plane was because they were on it. And as I listen to everyone tonight and I look to see who was being represented. And I thought, okay, this is the community.
Speaker 6: These these are we are the US.
Speaker 1: Our federal government has a fair housing. We have labor.
Speaker 2: Laws, we have.
Speaker 1: Discrimination laws and departments, we have EEOC, human relations departments, we have our police departments, we have violence prevention. We have neighborhood watch programs. Health and Human Services are in every city in the country. Homeless services is here and many churches on just about every corner. If without that department ever being implemented, each one of us are not willing to become the answer for this and other departments are going to do any good. If every white person in this room has never had dinner with an African American or a Spanish or an Asian person or an a Pacific Islander, a department won't help . This will just be adding a more budget would be adding more expenses to an existing exhausted budget. We have to become the change we want to see. Not ask the city for more money to open up another department to replicate a redundancy for something as individuals we don't want to do. If we won't step out of our doors and knock on house number five and say Hi, I live on house number two and I notice you're black and I'm white. I think we should have dinner because I don't know what pinto beans tastes like.
Speaker 6: And you may not have had a hog mog.
Speaker 1: We got to do that or we're just just bigger building, no more big business. Another department. I hate.
Speaker 6: To say this, Rex, but another.
Speaker 1: Department is not the answer for equity prevention. What? What? What is it? Equity. Access. We have a human resources department. We have a lot of representations of the problems that are in our city. But we don't have you. We don't have an individual. We got to get back to just being individual, committed neighbors.
Speaker 0: Times are a lot. Thank you so much. Thank you. Absolutely. Thank you. And our last speaker, Mr. Good here. Previous speaker made sense this evening. One of the downsides. This may not hurt the situation, but I really don't think that's going to help that much.
Speaker 4: So.
Speaker 0: Disparity in housing that will always exist. And quite frankly, it should exist. Otherwise it takes away the incentive. One of the biggest things that could be done is to. Disavow. And reversed the DNC is de facto policy. You want more kids or you want more money? Pop out a kid. You traced those numbers back, and that's probably the greatest single problem this or any major city faces. You just stated what the facts were in terms of where the where the crime goes. I've lived in the city since 1977 and I have never seen a there's a council that had a direct policy of excluding anybody.
Speaker 2: They did the.
Speaker 0: Best they could. There will always be disparities. When you take your kid to the hospital, you're not interested in diversity. You'll want the best there is. Same thing with your pet. If you take the dog to the hospital. You want that? There is. I see this as becoming another political. Debacle, pitting one group against the other. I'd give it some thought. I don't think it'll help. I'm not so sure it's going to hurt. I mean, I'm not sure it's going to help. And I don't know what his total impact will be, but I just think. You're going down the wrong tree. You're the wrong path. If you want to have a real impact on crime in this city, start listening tonight. Every council meeting, the number of people that are shot or killed from now until this new city hall is built. Urinating away $93 million on that. And as a reminder.
Speaker 2: Take the names of those people who were shot or killed.
Speaker 0: And put them outside the city hall. I just think it's poor policy. You're not thinking you're use. This is a policy that will be designed to pit one group against another, in my view. Thank you.
Speaker 5: I hate to. Please forgive me.
Speaker 0: Please. That's okay. Just come down. But it'll be your last speaker. Close the speakers list.
Speaker 5: But the last speaker should force me to address. I'm Leon Wood. I live in the. 36 or to break down venue. The thing that bothers me so much, I think that what is being done, our councilman is attempting to give us some options to do what has not been done, and that is bring programs together so that we can actually begin to assess our effectiveness. And also that office could work with the other local agencies and programs of the community programs so that we could actually build a team, a community team. And I think that's what they're trying to do. I think what we also have to understand, as I just heard from the person just spoke, that kind of thinking people need employment. People need an opportunity. Crime goes down when people start working. Crime. Health improves when people are working. So anything that you can do to help improve those conditions, I applaud you for trying to do it. And I think we have a fantastic city council who are coming together trying to new ideas and new and new and new avenues for things. And I think you're doing the right thing. It may not always be the most ideal, but it's a start and it's better than waiting and doing nothing. So this is an opportunity that we can that we can try to look forward to, and it can always be improved. And if it doesn't work, we just stop it and start over and do something else, because that's what this is all about. We keep trying until we finally get it right. We have to change the lives of people who are suffering, and we have to begin to help those people who are trying to make it. And there's a lot of men in this city who want to work but do not have a job. So they are angry and we must do something about that. So I thank you very much, Councilman, for making an effort. And I think Olive was supporting him. And thank you, Mayor, for this opportunity that I'm sorry for. I just couldn't hold it in long.
Speaker 0: No problem. You should see how I feel every Tuesday afternoon. I just a constant. Thank you. I want to go back to the council. Councilman Price.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm glad I had a chance to hear public comment on this. And I want to thank Councilman Richardson and the coauthors of this item for bringing this forward. I think with many of the issues facing the city, having a better coordinated effort and a central location is important because a lot of times we have different departments, different community based organizations and different faith based partners all doing work. And we're not doing the best coordination together to try to make sure we don't duplicate things or that we're complementing the work of others. And I think that that's the great opportunity I see with this, is aligning all of the efforts so that we're able to build upon the work of other organizations and actually complement each other in moving agenda items forward for each of these organizations. And if each of these entities and I appreciate, Jessica, what you said, because I think working with our partners in the community is a huge resource to us that as a city, sometimes we think about how limited our resources are. But we have a lot of resources out there through nonprofits and community volunteers that we could take advantage of and really put into play in a way that's a very efficient use of those resources. And we haven't been doing that. We're probably not alone in that. It's it's hard to coordinate. So I think that the opportunity to better coordinate is great. I will say, you know, there was some discussion tonight regarding this area or this zip code versus another. I choose to live in Long Beach because I believe it's incredibly diverse. I live on the east side. My kids go to school on the east side. True, they are children of immigrants and they are, you know, only half white. And they have a mother who learned to speak English at the age of seven. But I don't think they see themselves as different than anyone else, and I don't think they see their classmates as different. It's just something that is such a norm in the way that we're trying to raise them. And I hope that that's the case for many families in Long Beach, because it is what makes us unique. And I think hearing some of the comments tonight about diversity and in parts of Long Beach as opposed to others, I think there would be many, many East Side residents who would say that one of the things they love about living on the east side along which is its diversity now, is it as diverse as other parts? No, but it is a very diverse community in terms of just everything race, ethnicity, religion, lifestyle, all of that. And that's a beautiful thing. So we can have a department that's focused on bringing in grant money to address these issues. And violence prevention knows no zip codes. Violence knows no zip codes. We have issues like bullying. We have issues with people feeling displaced and not feeling like they fit in and lashing out in communities where they look just like the people all around them. But they're lashing out because of other issues that might be going on. So raising awareness and providing whatever resources we as a city get citywide to raise awareness for things that cause violence and cause the root of violence is something I'm 100% in favor of. So I think this opportunity to be more efficient with our structuring in the city is is a welcomed opportunity. And I thank my colleagues for bringing this forward.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman. Super now.
Speaker 7: Thank you. As usual, my esteemed colleague to my right is a tough act to follow. But she used the word alignment, and I think that's what I would like to address. The third, the last speaker, Shirley Rizzo, mentioned possibly a lot of money being poured into this. I and staff can correct me, but I don't think we're talking about a brand new office. We're talking about aligning existing resources for greater efficiency and to council member Osment's point about we haven't decided which department this is going to go into. That's what this study is for, I believe. I think only I only counted 25% of the speakers who mentioned the health department. Everyone else just wants a solution, I believe, independent of what department we end up in. Also, I'll just briefly mentioned about the zip code issue. I have the great privilege of representing a district that runs on the far eastern border of Long Beach to Cambodia town. So diversity is all part of what we do. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Oh, let me just add a couple comments. I think we've had a really, really good discussion by the council. I want to obviously thank everyone that came out and spoke. A lot of people have been involved in the community. Community work for a long time. I wanted to just use this opportunity, obviously, to to thank everyone that's been involved in the work, especially in the last few years, whether it's been through the Building Healthy Communities Network of organizations and certainly all the other non-profits and faith groups and Central Cha and so many other organizations that have been very involved. But I wanted to take a moment because we don't get to do it often. To think also the city staff that have been tasked with this work for the last few years, we have very few resources within the city to actually do a lot of this work. And I want to just give you a sampling of what we've added to to our goals in the last few years as a council, we have launched Violence Prevention Plan, which a lot of you were involved with, My Brother's Keeper, which the city is very committed to now, the language access policy, which is incredibly important, you know , minimum wage has been important to this body and moving that that issue forward, including local hiring, which was an ordinance as council discussed the PATH program, which our city prosecutor and also Councilman Richardson were very, very involved in that. So that's just a sampling of the new initiatives that our team has been incredibly involved with. And I'm talking about folks in the prosecutor's office, in the health department, Tracy Kohanga and her team, the health the health folks throughout the city. And so if we can just give them a round of applause, first of all, for for doing all that incredible work, the Parks Department, it goes on and on, because they're there on the they're there, like all of you are also on the front line of some of that work. And I know that there's a lot of interest from them. The other thing I will I will add is as this work continues, because we're all involved in it constantly to make sure that the two key I heard the faith community tonight and that's important I heard from our nonprofit community and the partnerships there are incredibly important . But the other key key important institution in this is our education system partners. And those are folks in the K-12 system. Community college and the university system are incredibly important for this work to be successful because the access to a quality education, as we all know from the research is is incredibly important to the success. And so that that will continue, I know, to be a part of that of the conversation as well. And before we go to a vote, I just had a question because a couple of the councilors have brought it up. This will come back. Councilman, I know that. And I'm under the assumption that I know that the agenda item speaks to the health department is being an option or maybe the preferred option. But I'm assuming that the that city management staff will come back and kind of bring a menu of what are some of the some of the options, knowing that that is seems to be, at least right now, the preference by the agenda makers.
Speaker 7: Our preference is the health department. And we've been working with staff hand-in-hand for about six months, just talking to everybody about what a motion might look like that is doable, frankly. And and so that said, you know, my preference is the health department. Now, should something come up, I'm not unreasonable here. If some if if something might come up that seems more prudent or reasonable, then I'm okay with that as well. But I think from a public health standpoint, it makes sense for violence prevention, all these things to be centrally located and looked at from a health lens.
Speaker 0: And I would agree, I think I think public health is and certainly there's a be consensus here, but I'm just hearing from some of the some of the folks on the council. I think we want to make sure we do give our staff the flexibility to bring back some some options. Right. I mean, maybe health is the centerpiece, but we certainly want to make sure that there are key connection points, whether it's the city manager's office or the work happening in other departments. So what we think the creativity of option is in.
Speaker 7: Absolutely what we did talk about, we had some conversations early on about things like KPCC, you know, I sat down and interviewed the executive director, fact finding myself, and I think there are some limitations to aligning everything, but I certainly would want to see a relationship between this new office and some of these other other offices like KPCC or work that's being done in the city manager's office. And frankly, it's important to make sure that this isn't buried somewhere right in some other office. So I'm totally okay with that. And the city manager, we've talked about this already, so I'm 100% okay.
Speaker 0: Great. Perfect. We have a motion and a second on the floor. And if members, we can please cast your votes. And thanks again to everyone that that came tonight.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Great. Thank you. We're going to now move on to public comment and we're going to use this opportunity as we set up to transition. If you're here for the last item, you can quietly if you're planning on exiting, that would be a good time as we set up for public comment. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Manager to explore the feasibility of realigning the initiatives of the City's Safe Long Beach Violence Prevention Plan as well as the Language Access Program into the Department of Health and Human Services; and
Evaluate the feasibility and benefits of establishing a new "Office of Equity, Access, and Prevention," or similar title, which aligns these critical initiatives with other key city programs and initiatives, and report back to the City Council within 90 days. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_07052016_16-0604 | Speaker 0: Thank you. An item will leave an hour on item 14. Is that right?
Speaker 1: 13. Communication from Councilman Austin. Councilwoman Gonzalez, Councilmember Wodonga and Council Member Richardson. Recommendation to request the city attorney to draft a resolution requesting the Governor and state legislature to declare a state of emergency to combat homelessness.
Speaker 0: Councilman Austin.
Speaker 10: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I want to thank my colleagues, Gonzalez and Miranda Richardson, for signing on and support throughout the region. We are seeing an increased number of homelessness. And in Long Beach, our last homeless count in 2015 identified over 2300 homeless individuals, including 255 children. L.A. County has seen an increase recently of 5.7% in just the past year, including an increase of 20%. People living in tents, shantytowns and vehicles. It is estimated about 47,000 homeless individuals in L.A. County. That's the current number in about 1515 thousand statewide. Long Beach is one of four agencies in L.A. County that provides a continuum to address homelessness. Along with L.A. County, the city of Los Angeles, and the city of Pasadena. In our health department, we have an outstanding program to provide outreach and services to homeless in Long Beach and providing coordinated services through the Multi-Service Center. However, this is the crisis of our day and more resources from the state are needed to address this problem. Last month, the L.A. County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to call for a state declaration of emergency on California's homeless crisis. Last week, the California State Assembly also adopted a resolution requesting Governor Brown to declare a state of emergency on homelessness. So given the growing homeless crisis in our city, our county and state, it is important for our city, the city of Long Beach, to be active in this issue and join in the call for the state to provide resources necessary for local governments to help address this glaring problem. And so I like to just take this opportunity to, again, thank my colleagues for signing on and asking for your support on this very important motion. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 3: I just wanted to say thank you to Councilmember Austin for bringing this forward. I think it marries with what we've been working on. We'll be looking to bring back a report in a few months with the health department that will talk about homelessness as a as a larger picture in relation to housing, of course, addressing children and families, because there is a larger number of children and families that are out on the streets at this moment, which makes it really tough. And I think taking a stance and knowing that we're doing something proactive here in the city is a is a great way to show our support for minimizing this issue. So thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next up is councilman, your anger.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mayor. I want to also thank. Councilmember Austin for bringing this forward. It's a growing problem. It's certainly a big one in my district that we've been fighting the good fight to have these people receive services to get housing and it seems like nothing seems to work. So perhaps this motion would be providing some much needed attention to this issue so that we can address it throughout the city. Thank you.
Speaker 0: I'm sorry. Customer.
Speaker 11: Yes. Thank you, Mayor. I also want to thank Councilman Orson for bringing this item in my district. Whereas other communities, I think amount of homeless people, as you know, is a big concern. And I think at times I have stopped and spoke to some of these individuals and all they need is a little help. And I definitely feel like that because the fact that what they're out in up against, you know, this is a I mean, a worldwide problem right now. Homeless is just not a joke. I mean, when you just take a look in in everywhere, especially in the city of Long Beach and in L.A. County, it's just something that I mean, we really have to take a real seriously concern. And and I'd like to you know, you think of some of these things happening. I think the government has to declare a state of emergency when it comes to that, because we're looking at things now we've never, ever seen. I know in my time here. So as a city, we cannot resolve this alone. So we need leadership. You know, I think also from Sacramento. So some of our leaders that will also see the problems that we're having and the individuals can get to them and let them know that this problem is a really epidemic. And we really need to do something about that. And I thank you again, Councilman. I said bringing this forward and then individuals know the concern, you know, the need of all these things that we're trying to do for them. Thank you again, Mayor.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Any public comment? Seeing none. There's emotion in a second. Members, please go and cast your votes. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Attorney to draft a resolution requesting the Governor and State Legislature to declare a state of emergency to combat homelessness and direct resources to support the efforts of major cities in the state to address the problem. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_07052016_16-0605 | Speaker 2: Motion carry.
Speaker 0: Make Saddam.
Speaker 1: Report from Development Services recommendation to approve the fiscal year 2017 Action Plan. The first substantial amendment to the Fiscal Year 2016 Action Plan, and the third Substantial Amendment to the Fiscal Year 2015 Action Plan for the Expenditure of Community Development BLOCK Grant. Home Investment Partnership Grant and Emergency Solutions Grant Funds Citywide.
Speaker 0: It was the motion in a second. Is there any public comment? Could you. Come forward. Very good. You can see the address. I'll be brief. I'd like to suggest that no action be taken in terms of expend in spending the moneys unless and until. Unless and until it is received a thorough. Audit is a. The auditor has the chance to present a thorough analysis by her office of where the money's going and how sound the project is. Given the dollar amounts and the budget situation.
Speaker 2: This city is facing.
Speaker 0: Just makes sense to do so. To not do it sends up further red flags that there's some serious problems here. Thank you. Speaker, please.
Speaker 6: Karen, recite again. And I feel your pain, Mr. Mayor. And since I didn't see Mr. Good you at any of the community sessions and I went to several of them. I just want to commend city staff, specifically Alam Hagos, who did an absolutely amazing job. A lamb works tirelessly for the city and does excellent work. And he dealt with very contentious community members over the development of the plan. He handled everything with grace and elegance. This man deserves a raise. He was fabulous. He did an amazing job. The plan presented a very clear explanation of what was encompassed in this application to HUD, and the explanations were very clear. There was very deep discussion. Not a lot of you all were there. I bet a lamb handled it really amazingly well, and I wish everything in the city was done with such simplicity and delicacy and aplomb when dealing with the community. And everybody felt by the end of the meetings that they were heard and listened to. And I know that always doesn't happen at community meetings. So I would say that I wholeheartedly support the plan that's being presented to go forth to head. And again, want to commend a.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Any other public comment? C9 members, please go ahead and cast your votes. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to approve the Fiscal Year 2017 Action Plan, the First Substantial Amendment to the Fiscal Year 2016 Action Plan, and the Third Substantial Amendment to the Fiscal Year 2015 Action Plan for the expenditure of Community Development Block Grant, Home Investment Partnership Grant, and Emergency Solutions Grant Funds; and
Authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all necessary documents with the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development to receive these funds, execute agreements necessary to implement and comply with related federal regulations, and expend these funds for the purposes of implementing the program. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_07052016_16-0607 | Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: I am 19.
Speaker 1: Report from Public Works and Financial Management Recommendation to award 13 contracts for as needed public works, construction management and inspection services in an aggregate amount not to exceed 39 million for a period of three years citywide.
Speaker 0: There's a motion and a second public comment.
Speaker 3: Mr. Mayor, I'd like to make a comment. Sure. Okay. Is there a staff report on this item here?
Speaker 2: Certainly. Mr. Craig, that director of Public Works.
Speaker 0: Good evening, Mayor. Members of the city council. Tonight you have an item before you that is our on call as needed construction management services. The city put out an RFP for these services. We had over 40 responses. Of those 40, we evaluated and narrowed down to roughly 20 firms that were interviewed. We're bringing forward firms that we believe will help us be successful in implementing our CHP projects, especially under measure. That concludes the staff report and I'm available for questions.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Craig. And how many of those you said there were 40. My only thing here is that there are no Long Beach resident or Long Beach business owners here. So how out of the 40 like what is the process after that? What do they have to do to be able to make this list of 13?
Speaker 0: So a council member of the 40 firms, approximately five were Long Beach firms. We went through and interviewed. Of those five, we interviewed three, I believe, that were Long Beach. None of them met the criteria of the firms that were ultimately recommended before you this evening. We do understand and support local jobs in Long Beach. We believe that there are other ways to achieve that. And any construction project that come forward that these firms would oversee does include local hiring provisions, both under play projects and non play projects. So I think we share a common goal, which is to provide jobs in Long Beach. But what you have before you are those 13 firms that staff believe are best suited to address the needs of construction management policy program.
Speaker 3: So why did they not qualify or what were the reasons for them not meeting the criteria to make it to the list?
Speaker 0: Well, typically it's because they didn't have the level of staffing. It may be a one or two person shop, and these are relatively large and complex projects. So as people went through the evaluation and went through and made presentations, staff evaluated both their experience, the projects that they work on, and the resources that they brought to bear for projects moving forward.
Speaker 3: Okay. Are there. Because I understand as well from from I believe that they're also given, you know, out of the 13, there's some sort of interview process or they come to you and they have to be vetted, if you will, to see what if they fit the criteria. Um, how many of those people were interviewed?
Speaker 0: Again, I believe that the five three went through the interview process.
Speaker 3: Okay. So three Long Beach businesses went through the interview process, correct? Okay. Um, it would I would suggest I mean, if it's possible, I think that, um, to be able to include all of those. Businesses that were interviewed because to some degree, they were they they fit some sort of criteria. And I think that out of 4013 that are not Long Beach, this is a it's a stark number. So if it's I mean, if possible for us to be able to include those Long Beach businesses, or at least the ones that came close to. Or had an interview. It would be my suggestion that this council would look at that.
Speaker 0: Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 12: Maybe I have a question that might be helpful. So if if we look at the staffing of the different organizations and let's say the 13 that did qualify, what if their staffing changes and their manager of whatever is no longer with the organization? How does that change and do people get reevaluated? How long is the term of the contract? And are there options in the future as these long each firms develop to reenter into the process? Is that a council decision to reopen in the future? Does it have a clause? Is it already settled? I guess I need to know more about that generally.
Speaker 0: Well, I think part of your question is a legal question. What I can say is that the term is typically two years. We engaged these firms for two years. We reevaluate after that. These again are as needed services and nothing is guaranteed as far as the amount of work that one particular firm would get depends on the level of IP projects that come forward and the availability and how those those firms resources match the type of work that's coming forward.
Speaker 12: So if the if the firm changes over any criteria by which they were judged, do they need to provide that information to us as a city?
Speaker 0: So I think your question is, if they if a firm goes through staffing changes, if they lose lose, for example, some key personnel. Correct. That allowed them to rate higher because of those key personnel. Would we reevaluate that contract? I think there's a twofold answer. Again, under that two year term, this is an as needed contract. If we had firm a that had an expertize in in a in a person on staff and that person moved on. We and we believed that that person's expertize was key for a project. We simply wouldn't ask that firm or bring that firm on.
Speaker 12: I completely understand that. But is there a requirement of the firm to notify us that that person has retired, left or whatever? That was a part of the initial bid?
Speaker 0: Yes. So there is a requirement under the contract terms that if key personnel are lost, that the firm must engage the city. And in telling us that that is occurred.
Speaker 12: And of all the teams being approved, are there at least multiple in every single area that we would have a contract? Or did not. So, for instance, I see there's construction. There's I'm not sure what some of these companies do, obviously, because their names are more ambiguous than others. But let's say construction, because there's a bunch that say construction management or engineering or things like that. So. In any category that we would use this as needed. Do we have multiple firms that have qualified? So if someone.
Speaker 0: Else maybe I could clarify a little bit. The item you have before you this evening is just for construction management services. Right. But those construction management services will vary greatly. So, for example, if we were building a new sports field and adding irrigation, the firm that we would use for that would be much different than the firm we would need. And the expertize of that firm to evaluate the construction of a new bridge. It's different. It's different expertize, it's different engineering knowledge depending on the complexity and type of the CHP project will typically drive the decision on what firm to bring forward.
Speaker 12: And so if we had a project, say, irrigation and there was only what would there be multiple firms on the lists that we would be able to use or if if a firm that we liked. And again, I don't know any of these firms really, but if a firm that you chose to do that project alerted you that their senior manager that let them qualify had retired. And then we were not comfortable with their new manager. Would we go out to bid again or would we just put the project on hold for two years until the next batch of these go through? Or would we just choose another firm that's less experienced? How do we work through that process? I guess we just have a lot more questions because we've got a new eye on contracting.
Speaker 0: Yeah. So I think what you have before you this evening is a number of qualified firms. Some of them have different expertize. To specifically address your question, using my example of a bridge. If there was one firm on this list that we believe was the firm that had the type of expertize necessary to evaluate that particular project , and that firm no longer had the individuals working for them that met that expertize, then the answer would be no. We would not bring on an alternate firm to provide construction management, and we would either a identify a firm, come forward to council and ask for a contract with that firm. Or B we would come back and add names to this particular list for as needed consulting services.
Speaker 12: That makes me feel great. I really appreciate you taking the time to explain that. We've had a couple of questions come in through email this week, and I think that it's really important for people to know that while they are judged on the expertize of the staff and we are at a time in our life cycle of baby boomer employees that people are leaving the workforce, that we have those protections in place. So I appreciate your diligence on this and we appreciate your work.
Speaker 0: Mr. Parkin, you wanted to chime in.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mayor. Members of the council to the council member. Gonzalez, to your question and a correction, I think to the what the director said tonight, you would approve a contract for three years and with an additional two one year options to maintain this list for up to a maximum of five years. But as the director indicated, that if there were changes or companies fell off of this list, obviously the director and the city manager could come back and add names or of additional companies that could come to that. I do have a concern about just adding additional firms based upon the location of that firm. I don't have any of the information in front of me, but there would be a criteria that the selection committee went through to determine which firms qualified and met the requirements of the request for proposals. And if the firm that would be added does not meet that request for proposals, then we're not following a process that we would be required of every other RFP. They have to meet the certain criteria. And so without knowing more specifics about which firms those were, I would be hesitant just to blanket ad firms based upon their address.
Speaker 0: Cancer prostate.
Speaker 10: Oh, man. Thanks, Charlie. I think you might have answered a couple of questions that I might may have had, but I wanted to be clear on how we how we came to 13 were those that 13 that that met the qualifications or might there have been 20 that met the qualifications? But you felt like the 13 were the best. How do we arrive at that number?
Speaker 0: Yeah, so that's a good question. Again, this was a very competitive process. We had 40 firms that responded to the RFP and I won't say that's unprecedented, but that is a lot more than we would typically see. Of those 40, we felt that the most qualified of the 40 should come forward and go through a panel interview process. So there was a group of professionals that represented different interests within the city organization that evaluated these presentations. There were 20 firms that came forward and made presentations, and of those 20 firms, this recommendation, the 13 that recommended for you this evening, came out of that process. So the panel is recommending these 13 firms.
Speaker 10: Okay. So to to the city attorney's point what it is. Does the council have the ability, based on the information here, to say, for example. We want 15 farms and. And. To include two more firms and strongly consider local local firms. Um, for. For for consideration. Would that be out of line?
Speaker 2: Certainly from a legal standpoint, you could request staff to go back and to reevaluate, to see if any of the other firms that they interviewed meet the qualifications necessary to be included on the firm. If you didn't believe 13 was a sufficient number, I would leave that up to the city manager and the director to say how many firms they believe are necessary to get this work done. But as they indicated in the past, if they didn't have the expertize in one of these firms, the answer would be to come back to council and add a firm or to add a specific contract for that particular project.
Speaker 10: So to other questions of the firms that are here. Would they be prime? And would these guys would these firms. Be up to to some kind of subcontract to other other firms.
Speaker 0: Typically for construction management services. The vendors on this list or the firms listed here have in-house expertize and resources that they would do the work directly. It's not typically a situation where they would subcontracted, subcontract out this type of work. There may be there may be conditions where they would need additional support for a project and they would consider that. But typically, the firms that you have before you this evening are those that have the expertize, resources and experience to meet the demands of our IP projects. And I would add something, I think, to this conversation. Again, I think Council appreciates my perspective on local hiring and and the need to provide opportunities here for residents in Long Beach. And I just want to make sure that when we're talking about Long Beach firms, that it's really it's employees, right? We want to make sure that it's it's the residents of the city and not just a firm's address. So, for example, one of the firms that is not on your list tonight is a large construction management firm. They have a Long Beach office, but their main headquarters is in Phenix. So I don't know if you would consider that a Long Beach firm or not. But I would point to local firms should should be looked at as those that are employing Long Beach residents. That would at least be my perspective.
Speaker 10: Well, is that a question in the interview process of any of the.
Speaker 0: I don't have that data before me, but we can certainly put that together.
Speaker 10: Yeah. I would love to know that. And and of the 13 firms that I knew. Then they're not all guaranteed to actually get a job or get work. Right.
Speaker 0: Now, again, I want to stress this is as needed services. There's no guaranteed work.
Speaker 10: Thank you.
Speaker 0: And just as a as a reminder, as I know we have a couple of more comments, I think, which are obviously which is always the case. We always want the idea of bringing our local folks in is always important to everyone. But just as a reminder in Mr. Parking, correct if I'm wrong, but these these RFP proposal, the process that these go through, we're also following very clear and strict guidelines that are legal as far as what can be considered and what is actually a preference or not a preference before this process even starts. And so in this case, I know that address of of business is not something that is looked at. Is that correct?
Speaker 2: That is correct. The Long Beach does, and the council has adopted a local preference for nonprofessional services, materials, equipment and supplies. But this is a professional service contract. So there is not a local preference ordinance that would apply to this type of a contract.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you, Councilman. Super now. Discount on your ring. I've been skipping them, like, every time.
Speaker 2: Thank you very did take in the motion. One of the concerns that I have always raised consistently is the inclusion of diversity, of having very tired that have a commitment towards equity diversity. Small business enterprises, women, women owned businesses, as well as minority owned businesses. I see a lot of the while. None of the 13 is a minority owned business, there's a few women owned businesses. But being being that said, I recognize a few of these companies during my time at the Lonely City College and the huge construction contracts that we had over there, I recognized all these companies and I do know that they have do have some minorities working with them in terms of administrative as well as workers. So I mean, I'm okay with that. The the one thing that I do look at and and I feel encouraged. Is that one sentence right below the list that says that these firms are committed to using small, local and disadvantaged areas as subcontractors. I think that's an excellent sense to put there. The only thing that I would want to know is, is there a a mechanism by which this is going to be monitored, such as a a consultant that would be monitoring the the contracts themselves in terms of their compliance with diversity hiring and the the construction and in the construction project as they move forward. So I can in other words, using not like a compliance officer or compliance agency to monitor those contracts.
Speaker 0: Councilmember Turanga to provide some some insight as to the construction process. So the city has has engaged a compliance officer for all of the construction activity that we engage in, and that includes both the play work to make sure we're in compliance with the play. And if you recall, part of the play language includes a DB component and there is a goal of 10% participation in all of our construction projects. For the for the most part, construction management services that you have before you tonight are for larger projects. And and those projects are typically going to go over the $500,000 threshold, which is where we have our plate placed. So there is a compliance element associated with all of our construction activity. To my knowledge, I don't know. And I would have to reach out and have a conversation with our purchasing manager. I don't know how individual professional services contracts are are reviewed for participation with with subcontractor components.
Speaker 2: Well, again, I want to re-emphasize the need for diversity in our contracts that we pay close attention. I'm not I'm not so much concerned about the address as I am about the diversity of the contracts that we offer. I think that's very important because I know that with that sentence there that we're going to be looking at local hires and local businesses to do contract with. But, you know, let's just give the jobs to where they deserve to be. I appreciate that very much. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Council member Supernormal.
Speaker 7: Thank you. I think I'll get in the weeds now because I don't think we're there quite yet. But just just I just want to clarification on the subbing issue from from what I'm hearing is that there's no law or there's no rule against one of the contractors subbing part of the job. But de facto, practically, it rarely happens. Is that what you're stating?
Speaker 0: Again, it really depends on the type of construction activity that's occurring and what that firm would need in the way of support.
Speaker 7: Okay. My my suggestion was folks who didn't make the cut could apply to be on a subs list. Ultimately. And they mentioned that this doesn't guarantee you a contract if you make the list. Not only that, if you get a contract that doesn't necessarily guarantee you work if it's a large project also. So that's is just it's a great milestone to make this list, but it does not guarantee a job. Also, I think I've heard that it's been about four weeks since these decisions were made. And I don't know if that's been enough time for contractors to regroup or whatever to figure out how they want to approach this again . I don't know if there's been enough time for them to think about this, but would it be appropriate to revisit this in six months or something like that to see if if we need to upgrade the list? Does that comport with with what we're doing here legally?
Speaker 2: From a legal standpoint, yes, you could either lower the term of this agreement or you could ask them to management to give you a off council agenda memo item on how it's doing or what they see on it. You have you have options here this evening that would be legal to change the scope of this contract.
Speaker 7: I'm wonder if that would satisfy satisfy the need of Councilmember Gonzalez. What you're saying it to give folks another shot of it at six months or some type of interim period like that. If that would be acceptable to the council here on this item.
Speaker 3: Yes. I think that would be fair if we're able to do that. I don't know if that's enough time. Would that be enough time to assess?
Speaker 2: It may not be enough time to assess. I leave that to the discretion, Director. You could you could change this agreement to one year agreements at the option of the city manager and he could, you know, renew it each year individually.
Speaker 4: Okay.
Speaker 3: And council member. Super or not, are you done? I just wanted to make.
Speaker 7: Sure you go ahead. I would just thought of that option that you might want to explore, so. Yeah, I'm done. Thanks.
Speaker 0: So just to kind of address the particular question I think is staff, if we were asked to come back and expand the list to include some Long Beach businesses, then I think that that's what we should be asked to do. I think doing. Coming back and renewing our contracts in six months or a year is we can do, but it just creates more challenges. You have to remember the complexity of many of these projects are multiyear projects and I wouldn't like it would be challenging to assign a construction firm to a project that then crossed their contract term. So we are asking for a period of time to ensure that we have the resources necessary to address multiyear projects. So if really the council's goal here tonight is to try to find a way to add more Long Beach firms to the list, then then I would ask to provide that direction. And we will come back and we will amend this list and we will include some on beach firms or a or a mechanism that would allow Long Beach firms to either subcontract with the firms listed.
Speaker 3: So I would prefer that just I mean, I it's not just because they're Long Beach, but it's because they're qualified and they're from Long Beach. And I think we need to make an extra effort in light of so many reports that have come out. There's been added scrutiny, and we're the ones ultimately that have to make the decision. And of course, with your recommendation and your suggestions, we certainly respect them and we want to make sure we're doing the right thing here. So I just I see this list. It's it's striking. There's 1340 people applied, you know, zero Long Beach I keep saying residents, Long Beach business businesses. And so if there is a way we can reassess that. Mr. City Attorney, what was your recommendation on doing that? I think that would be.
Speaker 2: Well, I think I concur with the director here. If the substitute motion is to direct staff to review the list and see if there's any additional firms that qualify under the RFP, they could bring back a revised proposal to you maybe relatively quickly.
Speaker 3: Okay, that would be great. I would, I would, uh, would love to do that. So if there is a opportunity for me to make a substitute motion for that, I would like to get myself the support of the Council.
Speaker 0: Can I ask Mr. City Attorney, because I want to just clarification as the substitute comes in as well, because I think I'm hearing two different things and I just want to make sure we're clear, because I think also I know I know that a reason why this is a lot of this is forward is because the timeliness of the measure, a work which if this isn't if we don't move this forward or putting back also the work that needs to happen to begin the immense amount of construction that needs to begin after October one. So what I'm hearing, though, and I agree, is there's incredible interest to ensure that that local businesses are included in this. And so I think what I've heard from Mr. Beck and the your interpretation, we're a little bit different. I heard one is to approve the folks that are here tonight so that the critical work that needs to begin can begin, but also then open up and review and see if there's other folks that are local folks going to be added to this list or just reject the list completely and start over. But open it up to local folks. Is that what I'm hearing, Councilwoman, or because I.
Speaker 2: May remember I was talking with the city manager and the director and the way you described it would certainly work to you could adopt tonight and direct staff to bring back additional firms that qualify for this list to add those to those listed at an in a later date or do the the previous way I described it . So that is an option that you have before you also.
Speaker 3: We can do that. And how long would you would you need a director to be able to bring back? Additional companies, if need be.
Speaker 0: We have all the data. We've gone through the review process. We know the firms. I wouldn't want to open it up to a new RFP. I think we have some large firms on there and we would simply bring back those firms and ask you to amend the list that you adopt tonight and include those particular firms. I could say next week, but I'm not sure we could get on next week's agenda. So maybe two weeks.
Speaker 3: Two weeks. Okay, that would be great. I would be amenable to that. So we go ahead and I'll approve the motion to go ahead and approve these firms. And then, yes, if we can come back and you'd be coming back to the council. Correct? Because I would just recommend that you do that. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Yeah. I mean, it has to come back here because you have to the council has to approve it. So. Right. And so just so I'm clear, the motion on the floor, which is a substitute for Councilwoman Gonzalez, is to approve the presented lists, the list tonight. And then in a couple of weeks, you're coming back to the council with additional firms to add to this list, taking into consideration the interest of the council to include local Long Beach firms. Councilwoman, is that correct? Okay. And then who was the second council member? Sabrina. Okay. Okay. So you just amended that that that motion. Okay. Councilwoman Mango.
Speaker 12: I'm just glad that we're I'm strongly encouraging my council colleagues to move forward on approving the list that's here tonight. There's a lot of work scheduled, and I know that we've been making commitments to our community on street repairs and tree removals and sidewalks and bridges and all sorts of things. And I think that it's important to take this dual track, and I think that that was a very wise amendment by Councilmember Gonzalez. And I'll be supporting that two weeks.
Speaker 0: Thank you. So there's a motion who's a second on it to chime in on there. I know, but it's not in the. There we go. Or I guess, Austin. So there's a motion or second public comment on this item. Please come forward. Very good. You click. Okay, so the address number of comments, the first thing caught my attention is the dollar amount here we're talking about is 10,000, $10 million short of half the cost of building the. This new civic center. Number two, I think it would be wise again to suggest that get an analysis from give it the dollar amount and the import of the projects and analysis from our city auditor. As to the comments of the need to own the imperatives of hiring local. Let me share this experience with you. As I watched the project a number of years not too long ago unfold and watched every single day.
Speaker 2: And I noticed.
Speaker 0: People standing around doing essentially nothing. Looks like a group of Larry, Curly and Moe. And the this was these were people that the contractor was forced to hire. And that did not had the skill level to do what is. The jobs, the reformed. I think that argues well to have a report from the city auditor. That's particularly in view of the last report she gave relative to the findings of some earlier contracts. Again the what we want. If you again, you take your kid to a hospital. Do you want the best person or do you want to look necessarily a local person? When you take your car in, you want it done by the best person. Or a local person. And the two are not always the same. Hence. Turn to the city auditor. Ask for her analysis of it.
Speaker 11: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Any of the public comment? See none. There's a motion in the second. Please cast your vote. | Contract | Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFQ PW16-115 and award contracts to AKM Consulting Engineers, Inc., of Irvine, CA; AndersonPenna Partners, Inc., of Newport Beach, CA; Caltrop Corporation, of Los Angeles, CA; Cumming Construction Management, Inc., of Los Angeles, CA; Harris & Associates, Inc., of Irvine, CA; Hill International, Inc., of Irvine, CA; KOA Corporation, of Monterey Park, CA; Psomas, of Santa Ana, CA; S2 Engineering, Inc., of Rancho Cucamonga, CA; Simplus Management Corporation, of Huntington Beach, CA; Stantec Consulting Services, Inc., of Irvine, CA; Vanir Construction Management, Inc., of Costa Mesa, CA; and Willdan Engineering, of Industry, CA, for providing as-needed Public Works construction management and inspection services, in an aggregate amount not to exceed $39,000,000, for a period of three years, with the option to renew for two additional one-year periods, at the discretion of the City Manager; and authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute any necessary amendments relative to extending the term, adjusting the individual contract amounts withi | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_07052016_16-0625 | Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: We did 22, so we're on 23.
Speaker 1: Communication from Councilwoman Mongeau, Councilwoman Gonzalez, Councilmember Odinga and Councilmember Richardson. Recommendation to request the city manager to direct the Department of Public Works to conduct a street tree canopy assessment prioritization and Financing Study to inform the development of a street street tree lifecycle management plan.
Speaker 0: Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 12: Yes, I appreciate my colleagues and I coming together on what we think is a very important matter in Long Beach. If you read the report related to the audit of the Parks and Rec Department, one of the great challenges that we are enduring here in Southern California is that as we have had to reduce our water utilization , we have also reduced the hydration for our trees. In addition to that, a tree canopy assessment done many years ago by students showed that tree canopies provide great health to a community. They provide shade. It actually increases property values when trees are appropriate for a neighborhood. And so I think that this the work of our stoves combined to bring together a bunch of facts related to Long Beach trees. The canopy and a tree management system is really necessary. As our trees get older. They have a life cycle just like people do, just like pets do. And we need to be aware of our trees and their health. And so I think that this is an amazing step forward in a city that really wants to preserve the health and safety of communities. And so I think that the staff of all of our offices have worked so well together in getting something together, and I look forward to having this come back from public works. I really appreciate.
Speaker 4: It.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilman Gonzalez.
Speaker 3: I just want to thank Councilwoman Mango. You know, I think we should definitely assess our park infrastructure, especially our trees, because there is a lot of work to be done there. And a lot of the quality of life and well-being of our residents relies on the cutting back of trees and making sure that the trees that are dead are taken out and our making our parks and our walkways look better and nicer. So thank you for bringing this forward. I know it was addressed in our In the Park audit, and I think we have a lot of work to do in this in this regard. Thank you.
Speaker 12: And I should probably clarify, because the park audit already identified the 30%. This is really going to focus on our street trees. And I think that our public works department is going to be the lead, and I think we're all on the same page with that. So we look forward to it coming back. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Yes, correct. Sorry.
Speaker 0: Any public comment? Larry, could you clear? Because I'm not an arborist, but I have an appreciation for trees. And the article in the press telegram today or earlier this week relative to the trees along the bluff, I bring it I suggest brings it into sharp focus of what we need to do. And on that top related topic, it pointed out that there are those engaging in the yoga exercise and along the bluff were quite taken back by the fact that they were taking the shade was away. And let me say that they no longer had the shade. Let me suggest that when the Parks Department or whoever gives out permits for that. That those type of locations are certainly inappropriate for that to start with because it ruins the grass in those in those numbers, period. More importantly, there should be no exercising along a route where one has to inhale the fumes from passing busses and trucks and automobiles. And I don't care if it's the yoga on that side of the street or the workout stations, which is certainly fine, but you should place that those should be placed in an area that doesn't injure somebody's lungs, i.e. by sucking in the exhaust that comes by. But I appreciate the need. I appreciate the the study relative to the protecting the trees and so forth. Thank you. Seeing no other public comment. Members, please go ahead and cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Now we'll go on to new business. I'm going to begin I'd like to begin by adjourning in the memory of Richard Garnett, known to his friends and family and so many of Long Beach as Dick. Dick Cornett, as we know, was a longtime husband of Betty Garnett, who represented Long Beach in the legislature in Sacramento | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Manager to direct the Department of Public Works to conduct a street tree canopy assessment, prioritization and financing study to inform the development of a street tree Iifecycle management plan. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_06212016_16-0563 | Speaker 1: Came Item 18. Clark, if you could please read the item.
Speaker 0: Report from Economic and Property Development and Development Services Recommendation to adopt specifications for the Purchase and Development Opportunity at Broadway and Long Beach Boulevard. Declare the property a surplus and authorize the city manager to execute all necessary documents with Raintree Evergreen for the sale of the property in the amount of 7.3 million District two. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Members I've moved to approve the item are actually seconded to approve the item. Councilman Gonzalez.
Speaker 3: Oh.
Speaker 1: Okay. I appreciate that. So let's do that again. Okay. There we go. It's been moved and seconded. Is there any member of the public that wish to address the Council on item 18? And before I take that, I'm sorry, let me ask for a staff report really briefly. Would you just take a seat in the front and then I'll call you back up?
Speaker 9: Vice Mayor Council Members. As mandated by the State of California, we continue to work to dispose of our former redevelopment agency properties through our successor agency. We have one of the final projects in the pipeline is going to be for you tonight in the downtown. And our economic development and property services manager Mike Conry will walk us through it.
Speaker 5: Vice Mayor Lowenthal, members of the City Council, the property located at the southwest corner of Broadway and Long Beach Boulevard, is a vacant lot, containing 44,249 square feet and is being temporarily used as a parking lot. The property is former redevelopment property and is categorized as future development of the city's long range property management plan that was approved by the state in March of 2015. Future development properties are disposed through a request for proposals process with a selection based on best value to the city rather than the highest purchase price. An RFP was issued and four proposals were received. A selection panel consisting of representatives from the Departments of Development, Services and Economic and Property Development and the city's real estate and economics consultant Kaiser Master reviewed the four proposals. While all proposals provided excellent opportunity for the city, the panel unanimously selected Raintree Evergreen as its preferred proposer to recommend to City Council. Raintree proposes to develop modern luxury apartments with co-working, flexible space, retail space and an outdoor public plaza, creating a high degree of activity on the street level and providing residents with a place to live, workshop and connect. The proposal offered the highest price for the property and the highest estimated development cost and the highest density. Raintree has also agreed to provide ten parking spaces for exclusive use by the adjoining psychic temple. On May 24th, City Council authorize the sale of property located at Broadway in the Promenade to Raintree Evergreen for a similar high density mixed use development. If City Council approves this item tonight, this would be the second property to be developed by Raintree in the downtown. Raintree submitted proposals for both Broadway properties and the Promenade and at Long Beach Boulevard. And their concept was to offer a cohesive and synergistic project, creating a dual campus like setting conducive to the downtown. Staff believes that this co-branding approach has merit and the proposed development offers the best value to the city. Purchase and Sale Agreement has been prepared with certain entitlement and development performance milestones that are detailed in the staff report. It is anticipated that entitlement required 12 months with the close of escrow, not later than 18 months, and construction is anticipated to take up to 24 months to complete. As these timelines are, estimates staff request some flexibility for unanticipated delays. It is also important to state for the record, that council's action this evening is for the sale of property and does not approve a development on the site and without staff requests that City Council adopt specifications number of Pep 16 Dash 004 for the purchase and development of property located at the southwest corner of Broadway and Long Beach Boulevard. Authorize City Manager to execute all documents necessary for sale of the property in the amount of 7.3 million except categorical exemption. S.E. 16 DASH 148 And this concludes my report.
Speaker 1: That was a fast report, Mr. Conway. You get faster and faster. So I know we have a couple of speakers and would you like to come forward?
Speaker 0: High Long Beach transportation and parking solution, which is also called Tips objects to this project on the basis that the city has failed to conduct any environmental review for the project under secret. The city claims that the project is exempt from secret because it has a Class 12 exemption for the project which pertains to the sale of the surplus property. However, the project is not so narrowly defined. The staff report prepared. The city prepared by the city specifically states that the project includes the development of modern luxury apartments work, work, flexible space, electric vehicle charging station space and electric vehicle charging stations and retail space. The project is not simply the sale of surplus property and therefore the Class 12 exemption does not apply. The city must conduct a secure review at the earliest possible opportunity and deferring seek review until after the purchase and sale agreement has been approved would amount to piece mealing which is prohibited under section. Further, even if the 12th class 12th exemption were applicable, there are unusual circumstances here that render it unavailable. Namely, the project is not simply the sale of surplus property, but the proposal to build a large, multi-purpose building as described in the separate staff report. This is not a simple real estate transaction, which is what the Class 12 exemption was designed for. There are numerous environment issues that must be considered. TAPS is particularly concerned that the environmental impacts that derive from loss of parking, from the loss of public parking due to the creation of new density with inadequate parking. As you know, downtown Long Beach is already severely impaired. With parking impaired, and this will exacerbate the problem by resulting in traffic and air pollution. We urge you to conduct a square review now and reject the proposed purchase and sale agreement.
Speaker 2: Thank you for your time.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Would you state your name? I don't think I.
Speaker 0: Sorry. I'm Debbie Tobias.
Speaker 1: Wonderful. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Warren Lisowski. Oh, excuse me, second district resident. Just to follow up on what the previous speaker was saying, maybe to break it down a little more simple terms. We all know the council is not going to respond to any type of public input or commentary. We can pretty much predict this will be a eight to nothing unanimous vote per the staff's recommendation. That's pretty typical around here.
Speaker 10: But what the.
Speaker 5: Previous speaker was saying was that city of Long Beach and their staff reports there's a law called Secure. It's a California Environmental Quality Act. And what the city has been doing as they've been disposing of these former redevelopment agencies properties is using what's called categorical exemptions. Now, if you go ahead and look at Sequoia's website and do any research on the law, you'll find out that each of the exemptions has exemptions to them. And so the city is using their staff reports, signing one page exemptions and pushing them through to sell these properties. There's some problems with the way they're doing it. Just to follow up on what Debbie was saying about the project, it's interesting how Mike Conway will say that we are only approving the sale of the property, not the project being developed on it. Well, sir, if you're not if you're not approving the project, why is there pictures of the project in the sale contract? I mean, it's pretty obvious that you guys have already approved this or are going to approve this high density project near the promenade. The same developer has another high density project on the promenade, and whether it's parking or quality of life, by designating these properties surplus, the council would like to use the Class 12 exemption. And so we were long wondered why the council was using designating these properties as. As surplus property. And now the answer is because they want to use the the Class 12 exemption. As W was saying, there's problems with the Class 12 exemption and there are also exemptions to the exemptions. So we're going to go ahead and file a lawsuit against this property as well. And when you go ahead and post the sequel exemption category exemption tomorrow, we can go ahead down to the recorder's office, take a picture of it, and we'll be filing another lawsuit against this development as well. The way that the city of Long Beach is disposing of the RDA properties is unfair to both the taxpayers. It's a noncompetitive bidding system. Just saying that you've got 3200 people looked at the RFP and four bids were put in on it. There's something wrong with the way the city of Long Beach is selling these properties and you've you'd like to quickly just kind of brush them under the rug with one page categorical exemptions. But we're going to bring a little light to this and we're going to use the power of the courts to do so. So I'm sure you guys don't have any questions or don't want to address this now and go ahead and enjoy your vote and we'll just settle in court. Thanks so much.
Speaker 1: So, Mr. Conway, I'll ask you a few questions. But just to remind members of the audience that have followed this council for perhaps the last several years, nearly a decade, we spent about five, six, almost seven years on updating the downtown plan and in doing so conducted an ER as part of it. And so the density that is approved for the downtown might not have been what certainly it was ten years ago, but that is why the downtown plan was updated. All the projects that have come before us for the second District comport with what that plan provides, and that process involved a tremendous amount of community outreach and for those that were not able to participate or chose not to. It is unfortunate, but it is a disrespect to those individuals who spent countless hours with this city for several years participating in updating the downtown plan. And I value that and cherish that and thank them for their time. Therefore, I am very confident in the way that we are approaching our disposition of surplus funds. If we were to follow what the State had advised us to do when redevelopment was disbanded, we would be putting up all our properties for fire sale. So what would then happen is it would go to the highest bidder, not necessarily what is in the best interest of community development or what is in the best interest of an actual plan for an area. So I'm not only thankful for the process that we are approaching, but I am actually very proud of it. Mr. Conway, would you share with us about the er confusion that the members of the audience may have?
Speaker 5: I'd be happy to give that a try. Vice Mayor Again, what council is doing this evening is selecting a developer, essentially a purchaser of property. You're not approving a project. There are concepts by which the panel made a decision on whom to select to purchase the property. The concepts as presented in staff's estimate estimation is consistent with the downtown plan, but that is something that would be determined through the secret process once an actual development proposal is submitted to the city for review. And when that occurs, they'll be a full scale review consistent with square guidelines and hopefully consistent with the downtown plan.
Speaker 1: Thank you. There's been a motion and a second, and I want to thank you, Mr. Good. Here. Please come forward.
Speaker 5: Very good. You. Clarke has the address. Noticeably absent at this? Of course. Is a review and position by our city auditor on his very face. If you have nothing to hide. It seems to me that on any piece of property that we're dealing with, the city auditor should be entitled to weigh in. And perhaps the biggest piece of evidence of why this should not go forward is contained and codified well set forth in the new business section. Item 37, which goes to the issue of how woefully inadequate trained is our city staff on such matters. I call your attention to item 37, where it says the city essentially is needing developing a training program for project managers, both employees and consultants for managing projects, preparing scope of work, reviewing the proposals, develop a training program on contract administration best practices, establish policies, procedures for overseeing, overseeing standardized city contracts. Developing a policy to ensure our project managers are certified and certifications are current. What you're saying here and somebody is to be certainly given credit for recognizing how woefully inadequate the city staff is, as many people have pointed out over the past years. That's one of the reasons we're in the process and in the situation we find ourselves now. So I would suggest that the very first thing is request a review from the city auditor unless you have something to hide. If you don't have something to hide, then you should step. You should request the report from the auditor. She has nothing to gain, nothing to lose. And she has. She's biased. Would bring a bias unbiased review and I think combined with item the idea implicit in 37. Any reason community of mind would find the issue before you today is one that you're ill prepared. To move forward on an intelligent basis. Yes, you could move forward using the disease. And in the end, it is thinking. But if that is what you want as your legacy, I think the voters need to know that. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Mr. Goodyear. And I'd like to thank the staff for the work that they've done on putting this report together as well as the item for tonight. And I know Mr. Ruddock is not here but has spent a tremendous amount of time on redevelop this year. Sorry. That's not where you normally sit. We have our assigned seating. She has spent probably. 14 years. 13 years on making sure that the promenade is reintroduced to this city. As a splendid piece of development, but really more of a neighborhood. I think we look at certain projects as just development, but what we've done is created a neighborhood and the promenade today. For those of us who have lived here, at least since the nineties, looks far different from what it was in the nineties. And I want to thank the staff for that. BLOCK by block, piece by piece, there is a cohesion to that space that isn't just retail and it isn't just residential, but it's truly mixed use with the walkability that a promenade should be. A lot of areas around the country are referred to as the promenade, but very few allow us that walkability among a. Set of retail options and neighborhood options. And so this is the last parcel to complete that Promenade project, and I'm very pleased with it. And I want to look at the staff that's here today and also speak to those that are not here. Thank you for your commitment to redeveloping the promenade. It didn't take one or two years. It took over ten years. And I want to thank you for that. With that colleagues, I am very much in support of moving forward with this item today. Members cast your vote.
Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Item. 1/2. 39. | Contract | Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFP EP16-004 for the purchase and development opportunity at 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 (Subject Property);
Declare the City-owned Subject Property as surplus;
Authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute any and all necessary documents including a Purchase and Sale Agreement with Raintree-Evergreen, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, for the sale of the Subject Property in the amount of $7,300,000; and
Accept Categorical Exemption CE 16-148. (District 2) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_06212016_16-0585 | Speaker 1: Thank you. Item. 1/2. 39.
Speaker 0: Communication from Councilwoman Gonzalez. Vice Mayor Lowenthal, Councilmember Odinga and Councilman Austin. Recommendation to request the city attorney to draft resolution supporting the good faith negotiations between Covanta and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers on behalf of the employees of the Southeast Resource Recovery Facility.
Speaker 1: Councilman Gonzalez.
Speaker 2: Yes, I want to just thank and acknowledge my friends here from the IBEW, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, and really thank them for bringing this forward, because I know it's very important. I know the city has done work with our surf facility for many years. And with that, we want to ensure my my intention with this was to ensure that we were showing some support for those employees that have been with the city for so very long. Just recently they joined the IBEW, which is great, and they over 80% of their members of their their employee workforce decided to go with the IBEW. So we're excited to learn about that. But they do quite a bit of work and they're such a large asset to our community. And so to show support from the city side for these workers would be certainly a great step forward. So again, I want to thank IBEW, I want to thank the workers at our surf facility. And this will basically be a an item to ask our city attorney to bring back information and language for resolution. So thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. There's been a motion and a second. Is there any member of the public that wish to address Council on item 39?
Speaker 5: Good evening, Vice Mayor, fellow council members, city manager, city attorney and the public that's here today. My name is Tommy Falvey. I represent IBEW Electrical Workers, Local Union 11. And we're here in solidarity with my fellow brothers and sisters. That's right behind me. And we're here in solidarity to support Covanta employees. IBEW Local 11 is officially the local union that has been certified by the National Relations Labor Board to represent the Covanta employees. Overwhelmingly, 40 plus employees will be certified to be represented. And I'm here today to ask for your support out of good faith with Covanta Energy, to sit down with IBEW Local 11 and negotiate a collective bargaining agreement between the two. So I'm here to also recognize Rebecca Davidson that's right behind me. She's going to speak and she's one of the Covanta employees. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Good evening, council members. My name is Rebecca Davidson. I'm a single mother and I worked at Covanta for August will be 28 years. I'm proud to have spent that many years there. A few weeks ago, my coworkers and I overwhelmingly voted. To join IBEW Local 11. We believe this.
Speaker 5: Secured.
Speaker 0: A very good future for ourselves and our families. Tonight, we ask you to encourage your employer to negotiate in good faith. We're not asking.
Speaker 3: For any special.
Speaker 0: Favors. We're just asking our employer to follow the state laws and federal laws and nothing more. So I ask if you would please approve the resolution.
Speaker 3: Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Councilmember Turanga.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Mary. One of the important items that we have and that we've had in the past year or so has been the recognition of union membership and the and the importance that they hold with creating good jobs, good paying jobs, security benefits. And I'm glad to see that this going forward. I'm very happy that I signed up on this to support the efforts of the employees at Covanta, because it provides all of that, and I'm very proud of that. As you know, the city has also established the project labor agreement that creates other union jobs for all the construction jobs that are going to be coming through Long Beach in the immediate future and beyond. So, I mean, it's it's an honor for me to have signed on to this. I congratulate the employees of Covanta for their vote and for the IBEW for your efforts in putting their first and the employees in train and knowing that the representation you provide would keep will keep them not only working, but working in in positions that are going to be providing them with livable wages and good working environment. So I want to thank you for your efforts in getting these employees as well.
Speaker 1: Councilmember Richardson.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Vice Mayor. I just want to chime in and say thank you to my colleagues for placing this item on the agenda. I want to encourage support for the workers in the bargaining unit in their negotiations. Stay strong. This is a representation of a strong a good economy, workers working in the world. And we don't want this to escalate. So we want to keep workers working. So thank you so much. And you have my support.
Speaker 1: Great. There's been a motion and a second. Members, please cast your vote.
Speaker 0: Motion carries. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Attorney to draft resolution supporting the good faith negotiations between Covanta and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers on behalf of the employees of the Southeast Resource Recovery Facility and bring back to the City Council within 14 days. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_06212016_16-0587 | Speaker 1: Item 41, please.
Speaker 0: Communication from Councilwoman Price, Council member Superman and Councilwoman Mongo recommendation to request the City Attorney to prepare and return to the City Council a medical marijuana regulatory ordinance for possible placement on the November 8th, 2016 General Election Ballot. Such council initiated ordinance would be placed on the ballot only in the event a proposed initiative petition regarding the same subject matter qualifies for placement on the November ballot.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Waiting for you, Councilman Price. Sort of secondary. Madam Clerk. Councilman. Councilwoman Mango is seconding the item. There you go. Okay.
Speaker 0: Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 2: Thank you. So I want to do a couple of things with this item tonight at the request of my colleague who has his anniversary tonight, which we talked about. I want to move this item over to our next meeting, which is going to be July the fifth. And not take this the item of a competing measure up tonight. But what I would like to do is anticipation for that meeting is I'd like the city attorney to provide us with a report on the proposed initiative and the items that have been enumerated in the proposed initiative that are different than what we have discussed previously at council in regards to things such as land use, cups, buffers, taxes. I'd like to just get a sense of what the differences are in the proposed initiative so that we can discuss that and talk about it. The other thing I would like the city attorney to do is to provide council with an overview of recreational marijuana and the interplay between recreational marijuana and medical marijuana. Educating us a little bit on what would happen if recreational passed, what would that do to medical? What would happen if both passed? How would they interplay with one another in terms of our land use options? And so I think those will be great discussion points. And as I indicated to my cosigners in regards to a competitive ballot initiative and thinking about one, I think it's important for us to have some data. The initiative that's on there is really the last place that we were as a council, and that's why it's offered. But I'm more than happy to to think about the suggestions that my colleagues have in terms of a competing ballot initiative and to incorporate any ideas that they have in crafting something that truly is a compromise that reflects the best interests of our communities. I understand. And it's.
Speaker 1: That the.
Speaker 2: Differences in the proposed initiative might be pretty significant in regards to land use and taxation. And those are data points that we need to have moving forward in determining what options we're going to give the citizens. It's this really is something that's going to go to the citizens. Many do want medical marijuana. Many will probably want recreation. So moving forward, we want to be able to give them the best choices in terms of the impacts to the city and really what we can manage as a city moving forward given the resources that we have. So the item is basically three, move.
Speaker 0: The.
Speaker 2: Competitive initiative to July the fifth so that my colleague Mr. Durango can get on his way and not be stuck here all night. And also, Councilman Austin will be here as well and then receive some more information from the city attorney's office from which we can start to have a dialog about what options we want the voters to have. So that would be my request.
Speaker 1: Councilwoman Mango. Is that the motion that you're seconding? On those three items.
Speaker 11: I think that for the purposes of considering an alternative, while I love councilmember your anger and want him and his wife to have a wonderful evening, I think that a study is important before determining if we would even want to consider a competitive measure. So I think that for different reasons I will support.
Speaker 3: The idea.
Speaker 11: I think voters should have. Choices. I think that there are many people here who fought very hard for a measure that did not pass this council originally, but I think would probably have that support. And I think the voters would likely be supportive of the original. System that did not pass and instead was proposed to be the delivery system. And so I think that there's a lot of space of common ground that could be found between now and then. And I think that a study. I've pretty much voted yes on every study to date, so I doubt I would change my methodologies now.
Speaker 1: Councilmember Turanga, did you want to speak at this time?
Speaker 7: I want to wait to see what of colleagues are going to say. But I do want to say that so much has been made of my anniversary tonight that I don't want to I don't want to be the the the one to rush this alarm just because I do have something to celebrate tonight. So I'll wait for my comments later. When they are, I feel they are appropriate. So let's go ahead and continue the discussion. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Councilmember Richardson.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Vice Mayor. I, I wanted to not comment, but my thoughts here are what I would support tonight is I would support information, but I don't right now I couldn't support and I understand placing this ordinance as a starting point, and that makes sense to me. But we had that discussion about that ordinance already at council and, you know, and the council is well documented on that particular ordinance to start a process with placing a competing, competing ordinance on the ballot. I think you have to start in a different place, I think. I think we had the opportunity. The public went to the ballot if there was something that was going to be competing measure. I think, frankly, starting at the place of what was being proposed by by so many voters who signed that petition and adding protections or strengthening it, there would have been a better approach. So tonight, I can't support the portion to move this to the fifth. But what I can support and what I would encourage and what I hope we arrive at tonight is information, because I do agree that the voters should know exactly what they're voting on. I think that we should do an analysis of the potential impacts of the ballot measure. That's fair. And there is still time. If if there's still time, something more reasonable comes forward. But I could not support this tonight. So in its current form, I would say no. But if the if if there is a, you know, if councilman woman price and it's not as important to me to to right now do a substitute motion. I want to respect the intent of Councilwoman Price. But if she were to, you know, make her motion more about finding information, stand alone, about the measure that the voters have voted on, the voters have signed a petition for. That's something I considered tonight.
Speaker 5: Thanks.
Speaker 1: Councilmember Urunga.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Senator. I can't agree with both. Arguments at this present time, and I'll tell you why. We've we've gone through this. We've gone through this since my wife was on the city council. We got through this last year. We've argued it all. We got reports. I don't know how much staff time we've spent already on building an initiative or getting the task force together. We had people from the community participate in those task force, albeit it didn't go as smoothly as it would should have. But it it did its job and it came back with recommendations. The proposal that was put here that that the councilwoman is putting forward. We went through that discussion. We talked about it. We did the analysis. We even talked about some of those issues that she's bringing up now in terms of further reporting and further further study . We've done that already. I don't think that we need to go any further in regards to getting more information on this. I think the people have spoken. There was a petition that was put out there. More than 35,000 people signed it. We're in the process of validating those signatures. There is a high likelihood that those signatures are going to be valid and that there's going to be a ballot initiative. Our what we have here is an opportunity to let the voter speak. Now, if there are members of this council who do not want to. Let me rephrase it. If there are council members here who do not support the initiative, they can they can do so. They can write an argument against it. But for us to consider a countermeasure, to put on the ballot in the name of giving them giving the voter an alternative choice, I don't think is valid. We went through all of that discussion. So I'm in favor of letting the process go through. Put it to the voter and I would. I want to provide a substitute motion to receive and filed this item here.
Speaker 1: Is there. Does that come up? Okay.
Speaker 2: Councilwoman Price Thank you. Vice Mayor So I may have missed something in this process, but I don't recall that we've ever done an analysis of the impacts of the specifications of this proposed ordinance. We have never analyzed the impact of this many dispensaries. This tax base is limited at capped at 6%. We've analyzed it at 10%. We've never analyzed that at 6%. We've never analyzed the impact with. No. We've never analyzed the land use implications that this ordinance proposes specifically. All of the discussions that we had regarding cups and land use and taxes are now null and void under this proposed initiative because nothing that we discussed was included in the current initiative. The buffers have changed. The cups have changed. The tax base has changed. The land use has changed. We have not analyzed this current proposed initiative. And in fact, yes, the voters have a right to know what that impact is going to be. Let me be clear. Let me be absolutely clear. I am not saying let's not have marijuana. That is not what I'm saying. What I am saying is let us find choices for the voters that are more prudent than what is being proposed. And, yes, let's let let the voters decide. There is going to be a cost associated with us having this election. And the voters of the city of Long Beach should be the ones to decide what measure they're comfortable with. I'm not saying that anything about the proposed initiative, other than if we find that it is not the most prudent for our city, then let's at least consider an alternative that is more prudent for our city. And yes, let's let the voters decide. I understand that in a city of 500,000, 35,000 signed a petition. I understand that. But we have 500,000 voters in the city of Long Beach, and some of them would like to know what the choices are in regards to prudence. Some of them may choose a measure that allows for a 2000 foot buffer or a 15 foot buffer from a school. Some of them may choose a measure that requires a C P for these operations. Some of them may choose a measure that goes up to a 10% gap, and some of them may actually think that the more prudent measure is better for the city of Long Beach, especially when we just passed measure a promising promising our residents that this was going to provide some relief to our police department, who has been completely stretched to the limit. And now if we are going to add another burden to the police department, some of our residents may want to know how we're going to pay for that additional burden. This council may not be interested in that information. I, as a resident of the city, I'm interested in that information. So if you're not interested in that information, then vote no tonight. Do it and do it proudly. You'll get a lot of cheers from the audience, but if you're a resident, you may want that information. And as council members, we should do everything that we can to provide alternatives for the voters of this city. I yes, I am always going to pick the more prudent measure. It's not about marijuana. It is not about marijuana. It is about a business. Any business that has elements that are associated with what we've seen in marijuana would be one that we want to have caution with. It's not the legal operators that are a problem. It is the illegal operators that are the problem. It is the illegal operators that have cost our city millions of dollars in police resources. It's the same illegal operators that have cost some of our neighboring cities millions of dollars in police resources. It's the illegal operators that we're worried about. And for every one legal operation that we allow in the city of Long Beach, we will see 1 to 7 illegal operations. Are we ready to take that on? That's the question. Are we ready to take that on? That is a choice for our voters. But what I'm I'm not saying let's not have marijuana. I'm saying let's come to the table and find a compromise. I will meet with anybody who wants to meet with me. In fact, my staff has been meeting with medical marijuana companies, very, very reputable, business oriented professional people. We've been meeting with my staff has met with them. I've met with them. We're looking forward to doing business with a lot of these people that have demonstrated maturity in the discussion.
Speaker 3: It only took 20 years.
Speaker 2: So my recommendation to my colleagues would be and I can I can change the motion to request an impact report on the. Fiscal land use and enforcement impacts of the proposed initiative. Because to my knowledge, and I would expect the city attorney to correct me if I'm wrong, we have not analyzed the specifics of this particular initiative . We've never analyzed it. Is that correct?
Speaker 9: We have not done so.
Speaker 2: So? So a group of people hired signature gatherers and put together an initiative and presented it to us. That was something that was created by an outside group, not the city of Long Beach. Correct?
Speaker 9: That is correct.
Speaker 2: So that's not like this. It's not an offshoot of what came out of planning commission as my understanding. Correct.
Speaker 9: This is a citizen's initiative.
Speaker 2: So it's a citizen's initiative. Just for a moment, let's forget that we're talking about marijuana. Any citizens initiative, if they get enough signatures, do we not as a council, have a duty to study what the impact of that is going to be to the city? We are the only entity in the entire city of Long Beach that has the data that can answer those questions for our residents. Our residents don't know what the impacts are going to be. They don't know what the impacts are going to be. They don't know what it's going to cost the police department. You know, who knows that information? The city of Long Beach, our police chief. So we are now proposing way more dispensaries than were proposed before with no coops, limited buffers, limited tax. We're actually repealing the tax that the voters voted on in April of 2014 and capping it at 6%. Our residents may have something to say about that. They may want to at least know that that's what we're doing. So, you know, let's not get dramatic. And, I mean, I understand there's a lot of special interests here, but we're talking about taking a prudent approach. And I just asked my colleagues, you know, if we don't want to vote on the counter initiative or the competing initiative tonight, great. Let's vote. Let's take it up another time. If we don't like the other competing initiative I've proposed. Great. Somebody propose another one. Give us a starting point that you like. I'm trying to get us a starting point that gives us a prudent alternative. If you don't like my starting point, I welcome an alternative starting point. I'm reaching out to my colleagues saying, let's work on something that's prudent. Let's work on something that phases in. Let's work on something that doesn't stretch our police resources more than they already are. We get calls and my staff can attest to this. We get calls every day from our residents talking about property crimes, talking about traffic enforcement traffic, talking about things that our police department currently with their current resources, do not have the resources to follow up on. How can I, as a council member, turn to them and say, we just added more work for the police department? And I don't know how to answer your question about property crimes or traffic enforcement, because not only do we not have enough money to do what you want them to do now, but we just added to their workload. I can't do that. I want to at least be able to say to them, You know what? You had the choice. This is what you voted. And you know what? If the voters vote for it, great, great. If recreational marijuana pass is great, then we're in the same boat as Newport Beach SEAL Beach, Cerritos. Every city around us is all in the same boat. It's a level playing field. I don't want to put our citizens at a disadvantage. It's my duty to protect them. And when they say to me, the police isn't doing enough for me, I want to say, well, you know what? You guys voted on that initiative that's now stretching them even thinner than they were before. I don't know what to tell you. It's kind of like Prop 47. You know, the people voted for it. We're suffering the consequences for it. And maybe with this measure, we won't suffer any consequences. I don't know. I just know that when we're voting on something, we should be voting on the most prudent thing in terms of giving our residents choices. And I just don't know, maybe we can have an alternative measure that says something like, this is where we're going to start. And in six months or a year, we can tweak it to expand. We can do that if it's all going as well as we think it is. And the taxes are, you know, bringing in millions of extra dollars a year that we hadn't anticipated, then why wouldn't we expand it? So, you know, that's just something that we can think about moving forward is that there is a starting point. And if there's any takeaway to be had, it should be that the alternative measure that was proposed, that's on agenda item 41 tonight, that measure asks for marijuana. It is not a ban. My proposal is not a ban. My proposal is an initiative saying let's start with a prudent measure to medical marijuana. That's the proposal. So anybody who wants to come up and complain about it, I'm not saying let's a ban. So get your facts straight. That's not what we're talking about. We're talking about starting with a prudent approach and expanding from there. So here's the deal. The main motion is to ask the city attorney's office or the city manager, whoever is going to do it for an impact report on land use taxes. Enforcement. And then I'd also like to get an overview because I don't think anybody knows the answer to this, of what's the interplay with recreational marijuana and medical marijuana. Nobody knows what happens. Who is it? But if recreation passes, is this entire discussion moot? Because if so, I don't even know why we're having it. And I don't think anyone knows that answer. So that's my that's my that's my motion. And I'd like to move the item to July the fifth and we can talk about it further then. If you want to vote for it, great. If you don't, great. It's a pretty simple item.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Councilmember Gonzales.
Speaker 2: Okay. So, you know, certainly listening to all of the discussion, I appreciate it. And I know we've been this is many years in the making, but I just have a question in terms of timeline and timeframe. So going, you know, understanding kind of what each council member that has spoken wants to do. What would be the timeline for a. Going with councilwoman prices. Option in terms of bringing. I mean, she's talking about July 5th, but what would be that like final deadline for submitting a ballot initiative?
Speaker 9: Mayor, vice mayor and members of the council. If I understand the question correctly, what is the last date that the council could decide to put something on the ballot? And I and I'll defer to the clerk. But I believe it's August 2nd.
Speaker 0: That's correct. The August 2nd date allows for the city clerk my office to meet ballot measure deadlines that are set by the county regarding arguments, argument writers, both arguments for and against and rebuttals for and against.
Speaker 2: Okay. So I think that because it seems to be to me that we're a bit fragmented here. So I don't think that there's any cohesiveness at all that I see and not that we have to get there. But I would say that most often than not, this council wants to be as as judicious and as thoughtful as as possible in making a decision. And so I think July 5th, at least for me, puts things in to kind of a rush. And I don't see where there's, you know, we would need more data. And that's the thing I know we've been doing time and time again. But if we are if there's any inclination of putting something on on a ballot, then, you know, July 5th is pretty it's pretty tough, I would say, for me to to at least take this all in and go forward with this. The the item itself in itself is very robust. So I don't think I'd be supporting anything coming back July 5th at this time. What I could say is that it would be great to get more information as to the land use, the taxes, enforcement and an impact report related to the initiative that's already put forward. I think that's fair to just kind of get an understanding of where we where we would be. And also, again, the interplay between medical and recreation, I think is is also fair. So that's something that I would support on that side, but not necessarily bringing anything back.
Speaker 3: Uh.
Speaker 2: So much so. I would support to receive and file this particular item.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Councilmember Andrews.
Speaker 12: Yes. Thank you, Vice Mayor. You know, I've listened to this and that, and I think in the fairness of all of this, because I've been here since the beginning of these topics about medical marijuana, and these are individuals that's been here and it's stressed their time. I didn't listen to everything that we had to go through with medical marijuana. I think, in fairness, every one of the individuals, not only the individual out there who've been waiting to try to get this ordinance passed, I mean, it's been a long, long haul. It's been a long time. And I think if anything, you know, we talk about our constituents, people in the city of Long Beach, the you know, a large it is. And what they you know, the voters you know, we vote all over the city of Long Beach. And I don't kind of like the idea of certain precincts. They they're the only ones that vote when we have issues of this type, I think everyone would vote on an issue of this type because the fact that we're talking about medical marijuana and you have to understand that these individuals here have waited a long time. And I think if nothing else about the fairness of this, you know, these individual waited. We went to this ordinance. We waited. We waited. We've given everyone a chance. I think even Mrs. Price and we've been very diligent, even with a lot of your, you know, your own interest as individuals. Could you wait get an impact on it? I think we've already went through that. And I think at this point right now, we're going to have to do something or not just throw the whole thing out. Let's get this thing done. Because these people waited long enough. The people have waited long enough. It's time for us to do something. If not, let's just wait on the state and see what they're going to do. I think really at this point, what do we what are we waiting on? What kind of impact are we looking for? We've gone through that. We've gone through everything that I think is necessary in order for us to really find out what we need to do in order to get a medical marijuana, you know, when it's on the ballot, because the people right now, I tell you, we have they have the vote. They have the votes for it. I'm not waiting around to see what we're going to do up here. That's the people that are the ones who we sit up here and represent. We represent the people, not this little guys. This is sitting up here. So what I'm looking and listening to, I think it's time for us to do what we're supposed to do, get this thing over with, and let's move on with and get to something else, because we have a long night tonight. Mr. Liberto, I don't know when you're going to get you wallet. It might be next year. Yes. Yeah. Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 1: I wanted to take an opportunity to make some comments as well. I think I'll do that now. And Councilmember Reyes Durango, former councilmember, is strong, is still here. So we're hoping to make sure that we wrap this up soon. So I I'm very appreciative and respectful of everyone's position on this council on the issue of medical marijuana. As Councilmember Andrews indicated, we have been at this for quite a long time. And those of us who just joined the council, you've also been at it at least for two years, and that's quite a long time. What I want to share, and I think Councilmember Andrews may have articulated it already, we had our chance. We had our chance for many, many years. And we got it right and that was undone. And then we got close to getting it right and then that was undone. I think we need to step back and accept that we haven't done our duty. I won't speak for myself personally. I and some of the others that are here. We have desperately tried to come up with a responsible measure and as I said, we did have it right and it was undone and undone because of fear mongering , really. If I'm truthful and honest about it, it was because of fear mongering and that kind of rhetoric and and and the politics that go behind it and the passion and forget the politics. It's really the passion that go behind it. It really does create a culture of fear mongering, which I don't think has a place in in a true democracy where dialog can take place and people can have differences of opinions, and then the voters vote or the council members vote, and then things are left as they are. Even before our item, the original ordinance had a chance to to play out for a few years. It was undone. And so we don't know. What I do know today is that after nearly eight years of having had the trust and confidence of those of you that have been involved for a long time, we didn't do our jobs. So there is a voter initiative that went forward. And as Councilmember Richardson had indicated, and Councilmember Urunga and Councilmember Andrews, people did spend time and resources to do that. But let's not forget that that voter initiative took place because we did not do our jobs. That's important to note. We don't get all these bites at the apple because now there's a voter initiative and we feel we have to put a competitive item on the ballot. I think that's highly disrespectful. The item that's brought forward to consider to place on the ballot is not that different from an item that was voted down . So why would we proffer that? I'm just mystified. I'm mystified that we would be here again at this time. This council had its chance. I think it's an abuse of our authority to go forward, to put something competitive to a voter initiative, not because I believe that every voter initiative is correct. I don't believe that. I think a lot of those that we see up and down the state are wrong and it's an it and it goes forward because democracy really didn't work in that moment. But I don't think putting a competitive measure is the answer to that. I think what we can do is educate our voters. And I do have a question for Mr. City attorney, Mr. Parkin. When we do have a voter initiative, what role can the city or council play in terms of the information about that or the analysis that would not put us crossways when it comes to electioneering?
Speaker 9: If the measure is certified by the city clerk pursuant to the election code, it will be brought back to the City Council. And at that time, the council have three options. One is to adopt the measure as submitted. The second is to place it on the ballot for November. And the third option is to request a report, which you could include these items. That report is due no later than 30 days, within 30 days. To discuss the impacts of the measure on the city at that time, when the report is presented back to the council , the council has two options to place the ballot, placed the measure on the ballot or to adopt it as submitted. So there would be that opportunity once it is on the ballot. The general election rules would apply to the city on the spending of city resources either to support or oppose a ballot initiative.
Speaker 1: Okay, so that process would take place regardless of whether this council took action today or not.
Speaker 9: It would have to be an action of the council to request that.
Speaker 1: Yes, at that time, absolutely. Having had experience with this council and watching other bodies, we always ask for information and we always do ask for a report. I don't see us moving forward without a proper analysis, and so I'm confident that that will take place. What I'm also confident about tonight is that I am not in support of moving the item to another date to forestall this discussion for another date. We do not have enough time to put a competing ballot measure on the November ballot, even if a majority of this council would be interested in doing that. If we look at the bond measure that just passed with our mayors, great leadership on it, that did not happen on a whim. That took many, many, many months of study and polling and research. It didn't happen over a three month summer period. That's what we do when we want to be responsible about putting an item on the ballot. We conduct many studies and we take the pulse of the constituency, and that's why that ballot measure was as successful as it was. Another reason why that ballot measure was as successful as it was was because we earned the confidence of our constituency. When it comes to infrastructure projects and the needs of the city and the neighborhoods in the community. When it comes to infrastructure, it's undeniable. We earned we earned your confidence in that area. On medical marijuana, we did not I think we lost your confidence and we lost our chance to do it right behind the dias. And I do believe that the voters should have a right to vote without our interference. I do support. At the time that it does come back to the council. I do support us receiving information so that we may be able to share that and then take a position once once the clerk finally certifies that it is on the ballot. Whatever decision this council makes, either adopt it on the spot or put it to the voters. Either way, we will have that information. But I am not in support of the original motion. I am in support of the motion to receive and file. And that's why I second and it and I hope my colleagues are with me on that. Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Just a couple of points. I'm not going to respond to all of them because I don't know that that would be very effective for our discussions. But the biggest difference I see in the measure that the vice mayor just referenced and this is that I'm not talking about running a campaign. I'm not talking about going out and getting people to support the competitive measure and running a campaign and having city employees volunteer their time to come and work in a campaign office. I'm not talking about getting union support to go door to door. I'm not talking about any of that. I'm talking about putting a competitive initiative on the ballot that lets the voters vote and choose simply giving them a choice of different alternatives. So there's a difference between having a campaign and really having a targeted effort to have what you want prevail. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm just talking about putting something on the ballot that gives the voters a choice. Let them read the material. Let them educate themselves. Let them vote. And that's really what I'm talking about. So that's the biggest difference. I'm not talking about running a campaign, but what I would request at this time. Actually, what I'd like to do is do a substitute substitute motion based on what I'm hearing from my colleagues, to ask the city manager or the city attorney or the designee that either of them determines to be the appropriate department to do this, to prepare a fiscal impact report, a land use report, and an enforcement analysis of the proposed initiative, as well as an overview for Council on Recreational Marijuana and its interplay with medical marijuana. And I'd like that report by July the fifth, if possible.
Speaker 1: I'm Mr. City Manager. And Mr. City Attorney. That is a week away. Two weeks away. They have. What is the likelihood of of you being able to prepare such a report and it actually being thorough and robust?
Speaker 9: Vice Mayor Councilmembers I want to point out that we have a large history of memos to the council and to the public regarding this subject. So working with that as a foundation, we certainly would give it the college to try to bring back something as comprehensive as possible. I can't promise it's going to answer everybody's questions, but we certainly, if asked by council, will.
Speaker 3: Put our.
Speaker 9: Nose to the grindstone and put as much as we can together by that time. And Vice Mayor, I'd add to that that we believe by July 5th we would be able to provide an overview of the recreational and medical. By June 30th, the state should hopefully determine if one of those measures qualifies.
Speaker 1: Okay.
Speaker 2: And would council be able to ask for follow up information if there was something that was missing in the reports that they didn't have to come back the following week.
Speaker 9: Yes.
Speaker 2: So that's my substitute substitute.
Speaker 1: Okay. And it's been seconded. Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 11: Do we think that this is? I guess I'd like to hear from my colleagues. I heard Councilmember Richardson say he'd be interested in hearing the study. It sounds like, from what I heard from the city attorney, a study would be necessary eventually anyway. So this would be putting us ahead. Did I misunderstand? Is this not a study of the impacts? Yeah, it's what would be required anyway, eventually.
Speaker 9: No, it's not required. No. When the election, assuming the signatures are verified by the city clerk under the election code, the Council will have three options, one of which would be to request a study. It's not required.
Speaker 11: Would you say that? Typically, I mean, I guess typically would be hard. I mean, if someone came with a ballot measure or it was an initiative that said remove all the trees in the city, it would be pretty simple to say we would lose all of our shade. So a study wouldn't be necessary. But I guess. I don't know what the likelihood is that most citizen initiatives get studies or not. Is there any kind of.
Speaker 9: There's no way they tend to be individually or specific. We've had in both situations where council is elected to put it directly on the ballot and other situations where they've requested the study and then placed the item on the ballot.
Speaker 11: Well, I think that deciding and getting that study is advancing the request in advance, which gives us some some better alternatives. So I'm always open to a study.
Speaker 1: Councilmember Suber now.
Speaker 6: Okay. Thank you. Things have changed a little bit here since I first clicked in, so bear with me. The I think we have a compromise position here, and that is for a study only. And I'm very late to this party. As most of you know, I wasn't elected until after the. The study group was almost done. A couple of thoughts. One is. I'm just reminded of the the airport international terminal, and I voted against that and the majority of my colleagues voted for it. And I just remember the line. What's the harm in the study? We're not voting for the international terminal. So I'm kind of would be perplexed if if my colleagues would go against a study on this. But I'd like to hear from the public. The other thing that occurs to me, and that is almost daily, I receive emails about a delivery model and I don't I don't have the exact count since our last vote, but probably 100 emails asking us to support delivery. And I think that should be a part of the study to. That's it for now. I'll wait for public comment.
Speaker 1: So that wasn't part of the Motion Councilmember Supernova. Were you asking the maker of the motion to consider that?
Speaker 6: Well, I guess what I'm saying is that we don't know what the initiatives is going to be. I can ask the city attorney if if the initiative would include that. Have we studied the initiative? Where are we with that?
Speaker 1: So we do know what the initiative language is that was submitted. So if the city attorney would like to speak to that.
Speaker 9: Councilmember Bowl is the is the question regarding the initiative that's being reviewed by the city clerk at this time. Correct. And it does allow for delivery. So we could look at that. Yes.
Speaker 6: Okay. So that was that was a critical piece that I don't think was part of our discussions in the past. So the study here would encompass that, I believe. Vice Mayor. That's that's what I'm kind of saying. So I think it falls within their guidelines.
Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you. Councilmember Richardson.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Vice Mayor. So I began my comments and they were very conciliatory and in the hopes for a compromise. And I'm very disappointed that it's sort of turned into a shouting session. Our job was to conduct good public policy. The City Council failed to do so. What did we think was going to happen when we didn't vote to adopt a balanced, reasonable measure that we had controls to protect our neighborhoods? We had a cat per district. We had a c p that regulates our operating hours and all the tools that we need as a city to regulate it. The city council did not pass that, so I don't see how we didn't expect the public to go to the ballot. That's exactly what happens when you don't. Do your job. And then the measure tonight, my hope coming in was to find some soft landing that puts us on on a path to a productive conversation . But it started in the wrong place. And then people were bullied about bullied about it. And frankly, not a single member of the council who was actually in support of responsible regulation was asked to sign on the ballot initiative tonight. So it was insincere. It appeared insincere, insincere. And tonight was a bunch of political grandstanding that I frankly don't appreciate. So the options that I see from the city attorney are to place it on the ballot, adopt it outright, or ask for a study. My question right now is, does that study create any additional option than placing on the ballot or adopting it outright?
Speaker 9: Before you. And that is not before you this evening, but when it does come to evening.
Speaker 4: I mean, our options about the ordinance on the ballot, the ballot measure.
Speaker 9: If I understand your question correctly, no, it does not provide you any more options. It provides you the information that the study would provide. But you would at the end of receiving that study, you still have to either place it on the ballot or adopt the initiative.
Speaker 4: With that study, evaluate the impact of competing ballot measures in the state in terms of recreation.
Speaker 9: Generally speaking, it would be the study would only. Study the impacts of the initiative that is going to be placed on the ballot by the council.
Speaker 4: Could that study be expanded to include that an evaluation of recreation, should that qualify for the ballot could include that.
Speaker 9: It could. Well, I guess if again, if I understand correctly, yes, it could include and provide an overview of the impacts of a state measure on a local initiative.
Speaker 5: Okay.
Speaker 4: So what I'm what I would recommend and so is to move forward with Councilman Franco's recommendation. And when the time comes to study it, ensure that we can study it and evaluate the state. Because frankly, I don't want to have this come this very uncomfortable conversation, every councilmember council meeting until that happens. So I don't I don't want to study it now and have a report next council meeting and then continue it have another report at the next council meeting. I want to receive and file this tonight support councilmember during his motion and then do the study in the appropriate time so that we can have that conversation about what is the impact. And so we can be aware and informed as a city on what the impacts are.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilmember Richardson. And I wanted to concur with Councilmember Richardson's comments. I. I appreciate you calling out boldly exactly what we witnessed tonight. And it does make me uncomfortable as well. When I referenced the mayor's effort for the bond measure. I was not referencing the campaign, but really the work that went into the effort prior to writing the ballot measure. That is where a lot of the work takes place. That is where the thoughtfulness took place, where many months. And when I say many months, it's over a year worth of study and data that went into it before writing the ballot measure. That's the difference when we consider putting ballot measures, ballot items on to an election. We don't just come to the dias and suggest that in a couple of months this could be written. And therefore we have an item. I would never compare this process to what the mayor went through. I think that would be denigrating that effort. And I want to be very clear that I was not suggesting that there was a similarity. I was actually pointing out the difference and the vast difference that exists. As I've stated before, I do support the substitute, the original substitute motion to receive and file. And I would ask my colleagues to vote no on the substitute substitute motion. If I may call for public speakers, please. Mr. City attorney or Mr. Sanchez, would the public speakers be speaking on any of the three motions or just what's at hand?
Speaker 9: They will be speaking on the motions on the table. So we have three, three.
Speaker 1: Motions on the table. Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 6: Hello. My name is Jason O'Toole. I'm a resident of the fourth District and I'm here today to speak on a few things associated with the measure. I think the interesting thing about this measure, I didn't read the current version of the PAC's initiative, but they're going to need 66% plus one to win because they have this tax change in their law, not just 50% plus one. So I think that was kind of foolish on their part to include that language in their initiative. I know this because I've drafted six myself for Matthew Poppers and we actually had to split two measures in other cities because we learned that if we put a tax regulation in our initiative, that we'd have to get 66% plus one instead of 50% plus one was just something I noticed from the discussion, but I came here to make a statement. I'm a little disappointed as a fourth District resident, I think that there should be no restrictions on the number of permits for collectives. I think it's unintelligent business policy because the voters of Palm Beach have already approved the ballot measure maybe four or five years ago. That says, hey, they want ten or 15%. I can't remember. That's for recreational or medicinal, but the voters already said they're okay with taxing it. And I think that, for example, I'll give you an example and signal, hell, we're doing a measure right now. And people have approached our PAC about bringing an edible factory to Signal Hill that could create hundreds of jobs. And I think that's really interesting because Long Beach is a far bigger city than Signal Hill, and I can only imagine the thousands of jobs this could create. But with the current proposal as it is for for delivery services unacceptable to the voters of California, they approve Prop 215, and there are no restrictions on the number of permits that can be in place. And I just think it's not very good business policy, you know, and I think that personally from my research working with marijuana campaigns, I think sorry, medical marijuana campaigns, I think opposition to these reforms and the laws are unacceptable because I think some of the original bans on marijuana are rooted in racism. And if you look at who's incarcerated for marijuana offenses and drugs, it's mostly minorities. And I just think that needs to stop or in a different time. I know Mr. Supervisors told me I've, you know, done some work for him in his campaign. He says he has different values. I'm not I'm not sure he meant by that. But my values seem to think that, you know, we should have as much medical cannabis limited as we want. The voters want it. 35,000 people signed the petition once they signed it. I think three years ago we petitioned. I did. We got 15,000 voters to sign that. I think, you know, the bottom line is with the three council members that are, you know, putting this motion up. If you look at their political districts and as a political consultant, I can tell you exactly why they're making these motions. District three is the most conservative district in the city, followed by District five. District four is kind of a wobbler. But, you know, in my opinion, I came out to say this. I think my council member. Okay, thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. I appreciate that.
Speaker 0: Diana logins. Enough's enough. And I hope you're paying attention. If you want to reduce the police work, all you have to do is close down all those bars in Belmont Shore. I don't know how you deal with it because that's where the crime comes from. I'm truly saddened by Susie and Stacey's lack of compassion and disdain for the democratic process. Their proposal did not pass before, and it should not pass. Now to the educated enlightened. It is clear that this proposal is solely meant to thwart the will and efforts of the people to engage in the democratic process. MBS Price. The monger will profess to be compassionate but claim that they have concerns about funding, etc. but the truth is they will do anything to subvert the people's initiative and this issue. Do not be fooled. This is their personal agenda. Never forget Susie's famous words regarding the continuing the ban. That is music to my ears. Make no mistake, a ban is her ultimate goal. The city of Long Beach. Voters have spoken time and again in the ballot box in support of cannabis. Medically prop to 15. Or is this too much for you, Stacey? She just left. I just want you to know fully. And speaking to the audience fully legalizing marijuana in Prop 19 and then taxing it on Measure A, you must represent the will of the people. If you have one ounce of decency and compassion, you will vote no on prices and mangos propositions and you will favor.
Speaker 1: Your mangoes.
Speaker 0: Substitute motion. And in this case, because Councilwoman Price makes her living off the illegality of the substance in question, she should recuse herself from voting. It is a blatant conflict of interest. Diane Logins Advocates for Disability Rights. Thank you very much.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Ms.. La James. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Thank you. David Zinke, seventh District resident. Good evening.
Speaker 3: Later.
Speaker 5: Thank you. I think.
Speaker 7: I think I hear water coming. This chamber is about to flood.
Speaker 5: I for one, as a citizen, I'm fed up with the waste, fraud and abuse that has gone on for 20 years around this issue issue. And I think some of you were here and I've said several times before, you have turned.
Speaker 7: Medical.
Speaker 5: Cannabis into a litmus test for corruption. And I've told you before, you're not doing well, but you're a miserable failure now. Miserable. Not one person has mentioned July 1st rescheduling.
Speaker 7: Is taking.
Speaker 5: Place. All this discussion tonight is worthless. Just worthless. It's going to schedule to. It's already been told. Triplicate. How? That'll work with what you're talking about. I have no idea. And with legalization of recreational use, I have no idea what it's going to the effect it's going to have. And I don't think one of you has ether or Mr. Parkin, but you have allowed the prohibitionist influence in this council to rule. That is why this has been so difficult all these years. I've been here for all of it. As late as the last task force meeting, Deputy Chief Hendricks said, quote, It's all criminal. And that is the attitude that has been pervasive. And as I told my councilman when he said that this council runs the police department, that's not true. The police department runs this council. It's really unfortunate. But the crime, corruption and violence that we really all want to see reduced. It's just exacerbated by this corruption. You might as well have rolled out the red carpet for the cartels and gangsters. That's what you've done, in my opinion. Thank you. Good.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Hello. I'm John Donoghue and I'm an expert in this subject. Let me tell you how that happened.
Speaker 5: I came back from World War Two. I read a wonderful book called Really.
Speaker 8: The Blues by a musician called RMS Mesmer. And soon as I read that, I said, gee, I got to get some of this. So I tried it. And guess what I discovered it's not a crime. Possession of cannabis and get away from the expression marijuana. Whether that expected to come from Pancho Villa and his revolutionaries used to sing a song called La Cucaracha, Cucaracha, Marijuana, Port Humor. So that's where that expression came from. We should be calling it cannabis. It's been used for thousands of years as a medication. And so this is what we need to know also. I'm also an expert in that. I was I've been I was arrested and did time. I did three years in the federal penitentiary for a half a dozen joints, banks and a crazy federal judge that told me I was worse than a murderer because I had several. Is this is what you get with this kind of misdirection information? Yeah. And also, I understand what Diane was saying about the Miss Prize. She's a prosecutor and a legislator and executive. So we have three forms of government. I don't think we're allowed to people to be on two of them. So I think she should recuse herself from this entirely. Also, I'd like to suggest that the certain certain times the the the you folks should have a limit on your we only get 3 minutes, but you get to talk forever and ever.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Mr. Donahue. Next speaker, please. Thank you.
Speaker 6: They're still members of Long Beach City Council. My name is Stefan Dawson, so I'm a policy advisor for the California Growers Association and an independent lobbyist for the medical marijuana community. While I normally celebrate any attempts by municipalities to provide regulated access to medical cannabis, I'm disappointed to see the resurrection of Council Member Price's poorly conceived and slightly designed proposal being discussed again here tonight. As I first said in February before this Council unanimously, unanimously rejected the price measure, maintaining the ban on a combined comprehensive commercial cannabis activity enabled by a delivery only approach is an inept public policy born of irrational taboos and political carelessness.
Speaker 5: This proposed system does.
Speaker 6: Not adequately address demand. It creates far more public safety problems than its proponents claim, and it guarantees the future license holders will be functionally unable to compete against the illicit marketplace. Ironically, this proposal would actually make me a weed lobbyist incredibly wealthy. I represent some of the biggest delivery services in Los Angeles who, after being shut down by that city's Proposition D, are pretty much looking for a patient base of 60,000 people to be able to supply. That said, I would never advise them to apply for a license under this proposal as it is designed to fail. In effect, this proposal is a poison pill, a political device designed by legislators to provide the facade of public compromise while remaining fully conscious that the substance of the law virtually guarantees the program's inevitable failure. Councilmember Price has both a direct financial incentive towards maintaining the status quo of prohibition and a record of callously lying about the issue. As such, she does not deserve the public's trust when she cynically claims to be representing the patients. If Councilmember Price actually came.
Speaker 5: To this issue from a place of compassion.
Speaker 6: Instead of trying to sneak in this proposal when the mayor is out of town and when every other public policy expert on this particular issue is at a conference in Oakland at the time, she would understand the actual role that delivery services play in this marketplace.
Speaker 5: Delivery provides access to two groups, the seriously ill.
Speaker 6: In it for seriously ill and homebound patients without a primary caregiver under law and frankly experienced by busy consumers like myself who already have and who are already aware of the potentially intense side effects of this drug.
Speaker 5: As the fastest growing patient.
Speaker 6: Base of cannabis are older individuals who have either never used or at least recently tried the drug. Best practices require that they receive in-person, capable education from staff members at a physical dispensary.
Speaker 5: The price proposal.
Speaker 6: Does not reflect the principles of sound public policy or a sincere desire to promote more conservative concepts of public safety. Rather, the plethora of laws and embarrassing flaws and embarrassing oversights in this bill merely demonstrate the deep seated hatred that Councilmember Price has for the culture she associates with cannabis use. This is, after all, the person who published a newspaper article hilariously warning of the imminent danger that stoners like myself pose to the ice cream parlor as a bell. Not sure. Please ignore your colleagues desperate attempt to drag all into a war that she lost a long time ago. Being identified with her with racially biased lost causes is a bad look for public officials seeking reelection or higher office. Her prudence is really prohibition. Thank you for your time.
Speaker 5: Mr. Garrett, could you clear? Cause the address. I'll be brief. My views on the subject of ice falling somewhere between that of Bobby Knight and Woody Hayes. Take whatever necessary steps you need to take to make sure that we never have legal marijuana in this city delivered to the city at all. Period. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. I'd like to thank the public for their comments. Is there anyone else that's coming forward? Are you coming forward? Okay. We're going to wrap public comment up. So if you'd like to speak, please come forward now.
Speaker 5: Hi, my name is Bobby Waltman. I'm a resident of the second district in Orange County, public defender in Orange County. And I just wanted to add that for myself and other cannabis patients, those of us who are learning about how to use this medicine, which I really do think it is a medicine you need to learn about the medicine because there's not just one weed to smoke. There's not just one edible of one dosage to take. There are many products out there. And as this becomes more and more popular among the public, which it is, we need to educate the public. We need to educate the patients. And people need to know how to use it or else they're going to use it incorrectly. And that's when it can be dangerous. And so I do believe having actual dispensaries with bud tenders who are knowledgeable to educate the patients as to what they need for their particular illness or ailment would help these people use this medicine in the correct way. So I believe that a delivery does not provide the opportunity for those patients to obtain the information they need to make the right decisions as to how to consume this product in the way they want to consume it, to provide them with the pain relief or stress relief or whatever it is that's causing them to use this. I do believe that as dispensary provides them with more information and knowledge, and I think it's just a better way to allow these patients to get the medicine they need. Thank you to. Hello, everybody. My name is Michael Mooney. I'm also a public defender in Orange County. I'm a resident of the second District. And I just wanted to point out some some quotes that I that I overheard, which was, let's give the voters choices. It was pointed out by Councilwoman Mongeau and councilwoman, the price and delivery only is does not give the voters choices. What it does is people who are going to consume medical marijuana, they will be given the choice of, hey, I've got a delivery guy coming to my house. I mean, they're going to do this transaction in my front yard, hand-to-hand through a window, or I'm going to get in a delivery person's car. I'm going to invite this delivery person into my home. What that reminds me of is something I deal with almost daily in my job, which is illegal drug sale transactions. That's the choice that you're giving people by delivery only. You either conduct this business in the same way that illegal drug transactions are conducted or you don't get to safe access. We need dispensaries, dispensaries, storefronts, provide security, regulation and safe access to something that the voters want. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Okay. I think that is the last speaker. And I wanted to actually just address the last two speakers, not because we generally do this. I have to imagine that it took a tremendous amount of courage to come forward and identify yourselves as the profession that you did not because medical marijuana is illegal, but because the conversation here has become it's certainly in our council for many years. Suggestive that it might be or should be or it should be banned. And so I want to thank you for coming forward and and saying what you did, not because of the opinion you shared. But really, I think what I'm really trying to say is it makes me very sad that we have compelled people to come forward and identify themselves and perhaps risk reprisal at their workplace by doing so, because they feel so strongly about the failure of our policy dialog. And and I want to apologize for that. I am very sad and very sorry that it has come to that. I know people come to us personally and reveal themselves and identify themselves, but to have had to see that at at the diocese, I, I want to apologize to you, but I do want to thank you for that. Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 2: Q And I am familiar, at least with one of the last two speakers. And I just want to clarify, because I think there's some confusion. The measure that was on was not a delivery only it was a delivery phase and a brick and mortar. So I just want to clarify with a maximum of seven. So that just that I think that's an important distinction, especially I think as lawyers should appreciate that it's six months and then it phases into a brick and mortar after taxes are paid and all of that. So thanks.
Speaker 1: Thank you. And I know that there's an interest in hearing what the substitute substitute motion is so everyone can be clear. Mr. City Attorney.
Speaker 9: Vice Mayor, members of the council, we have three motions. The first the substitute substitute motion by CD3 and a second by CD five is to request a report back by July 5th of the fiscal impact, the land use enforcement and Taxes of the Citizens Initiative. And the second part would be to provide an overview of the recreation and medical marijuana. If recreation passes or if both passed, how do they relate with each other?
Speaker 1: And I was a substitute.
Speaker 9: Substitute that was a substitute substitute. The substitute motion by council member Urunga and second by the vice mayor is to receive and file the item, and then we have the original motion.
Speaker 1: So council members were voting on the substitute substitute motion. And again, I will reiterate that we have time to call for an analysis at the time that the voter initiative is certified, as well as call for an analysis of recreational marijuana when the state's measure qualifies. So for today, I ask my colleagues to vote no on the substitute substitute. And Councilwoman Pryce regarding timing.
Speaker 2: If we did put a competitive measure on, when would we need to vote on that?
Speaker 1: August 2nd.
Speaker 9: The August 2nd would be the very last day we would need. The city attorney's office would need to know before that time so that we could prepare something to bring it back for August 2nd. So realistically, we would need some direction sometime in July to bring something back for to adopt the resolution placing something on the ballot
Speaker 2: . And it's my understanding that August 2nd is national night out. So we have an either no meeting or a limited meeting that night. Right.
Speaker 3: No.
Speaker 12: Council Member Price Yes, that is correct. We will have a limited meeting on that day.
Speaker 2: So July 19th would really be the last time that we'd have the opportunity to discuss and vote on an item.
Speaker 9: Unless the council decided to call for a special meeting. Yes.
Speaker 2: So if we were to wait to order a report, that would just delay the amount of time the city staff has to get working on the report.
Speaker 9: That's correct. The the other issue that I'm hesitant to bring up, but the 30 days would be we need to have that report back in time for council to be able to take an action so that it could be still meet the deadlines to consolidate and place it on the election. If that was their choice.
Speaker 2: Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Members, please cast your vote on the substitute substitute motion.
Speaker 0: Motion fails.
Speaker 1: Okay. Members. We are back to our substitute motion, which is to receive and file this item. And again, I urge you to vote yes.
Speaker 0: Council member, Cipriano. Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Your Honor, for staying as long as you did. Happy anniversary.
Speaker 0: Item five.
Speaker 1: Madam Clerk, were we time certain? Four, seven? But were we also waiting for Council Member Austin.
Speaker 0: That's correct.
Speaker 1: For all three of those items. Yes. Yes. Okay. We can wait 10 minutes for that. What do we have? If you can put me back on track. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Attorney to prepare and return to the City Council for its consideration, a sensible, financially sustainable, fiscally prudent, Medical Marijuana regulatory ordinance for possible placement on the November 8, 2016 General Election ballot. Such Council initiated ordinance would be placed on the ballot only in the event a proposed Initiative Petition regarding the same subject matter qualifies for placement on the November 2016 ballot. The ordinance prepared by the City Attorney for Council consideration and placement shall be modeled upon an ordinance considered by the City Council on February 2, 2016, which contained a phased in regulatory approach to Medical Marijuana in Long Beach. | LongBeachCC |