meeting_id
stringlengths 27
37
| source
stringlengths 596
386k
| type
stringlengths 4
42
| reference
stringlengths 75
1.1k
| city
stringclasses 6
values |
|---|---|---|---|---|
LongBeachCC_02162016_16-0150 | Speaker 0: Well, Mr. Good, he wants to Skype into the meetings is what he's working to. We're now moving on to the next item.
Speaker 1: Please report from Financial Management Recommendation to receive and file the fiscal year 2015 year end budget performance report and increase appropriations in several funds across several departments for various purposes to reflect financial expenditures and carryover cleanups citywide.
Speaker 9: Is there somebody born in this place?
Speaker 4: Yes, there is. Leah Erickson, our deputy finance director.
Speaker 1: Good evening. Good evening, Mayor and city council. This is the urine performance report prep by 15 for the period ending September 30th, 2015. It reports that our performance for the fiscal year 15 and also includes a few technical adjustments for the year. Generally, the report is good news. Citywide urine spending came in under budgeted appropriation for the general fund and for all other funds. After factoring in into technical adjustments in the general fund, department spending was under budget due to some 14 and 15 fiscal year budgeted one times that could not be spent by year end due to the timing of projects being extended and savings for most departments, including the police departments, plan savings that has already been included in the budget to cover a portion of the Academy class scheduled to begin in April of 16. On the revenue side of the general fund, revenues did exceed estimates primarily due to some one time revenues, including revenue from the realignment of funds from a ground lease at the park. State reimbursements for mandate related costs incurred prior to 2014 or 2004, and reimbursements for wildland fire deployments. In addition, there were structural revenue growth in areas such as property tax, transit occupancy, tax, electricity related revenues and business license tax, among others, which has been factored in the projection shown in November or ever. Overall, the general fund had a 4.2 million surplus and there was also a surplus of approximately 900,000 in the Uplands Oil Fund in accordance with City Council policy. The city manager is proposing that 5% of those surpluses in both the general fund and uplands be set aside for unfunded liabilities. The city manager has also proposed setting aside funds for conducting two police academies in 16 and funding for a police department police department pilot program for additional helicopter flight hours, and also setting aside the savings from the legislative and city auditor's departments. After the recommended use of funds available, the remaining ending funds available for the general fund is approximately $1 million. This provides the ability to cover the election cost of any potential city wide revenue measure that may be put on the ballot for June. Lastly, there are some technical adjustments for appropriation increases offset by revenue and budget reallocations in Parking and Business Area Improvement Fund and the Community Development Grants Fund. This concludes the staff report and I'm available for any questions you may have.
Speaker 9: Thank you, Councilman Rich.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Leah. Mr. West, thank you so much for for presenting this. Let me just take a look at this again. So I think it's fantastic that we're making these investments because we have saved this money and congratulations and great work on saving this money in the last fiscal year. I think it's important to note, and I think this is a is prudent that we're maintaining this 5% policy on unfunded liabilities. In terms of the I see we have extra hours on our police helicopter into academies. I think that's certainly in line with the theme that we've had tonight. I think setting aside funding for these other purposes and and in terms of the election is good. So I guess my question would be, after those are set aside, we make those allocations. Are there was there anything left over that the city council can allocate, let's say, on a divided by nine basis to make.
Speaker 1: Councilmember Richardson there is at ending funds available projected of about $500,000 in the general fund, which we do recommend as a minimum funds available, especially since oil prices are or were closely monitoring oil prices this year. So at this point, we are not recommending allocating any of that those funds available.
Speaker 3: Help me understand that. So there's $500,000 left over and you're saying we're going to put it in a reserve or what are you saying we do with that?
Speaker 1: Council member we're using we're just keeping that unspent in case there are problems with oil revenues that happened later. Oh, okay.
Speaker 3: I get it. I'm good with that. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 1: Thank you, John and Leah. Excellent presentation and well-written document. I think that maintaining our prudent fiscal practices is warranted, and I hope the Council will be supportive of maintaining that. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Any public comment on this item? St Andrews cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Councilman Andrews motion carries. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to receive and file the Fiscal Year 2015 Year-End Budget Performance Report, and increase appropriations in several funds across several departments for various purposes to reflect final expenditures and carryover clean-up. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02162016_16-0139 | Speaker 1: Motion carries. Item 15 Report from Long Beach Airport Recommendation to execute a contract with ABM Parking Services for airport parking operations and management at the Long Beach Airport in an annual amount not to exceed $1 million. City District five Councilman Mongo. So I'm hoping that the staff report includes the $40,000 a month we'll be saving.
Speaker 4: Brian Francis will give that staff report.
Speaker 9: Awesome.
Speaker 3: Good evening there, Garcia. Members of council this evening were requesting city council approval to enter into contract negotiations with ABM Parking Services to provide airport parking operations and management of the airport's public parking facilities. These operations comprise lot A, Lot B and the employee parking lots. The airport worked with the purchasing department and advertised a request for proposals on August 27th, 2015 of nearly 4000 potential proposals. 37 download of the RFP for the local outreach was executed via the purchasing department as well. Eight proposals were received on October 15th, 2015. Each complete proposal was evaluated by a selection committee based on demonstrated competence, experience and performance of comparable engagements. Reasonableness of cost expertize and availability of key personnel, financial stability and conformance with the RFP terms. The committee determined that ABM Parking Services of Los Angeles, California offered the best proposal to provide the service at Long Beach Airport. ABM operates at airports nationwide, across the spectrum in terms of size. It is provided parking management services at an airport for the past decade and has maintained a good level of customer service throughout. The intent to award was posted by the Purchasing Department on January 12th, 2016 and no protests were received by the January 17th deadline. The contract is for a period of three years and an amount not to exceed $1,054,122, with a 25% contingency in the amount of $263,531. Requesting authorization of a 25% contingency as we feel it is the appropriate and necessary amount to accommodate additional services requested of ABM during the life of this agreement, which may include software upgrades, replacement of equipment, staffing, augmentation and unforeseen maintenance and repairs, among other things. And it's Councilwoman Mongo. I mentioned at the beginning of this item, the current contract amount or the current amount that we're paying on an annual basis is roughly $1.5 million. And again, as presented to you this evening, this contract is for a three year period of three years and an amount not to exceed $1,054,122 per year. So that would be a savings over the current arrangement. And that concludes my staff report.
Speaker 1: So I want to thank you for your work on this. I know that this hadn't been scheduled and or executed in quite a long time. I feel that in the amount of time we've been working together, we've been reconciling many issues that hadn't been touched in quite a long time, and I hope to wrap many of those up shortly. I know that there were questions related to the proposal and the lack of innovation and or technology in it. But I will say that while I wish there was more technology, I think that while the airport is running in the lean as it can possibly be, I think that the movement towards a reduction in cost is really a good step in the right direction. I think that's the way that the bid should be cherished and that since it is only a three year, that the airport will look very different in three years, hopefully in terms of the economy and hopefully oil prices and we'll see what that looks like. And then perhaps people will be driving their cars and parking them at the airport again, which will then increase our revenue in parking, which is currently down. So while I was in many discussions today with airport stakeholders and residents who live near the airport specifically asking about those technologies, I think at this time this is the prudent way to go. And I will be asking my colleagues to support this item.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Councilwoman Mongo. Councilman Austin.
Speaker 4: Yes. Thank you very much. I am to pleased to see that this will this contract will actually save us as a city. But I think it saves us as an airport because as I understand it, the revenues for this, for the airport parking stays within the airport fund, is that correct? Yes, sir, that's correct. All right. So there is no tangible benefit to the general fund for this contract, right?
Speaker 3: That is correct. The all the revenues generated from parking services, as well as other revenue generation on airport remain at airport. Aside from the various arrangements we have with other city departments for for services rendered.
Speaker 4: Okay. Thank you. I'll be supportive of this because I think it's a prudent move for the airport, but I just wanted to make that distinguishable difference. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Is there any public comment on item 50? CNN members cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Basically alone, though.
Speaker 7: I mean. Yes.
Speaker 1: Motion carries. Item 16 report from police recommendation to receive and file the application of the breakfast bar for a premise. The premise and person to person transfer of an ABC license at 78 Atlantic Avenue District two. | Contract | Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFP AP15-153 and authorize City Manager to execute a contract, and any amendments thereto not exceeding the authorized amount, with ABM Parking Services, of Los Angeles, CA, for airport parking operations and management at the Long Beach Airport, in an annual amount not to exceed $1,054,122, with an annual increase no greater than the Consumer Price Index adjustment, authorize a 25 percent contingency in the amount of $263,531, for a period of three years, with the option to renew for two additional one-year periods, at the discretion of the City Manager. (District 5) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02162016_16-0141 | Speaker 7: Thank you. Item 17.
Speaker 1: Report from police recommendation to receive and file the application of beer belly for an Inter-County premise to premise and person to person transfer of an ABC license at 255 Long Beach Boulevard, District two.
Speaker 7: Thank you, sir. Staff Report.
Speaker 4: Commander Konate. Honorable Vice Mayor City Council Item 17 is an application for a Type 47. Person or person premised the premise on sole ABC license for a restaurant. The police department has conducted our investigation and do not anticipate any adverse impact to the for the issuance of this license. That concludes my staff report and I'm available for questions.
Speaker 7: Thank you. And I just wanted to make some comments. I'd like to welcome the owner and Jimmy Horn, who's in the audience today and to I'd like to welcome to the neighborhood and thank you and your wife for investing in Long Beach for their second restaurant. The first one is in Koreatown. And thank you also for taking the time to meet with my staff about verbally and sharing a little bit about your vision. I think you when you look around, you'll see how very fitting it is. And so we appreciate your focus on food and craft beverages. Aside from fitting in really beautifully with our craft beer and foodie culture, I do look forward to having our folks come join you at some time. More and more, our downtown is expanding. I think it's really become a very welcoming place. And you probably saw the L.A. Times article a couple of weeks ago about the craft brew culture shaping up in our town. So thank you. I'd like to thank you for really your confidence in our city and with this council and and prior members have done to make this a very welcoming place for business as well as for entertainment and residents. And so it's that full 24 three shift culture, not quite 24 hours, but close enough that I think will make our downtown very exciting. So with that, there's been a motion and a second. And I also want to encourage you to stay in touch with our office. I think it's a great start. And as you continue to expand in your patronage there, it'd be nice to have that contact. Members, cast your vote. I'm sorry I didn't call for public comment. Is there any member of the public who has to address this council on this item? Seeing none. Members, cast your vote.
Speaker 2: Councilman Andrews.
Speaker 1: Motion carries. | ABC License | Recommendation to receive and file the application of Beer Belly, Incorporated, dba Beer Belly, for an inter-county premise-to-premise and person-to-person transfer of an Alcoholic Beverage Control License, at 255 Long Beach Boulevard.
(District 2) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02162016_16-0143 | Speaker 1: Motion carries. Item 19 Report from Police Recommendation to receive the application of Aldi for an original application of an ABC license at 4580 Atlantic Avenue. Determined that the application serves the public convenience and necessity. Submit a public notice of protest to ABC and direct City Manager to withdraw the protest if a conditional use permit is granted. District eight.
Speaker 4: Councilman Austin Yes, I am very excited about this new development. I'd like to welcome the very first Aldi to Long Beach. It'll be located in the big Knowles or just next door to the biggest we no shopping center. This is actually one of three new grocery stores coming to the eighth District this year. This conditional conditional use permit for this Aldi is scheduled to be heard before our planning commission this Thursday. So while the City Council must vote to protest the ABC license this evening due to a lack of a copy, the protest may be withdrawn very shortly if the CP is granted it. And so therefore I would ask for your approval of the staff recommendation.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Councilmember Mongo.
Speaker 1: I support the new development.
Speaker 7: Thank you. So any member of the public that wishes to address Council on item 19. Seeing None members cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Motion carries. | ABC License | Recommendation to receive the application of AI California, LLC, dba Aldi, for an original application of an Alcoholic Beverage Control License, at 4580 Atlantic Avenue, determine that the application serves the public convenience and necessity, submit a Public Notice of Protest to ABC, and direct City Manager to withdraw the protest if a Conditional Use Permit is granted.
(District 8) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02162016_16-0144 | Speaker 1: Councilman Mongo. Motion carries. Item 21 Report from Technology and Innovation Recommendation to Execute an amendment to Amend Amendment to agreement with Tiburon to provide software support services for computer aided dispatch and records management systems in an amount not to exceed $402,000 citywide.
Speaker 7: Is there a staff report?
Speaker 4: Our Technology Innovation Director, Brian Stokes. Vice Mayor, member City Council before you is a recommendation to authorize the City Manager to execute an amendment to the agreement of 2321 four with Tiburon to provide software services for our CAD system, our records management system in an amount not to exceed $402,327. It's for a 12 month term, and I'm available for any questions after that.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Councilman. Councilmember, Your Honor.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Mayor. This is an important tool that our police department uses. And in tracking the vehicles and other. In other issues that the cap comes out to. I strongly support them. Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
Speaker 7: Councilman Andrews. You too. Thank you. Is there any member of the public that wish to address Council on item 21? CNN members cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 7: Item 22. Yes. No. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager to execute an amendment to Agreement No. 23214 with Tiburon, Inc., to provide software support services for Computer-Aided Dispatch and Records Management Systems, in an amount not to exceed $402,327 for an additional 12-month term through February 2017. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02162016_16-0147 | Speaker 7: Item 22. Yes. No.
Speaker 1: Yes. Yes. Report from Water Recommendation to Adopt Resolution Increasing Appropriations in Fiscal Year 2014 2015 in the water fund. In the water department by $6.5 million citywide.
Speaker 7: Is there a staff report? I don't see the water department here.
Speaker 4: We can have one. The water? What's your.
Speaker 1: Name?
Speaker 7: I'm sorry. I see you.
Speaker 4: Are our new water director. Fresh. Brand new. Chris Garner.
Speaker 2: Still the wet.
Speaker 10: Still wet behind the ears. But I'm.
Speaker 4: Here. Good evening.
Speaker 10: All this is is a we're asking for an appropriation increase for six and a half million dollars.
Speaker 4: The good news is this was fully reimbursable by the Y replenishment district.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Councilman Andrews. Okay. Councilmember Richardson. Fabulous. Is there any member of the public that wish to address Council on item 22? Seeing None. Members Cast your vote. Motion carries. | Resolution | Recommendation to adopt resolution increasing appropriations in Fiscal Year 2014-2015 in the Water Fund (EF 310) in the Water Department (WA) by $6,500,000. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02162016_16-0160 | Speaker 1: Item 23 Communication from Councilwoman Gonzalez recommendation to request that District Ones carryover funds from the 2014 2015 fiscal year in the amount of $29,102 be directed to the District Office budget.
Speaker 7: So staff report.
Speaker 4: This is a request from District one to carryover funds that aren't going to be utilized for infrastructure for other purposes.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzales.
Speaker 5: Yes. And I think this was just in response to a changed policy that we had from the city manager's office. So that's what we'll be doing. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Councilmember Richardson.
Speaker 3: I support it and I anticipate a bunch of these coming forth with this new change in policy. But I'm glad to see it being worked through.
Speaker 7: Thank you. I appreciate that as well. Is there any member of the public that wish to address Council on hearing item number 23? Seeing None members cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Motion carries. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request that District One's carry-over funds from 2014-2015 in the amount of $29,102 be directed to the district office budget. These funds will be used for District One community and neighborhood events and meetings. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02162016_16-0161 | Speaker 7: Item 24 has been withdrawn and we've taken up item 25. Item 26.
Speaker 1: Communication from City Attorney Recommendation to Adopt Resolution in support of National Teen Dating Violence Awareness and Prevention Month in February Citywide.
Speaker 7: Thank you. It's an emotion and a second. Councilmember Richardson.
Speaker 3: Moved to support.
Speaker 7: Councilman Andrews. All right. So any member of the public that wished to address council on item 26. Seeing None members cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Councilwoman. One motion carries.
Speaker 7: I believe that is it for a formal agenda?
Speaker 4: Yes.
Speaker 7: New business. First for public comment.
Speaker 1: First public comment.
Speaker 7: If there's any member of the public that wish to address council during this time. General public comment please come forward and do so. Did you have comments? You did.
Speaker 2: The man was in the long range. I just want to say hi to Stacey and home over there. Tell me. Tell you how. Because Deandra in the city council support. No. Yeah. A lot of support from the party. | Resolution | Recommendation to adopt resolution in support of National Teen Dating Violence Awareness and Prevention Month in February. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02092016_15-1340 | Speaker 1: Thank you. Next item, please.
Speaker 0: Communication from Councilman Andrew's chair. Housing a neighborhood committee recommendation to approve naming the North Branch Library, the Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library.
Speaker 1: Okay, there's a motion and a second. Hold on one.
Speaker 10: We thought we worked it out.
Speaker 1: Okay. So, Councilman Richardson. Sure.
Speaker 10: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And thank you, Councilman Austin, Councilman Andrews, for a. Talking with us about this this. For bringing this recommendation forward, I want to start off just with a brief staff report. Do we have a report on the process that we asked for in terms of public outreach?
Speaker 7: Yes. Mayor Garcia and members of the City Council providing the report today will be director of the Library Services, Glenda McWilliams.
Speaker 4: Good evening, Mayor Garcia and three members of City Council. During the January 19th meeting, City Council referred a proposal to the Housing and Neighborhood Committee to consider renaming the new North Library the Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library. Library Services and Parks Rec. Maureen were also directed to conduct additional outreach to engage youth and library patrons. Since that time, four community meetings were held to obtain community input. The ninth District community meeting was held on Thursday, January 21, with 150 participants, and they were asked that the name of the new North Library should inspire youth and if Mrs. Obama's initiatives aligned with the interests of the Ninth District. And during the discussion, 72% supported renaming the library the Michelle Obama Obama Neighborhood Library. Library Services held a focus group meeting on Saturday, January 23, with 11 library patrons at the current North Branch Library. The same questions were asked of the participants. Six of them voted to keep the name the North Branch Library. Other names provided for consideration were Indira Hale, Tucker Branch Library, Martin Luther King Jr Branch Library and the Coretta Scott King Branch Library. City Council's Housing and Neighborhood Committee met on Tuesday, January 26 to discuss the referral. There were seven members of the audience who spoke during public comment. Six people voiced their support to rename the new library in honor of Mrs. Obama. The Housing and Neighborhoods Committee voted unanimously in favor as well. 20 youth attended a meeting held by Parks Rec and Marine on Wednesday, January 27, at Houghton Park. The same questions were asked. 15 of the 20 youth voted for the Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library. Other names put forward included doorstops, the L Word Branch Library and Brighter Futures. This concludes my report, and I'm available to answer any questions you may have. Thank you.
Speaker 10: Thank you. So I want to I want to thank Chair Andrews and the rest of the Housing and Neighborhoods Committee for bringing back this recommendation of approval for the Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library. This has been a very open, inclusive process. We've conducted more outreach around this proposal than any naming process that we've heard of in recent city history. Through these past two months, we've held forums, focus groups. We've engaged in online discussions around the topic. And at this moment, I'm most proud of the opportunity to witness our community of different ages and backgrounds coming together to build consensus around the idea and to inspire and engage the next generation. There are many individuals and groups that I want to thank tonight for actively participating and being supportive of this process. So first, I want to extend a huge thank you to the students of the rap program at Jordan High School. They'll make are brothers in the ZAE Sisters for the original idea of the Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library and for their strong participation and advocacy over the last couple of months. This has been an exercise in democracy and the civic process that won't be soon forgotten. So thank you to to the rap students and their program coordinator coordinator, Candace Meehan. So next, I want to thank the students from Hamilton Middle School and the Andy Street Community Association for the the over 80 letters that I've received in support for this library, naming and coming the council and participate in the community meetings. You're all an inspiration to other youth around the around our city. I want to thank the North Long Beach community leaders like former ninth District Council member Steve Neal, school board member Megan Kerr for lending your voice and standing who supported this proposal from the beginning. Thank you to the neighborhood association presidents for committing their support and being engaged through this process from the very beginning. That includes Laverne Duncan, Deborah Shelton, Dan Press, Berg, Eileen OII and Jeff Roe, Hilda Gaytan, Otis Hogan, Julia Brown, James McWhorter and Jimmy Murray making up ten neighborhood association presidents representing ten different neighborhoods in North Long Beach . Thank you also to the elected officials who expressed support, including the letter we just received from Congresswoman Janice Hahn today. Congressmember Alan Lowenthal State Senator Ricardo Lara. State Senator Isidore Hull Speaker elect Anthony Rendon. Anthony Assembly Assembly Member Mike Gibson Assembly Member Patrick O'Donnell. I want to thank staff, particularly departments of Parks and Recreation, Marine and the Library Services Department and their staff, for helping to helping with the outreach efforts and working with our staff throughout the process. I want to thank the Long Beach Library Foundation for engaging and supporting in this process for the and for their commitment to our North Library campaign. I want to thank Delta Sigma Theta and Zeta Phi Beta for their sororities for engaging in this historic process. And finally, a big thank you to the over two. Community members who participated in the library, community discussions, focus groups and the housing neighborhoods, community meeting. So there's been a tremendous level of outreach and in for the first time we can make history by naming a library after a person of color and in the same gesture demonstrate that we're forward thinking city, which values the opinions of its youth. Quickly, I have I have a question for our director of Library Services. Thus, the Council has invested funds for an opening day selection for our new library. Can you tell us about that investment and what that brings starting the library?
Speaker 4: Yes. Councilmember Richardson, the $400,000 excuse me, approved by city council will purchase about 17,500 volumes for the new North Library. They're going to be books for reading pleasure, as well as information and instruction and all subject areas. And that would be for little ones. Our school age children are teens, are adults and are seniors.
Speaker 10: Thank you. So I'm personally excited at the opportunity to engage with these 17,000 new volumes of books in this new library. I'm excited to take my daughter there and and to introduce her to the new stories and open up her imagination. Personally, living in a forward thinking city that acknowledges contemporary heroes like First Lady Michelle Obama and values diversity and literacy is an added bonus to raising my family in this great city. But I've said this from beginning. I'll say it again now. We fall short if we don't utilize this library to inspire a new generation of library patrons and readers. So that said, on March 2nd, read Across America Day. We're going to launch our read with RECs challenge. So we're going to be challenging our community to get library cards and to check out and read 25,000 books within the first 100 days of the library opening. I'm excited to launch this challenge. I can't wait to share more with you on how you can get involved. On March 2nd. In addition, we're going to be turning our attention to the Library Foundation's public fundraising efforts to support them to make sure we have the technology and capital resources necessary to meet the needs of our community. Next, during the OUT during our outreach over the past few weeks, we asked the community their input on the process in general. While this process was consistent with other processes in city history, we have the responsibility to figure out how we can continue to improve on this process. So as a part of my motion tonight, I'm going to ask staff to take the event, evaluate the feedback received through this process, and make recommendations to our Council on ways we can use technology and other means of engagement to improve naming processes in the future. So that said, I'm proud tonight to make the motion to approve the recommendation of the Housing Neighborhoods Committee and naming the North Neighborhood Branch, the North New North Branch Library, the Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library, in honor of her contributions to youth education literacy in the United States and to further explore opportunities to improve our city's naming process . Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Councilman Andrews.
Speaker 9: Yes. Yes. Mayor, real quickly, I want to thank our Councilman Richardson for bringing this forward. And I need not to say much more about it, because I think he went through everything very eloquently and let everyone know that the community voted unanimously to favor, you know, renaming the new library for Michelle Obama. And I think it's a wonderful idea. And I want to congratulate you again, Councilman Richardson, for bringing this forward. Thank you very much.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Let me open it up now for public comment. There's public comment on the item. Please come forward. And just make sure you say your name for the record, please.
Speaker 9: My name is Benjamin Miranda. Good evening, Mayor Garcia and council members. My name is Benjamin Miranda, representing the program at David Star Jordan High School. I'm current president of the Omega Brothers. I'm here to present to you why we would like to name the library being built in the north Long Beach in north Long Beach after Michelle Obama as an individual, why do an individual why do I choose the name? Why do I choose to name this library, the specific name of the First Lady? She's done a lot from promoting healthy eating to creating community projects. She's a she's accomplished many goals from advocating poverty, higher education and healthy living. Michelle Obama decided to use her position by making the Let's Move program, which has the potential to lead the childhood obesity epidemic in the right path. As the program was running. She's made a lot of progress by trying to keep the youth of America eating healthier and getting active, to show her gratitude and our appreciation for her efforts. We decided to pitch her name for the library. She's been successful in all her programs. She's also a role model to the citizens across the nation due to her successful program and her success as a first lady. Also, we have to pay attention to our youth. Our youth reflect Michelle Obama as a person. She's paid close attention to our educational system because she wants all of us to have a bright future. They see a local library with one of their role models name on it. They're about to go and check it out. I, for one, would go off then so I can check out their books. As a program, we agree that she deserves the naming of the library. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Good evening. My name is Margaret Turley and I'm a resident of the ninth District and I would like to thank the council and I'd like to thank my city councilman for bringing this issue up to name the library after Michelle Obama. But I believe the library is one that we truly need in our district, and I believe that it will help educate and serve our community. And I believe that Michelle Obama would appreciate the fact that the library was considered by the youth to be named after her. And so I think I'm in very much support of this library. And I'd just like to say thank you to the community for coming out, too, because I believe it was a diverse and also transparent meeting. So I'm also in support of the library and of naming it Michelle Obama. So thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Good evening. My name is Kate Azhar. I'm the interim executive director of the Long Beach Public Library Foundation. As most of you know, the Library Foundation has been very supportive of all library issues in Long Beach, and in particular because this has been such an exciting issue that the community has been really involved in. We have really urged that this process engage the community and every step of the way to decide a new name for the North Library. And we've been very proud of those who've arrived this evening at the other community meetings and their involvement. We thank Councilman Richardson for his partnership in engaging the community both on this issue and others. We've been working with them, as you said, on our campaign to raise the much needed funds for the new North Library. We fully support his recommendation that we look at the process for the future of naming buildings in Long Beach and ensure that the community has a say because it's clear that the community wants to participate in this process. I've said it before that that our foundation will continue to support the North Library and all our libraries, regardless of their names. So I really hope that the rest of the council and the community will show equal engagement and support for our campaign to raise the much needed funds that will provide resources that are needed to make this library truly great. Things like the Family Learning Center, the digital studio. This is work we've been doing for 20 years as of this year, and we can't do it alone. So I ask that you, the Council and the community get involved in our campaign to continue to make this library great, that whoever's name should appear on the front. They can be truly proud and the community can be proud of what's inside the library as well. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Other speakers, please.
Speaker 6: Good evening. My name is Ben Rockwell. Reside at Fifth and Magnolia. I'm surprised that Maya Angelou's name was not brought up as a possible suggestion, since she is one of the wonderful prominent. Persons of color who is now deceased. And I think it would have been a great honor to have the name named the Maya Angelou Public Library. However, I have no objections to using Michelle Obama. I just thought that that would have been an excellent name to give honor to Maya Angelou, who was at one time our great and wonderful poet and of America.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 7: Look at. Very good. You click as the address. Let the record reflect the last time this came before this council. At the direction of the city attorney who initially blew the whistle and. Saying in the process that at that point it was in direct violation of the Brown Act. They went through a series of community meetings. The last time. Then it was reference that this city council. The Council person said we had a a. Outreach meeting, a community meeting. Well-attended, well-attended, the operative words. Three, 3 minutes later, I filed a public records request asking for those records of that meeting. You've seen the copy. Public records, the very diligent office sent me saying those will not be available until September 26. That's strange. The olfactory senses. All right. Being out and out elbowing. Michelle Obama. They monitor, there would be an embarrassment to the first lady. All right. Her husband might be a turkey, but you do not embarrass the first lady of the United States, period.
Speaker 1: Yes, sir. You can make your comments, but I would just try to be respectful of of the president and of the process. So please go on.
Speaker 7: You do not embarrass the first lady of the United States by elbowing or her name in here. I personally believe I side with the former two council people that had 20 years of experience and familiarity. And suggested that if he should be named after somebody locally here within the city, there exists no you should understand. The commendable work that the first lady does is part of her de facto portfolio. Unlike your parents, she doesn't go out and carpool you to school or after school. She doesn't take the trash out. She doesn't do the clean up, the do your sewing, do your laundry. She doesn't try to fix that broken lamp. You. Accidentally broke when you threw a house party one weekend when they weren't home. That's part of the job. She does a great thing. So the fact that she's involved is no great. Achievement period. We do have ample inventory of people here in this city. That deserve it. I happen to personally believe it should be. Eleanor Schmidt, the 20 year director of the library services. But make no mistake, she will not come within ten, 100 miles of this place knowing, and she will know she will have the full record of being. Her name is there because the more qualified people were elbowed out. Thank you, political pipsqueak.
Speaker 1: For your time's up. Thank you. Always very respectful of your comments. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Good afternoon, honorable mayor and all the city council representatives. My name is Linda Wilson. My address is on file. And first of all, I'd like to say thank you to all of you for your attention and this recommendation. I want to attest to the fact that it's been a process that I have not experienced before. However, it was well run, well orchestrated and well-attended by those who were interested in the process. I want to say that this is an excellent name. It's been well endorsed, and I would really like to urge that we had so many young people to get involved in this process. And I've not seen that much energy in the process of this nature in a very long time. Our young people have voiced and have submitted the name that they would like to see. And they are our future. They are now, but they are also our future. They will be the ones and their children will be the ones that will be utilizing this library. And I urge you and I thank you in advance for casting a vote in favor of Michelle Obama. Neighborhood Library. Thank you for your time and attention.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Good evening. My name is Joanie Ricks, O.D., and I am a member of District nine. And I just simply want to say thank you, Rex Richardson, for bringing this forward to the council. It's really exciting for us as residents to see the engagement. And I would just like to say, I think that our first lady would be honored to know that we have young people in our district that think so highly of her that they would want to name it after her. And I just think it's just a testament to where the ninth District has come, where we are going. And so I just end with saying thank you and go uptown.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: I'm Reverend Leon Wood from the seventh District. What I wanted to to actually mention here that that the recommendation for. Michelle Obama for the library reflects the entire city council that we have here. Long Beach is is is represents change. It represents what's going to happen in the future. We have now a progressive city council who are making progressive decisions. And Michelle Obama, as the library just reflects an advanced city that's moving forward where people are going to be to work together. Multi-ethnic groups of people working together on one accord, and I thank you very much, and I think you all should be commended for what you've done thus far. So thank you very much.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Any other speakers? Please come forward. Okay. No other speakers. Okay. See? See no other speakers. There is a motion and a second before we cast your vote. I just want to first I want to thank all the the young people that are here. I think it's really important that you guys were very active in this process. And I want to thank the councilman for ensuring that young people had an important voice in this process. And so, like all of you, I look forward to visiting this library. And I think that the woman's name, who will be most likely here on that on that library, is just a great symbol of what our country is about, which is someone that that that represents everyone that's successful. She's successful on her own in spite of her, her husband, and represents not just the nation, but I think a lot of the values of North Palm Beach as well. And so thank you for for what you've done. And Members, please cast your vote.
Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you all. Next item, please. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to approve naming the North Branch Library, the "Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library," in honor of her contributions to youth, education, literacy, and the United States. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02092016_16-0118 | Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Next item.
Speaker 0: Report from Long Beach Gas and oil recommendation to adjust rates for natural gas service to recover current and future costs related to Assembly Bill 32, the California Cap and Trade Program Citywide.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Can I get a second on this? Can any public comment on this item? Please cast your votes. It was a question of accounting council it.
Speaker 8: Yes. Just a quick question of staff. What will this mean to ratepayers?
Speaker 6: I'm going to turn this over to our interim director of Long Beach Gas and Oil at Farrell. No relation to our port commissioner. And Tony Foster. Councilmember we're looking to add.
Speaker 7: Per therm 0.0 to.
Speaker 6: $0.07 per therm, adjusted from 0.02 to $0.03 per therm. Okay. We're going to see an average bill increase of about $0.67.
Speaker 8: Okay. That that helps. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you. Any public comment on this item? Please cast your votes.
Speaker 0: Council Supernova. Motion carries. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to authorize City Manager to adjust rates for natural gas service to recover current and future costs related to Assembly Bill 32, the California Cap-and-Trade Program; and increase appropriations in the Gas Fund (EF 301) in the Long Beach Gas and Oil Department (GO) by $1,800,000. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02092016_16-0146 | Speaker 1: Next item.
Speaker 0: Item 20. Communication from City Attorney. Recommendation to adopt resolution in support of President Obama's Executive Actions to reduce gun violence.
Speaker 1: There's a motion in a second attorney public comment on this. Seeing none of Mr. Good here.
Speaker 7: I obviously support that. I don't care who is supporting it, who's putting it forward. I think it makes absolute sense and I would suggest some amendments here locally to something. And I realize they don't have the authority that I would suggest to you make the recommendations to the OR both to the county and to the state. Let's begin with, as I mentioned last week. Increasing the penalty for car theft by ten years in prison and a $10,000 by a bicycle theft. Ten years in prison. Ten years in. And then ten years. Revoking of a license. Of. And then wearing a T-shirt for ten years saying they are a loser. I'm a firm believer in prisons, period. And given the trajectory that we're on, which, as I mentioned before, within 40 years will have US City of Long Beach will be like a third rate city that one would find today in Guatemala or Honduras. I mean, that's the that's the trajectory we are on now. And no power on earth is going to stop that. And all you have to do is check the pop out rates of kids, period, unless we want to adopt something that is now being adopted in Africa. And a lot of people didn't realize and I did not realize until I started getting inside of it and read the scientific articles why the African elephant population is being dramatically reduced and has nothing to do with poachers. The female elephant. Can only give birth the hormonal dynamics within that animal every four years. So unless we want to attack it like we're attacking cancer. And I would suggest maybe what we might want to do is develop a paradigm. Or develop a hormone that we can provide to people where instead of popping out a kid every 24 months. It will be every 48 months and you'll be able to control better the crime. And this is what we're talking about here in terms of gun violence and gun violence. You just can't ignore it and hope it will go away because it's not going to go away. But I will begin also, as I said, with stiffer penalties for two of our biggest problems theft of bicycles and theft of automobiles $10,000 fine, ten years in prison. It's great employment and it's great construction opportunities. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Any other public comment on this item?
Speaker 2: Councilwoman Gonzalez Oh, I just wanted to say thank you. I know the last meeting, it kind of was at the end of the meeting. So I just want to send my appreciation to the council for staying committed to this. I know this is a symbolic measure, but it's definitely something that we need to take a stand on here in Long Beach. We have a lot of gun violence going on in our streets and our PD. They do an amazing job. Our fire department does an amazing job. But we just need to stay committed to this. So thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. There's a motion and a second. Members, please go and cast your votes.
Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next item, actually, that that.
Speaker 0: Concludes.
Speaker 1: That is the last item. Okay. Where we have our second public comment period, if there's anyone that wants to speak that hasn't spoken from the council. Please come forward. | Resolution | Recommendation to adopt resolution in support of President Obama's Executive Actions to reduce gun violence. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02022016_16-0031 | Speaker 0: Mr.. Dr. Schaeuble is here and I had initially told him, I think. 530.
Speaker 4: So.
Speaker 0: Dr. Schaeuble, if I can have Madame Claude, can you read. Item number six, please.
Speaker 1: Communication from Mayor Garcia Recommendation to receive and filed City of Long Beach Climate Resiliency Assessment Report from the Aquarium of the Pacific.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Let me let me just begin by one, welcoming Dr. Schaeuble back to the council. We know Dr. Schaeuble well as not just a great resident of Long Beach, but obviously directs our great aquarium, which is not just one of the most important. We're not one of it's not only one of the most important cultural institutions that we have, but as an educational institution, it's a research institution. And so we want to thank you for your leadership. A year ago, I asked Dr. Schaeuble to prepare a climate change and climate adaptation resiliency report to present to the city and the city council. Dr. Schaeuble, over the course of the last year, brought together some of the top minds across the state in the country, including at the federal government, local universities and a bunch of other folks, to put together a really comprehensive and important report for the city. I think it's important to remind us, remind ourselves that climate change is real. Climate change is happening. It is having an impact on Long Beach and other coastal cities. And it is a serious challenge. We should not ignore it. It is it is already having an impact here and and globally. And it's our job as elected officials to do the responsible thing and to learn to adapt and do what we can to stop and slow really at this point, slow down what is already happening. As a community, we've done we've done two major things in the last year. One is we joined the Compact of Mayors Agreement. We are one of 250 cities in the U.S. that has agreed to a pretty strict standard of emission reduction over the course of the next 20, 30 years. And we've also asked the aquarium to put together this information and report for the council to review. And so I want to thank you, Dr. Shuba, and your team, and I'm to turn it over to him. Thank you.
Speaker 9: Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. Honorable members of the city council, members of the city staff. You have the report and it's posted on our website if anybody behind me wants to read it in full tonight. What I want to do is give you a very brief overview of some some of the major findings of this report . That's what the cover looks like. It's in two parts. There's the assessment report, and then there are a series of appendices. What does it mean to be a climate resilient city? A climate resilient city is a city that's able to continue to function in the face of challenging circumstances due to climate change and to recover quickly from disruptions. And those disruptions with climate change would take the form in general of extreme weather related events. And there are four different dimensions of community resilience. There's leadership and strategy, infrastructure and environment, economy and society and health and wellbeing. And to have a resilient city, you have to be able to function in all of these areas, areas during trying circumstances. We have some unfair competitive advantages. I use the word unfair in the sense that Jack Welch of GE used to use it. Companies, cities, organizations should look at what with their unfair competitive advantages are. We're just the right size. We're small enough to be manageable and large enough to have national impact. We have wonderful, strong leadership, starting with the mayor and all of you in the city council and with the city manager's office and with most of the department . We have an outstanding water department. We've got in the in the health department transit and we have the the greenest port in the United States and probably the greenest port in the world. So we're off to a good running start. And as the mayor already mentioned, we're a member of the Compact of Mayors and the we'll become soon, I think, a member of 100 resilient cities. It's important to distinguish between mitigation and adaptation because they are totally different. Mitigation is when you reduce the driving forces of climate change, that is, you reduce the emission of greenhouse gases. You first stabilize the concentrations in the atmosphere, and then you have to reduce those. Adaptation is a recognition that no matter what we do, if we eliminated all greenhouse gases tomorrow, we would still have to adapt to a climate changing climate, to a rising C, to a warmer world. And this report focuses on adaptation. California is a leader in mitigation among all the states. And we as a city now as a member. Of the Compact of Mayors will join becoming a major leader in the city. The steps in this study were to identify the major threats of climate change to Long Beach. Effects of climate change vary with geography. And so we had to look specifically at Long Beach to assess the impacts and the vulnerability of these threats to our city. To review the existing plans and efforts that are already in place. To address these threats. To explore additional approaches. And then to summarize our findings and to suggest some additional approaches. So the major threats of climate change to Long Beach are drought, extreme heat, and the number of hot days increase in the number of hot days, sea level rise and coastal flooding, deteriorating air quality public health and social vulnerability. And I'm going to give you just a few comments about each of these major threats. Drought obviously, drought is a period when a region experiences below average precipitation and it results in decreased water supplies. And we are entering the fifth year of drought. We have to remember we are in a semi-arid region and our area was designated as one of extreme drought starting several years ago and as recently as January of this year, we get 53% of our water from groundwater. 40% of it is imported and 7% is recycled. And some of that groundwater depends upon imported sources of water because we use it to recharge our groundwater. And the two sources of imports from Northern California and from the Colorado, both are at risk because of climate change. This is a map of California on the left and and on the right. You can see the United States and the deep, deeper the the red, the more serious the drought. This was from January the fifth. And you can see that we are in a serious situation and not just here in Long Beach, but in much of California. The impacts of drought, if you have to, you have to look again. I mentioned where our water comes from and how the drought will impact those different supplies. The biggest source of our water comes from snowpack in the north and where last year we had 5% of the long term average snowpack on April one, which is the date when it's inventoried every year. We're ahead of schedule this year and we're all hoping, hoping that we will continue to do that. This is what Lake Oroville looked like in 2011. That's what it looked like in 2014. So you can see many of our reservoirs, including, as I say, our largest, the snowpack, they're disappearing. What's happening now? Long Beach is a leader in water conservation. We have a lot of different programs and incentives. We have the low impact development. We have schedule. Landscaping is restricted to certain days, Tuesdays and Saturdays only. We use some recycled water. And at the bottom we have been a leader in converting lawns to drought tolerant vegetation. But that's still an area where we have a lot of opportunity because fewer than 5% of our lawns of single family dwellings in Long Beach have been converted. So we need to continue to increase the shift to drought tolerant landscaping. We need to continue to increase use of recycled water. We have to figure out ways to promote onsite stormwater capture and retention. Right now, that's a serious problem, not just here, but throughout much of California, because we we are not capable of capturing rainfall and putting it back into the ground. We lose much of it and we need to decrease the reliance on imports for groundwater, recharge extreme heat. 2015 was the hottest year on record. 2014 was the hottest year on record before 2015. We will continue to see an increase in temperature and we will continue to see Greece see an increase in the number of hot days. Heat kills more people than earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes combined. And heat really is a serious issue. We're fortunate being here in Long Beach, and I'll come back to that in a second. These are two scenarios. One on the left is for lower emissions of greenhouse gases. So you can see that in California, the temperature would rise by 2100 or three or four degrees Fahrenheit in the higher emission scenario. It would rise by 5 to 7 degrees. Both of those are significant in significant increases. And we probably are going to be closer to the map on the right than to the map on the left. This shows the increase in the number of hot days. And you can see the star down there, Long Beach. We're very fortunate. And Long Beach, Santa monica. And being in the San Gabriel Mountains, we benefit here, as does Santa monica, from being close to the ocean. But we will still see an increase in the number of hot days that is days over 95 degrees by three or four times. The plans that are underway to cope with warming, where we have a network of cooling centers and we're planting trees. Both of these are very important initiatives and they should be continued and expanded. We can expand the number of cooling centers, and one of the challenges is to make people aware of where these cooling centers are and how they can get there, because many of the most vulnerable people do not have transportation. We can add even more trees. We have this plan to add 10,000 trees. We can add more. This is a double edged sword. Trees are thirsty and so they give you some shade. They cool because of the transfer transpiration, but they also use water. And at the bottom you can see we can add shade structures, green roofs, cool roofs, cool pavements. All of these can reduce heat island effects or go along with being cities, sea level rise, coastal flooding and inundation. They're not like mitigation and adaptation. They're quite different things. Coastal flooding is a temporary condition that's caused by storms or very high tides or the two of these together. Inundation is a permanent condition that's caused by sea level rise. Coastal flooding is a problem right now, and it will become a more serious problem as sea level continues to rise. Inundation is something that we probably don't have to worry about for a few decades, but after that, we will have to worry about it. This is from the California Coastal Commission and their guidance on sea level rise for three dates 2030, 2050 and 2100. And this is for the area of the coast where we are, south of Cape Mendocino, 2 to 12 inches by 2035 to 24 inches by 2050, 17 to 66 inches by 2100. There's a lot of uncertainty in these estimates, and partly it's because of the models that are used. And partly it's because we don't know what's going to happen to Greenland and Antarctica. And those are the two areas that could move these rises to the upper end. But the real issue now and in the future will be what gets superimposed on these rises of sea level king tides. We just had a couple on January 20th and 21st, El Nino. We're in an El Nino and coastal storms. We can learn a lot from the present El Nino because sea level rise from this present El Nino is equivalent to about 25 years of average sea level rise. And when we superimposed storms upon it, it's giving a look, giving us a look at what the future of California, Southern California and Long Beach will look like in 25 or 30 years. I'm sure most of you can't see this map, but this is a 100 year storm with present sea level. In about 2020, 23,000 people would be at risk of flooding during a 100 year storm right now without any further rise in sea level. And you can see where the flooding is concentrated along Second Street to Peninsula Alamitos Bay, plans that are underway, beach nourishment and protective sand berms. This is ongoing activity along the peninsula. The we're cleaning out storm drains to reduce urban flooding. We have a boom on the L.A. River that keeps a lot of debris from reaching the ocean. And we have Cosmos, which is a modeling program of the U.S. Geological Survey, and we also have an El Nino preparedness program and the alert Long Beach. So we have a lot of efforts that are underway. These are approaches we think need to be further considered. We should inventory and review all of the existing studies. This was one of the challenges we had. It's very hard to get your arms around these studies. We should delineate historically flooded and damaged areas. We should collect additional data. I think El Nino is a great opportunity for us. It's going to go on for another several months and we should be getting some additional data during that period. We will need you will need to select an appropriate hydrodynamic model for Long Beach. It has to be a detailed, dynamic hydrodynamic model that can take into account the complicated bathymetry we have near shore and the complicated topography that we have. And we will also need to inventory all infrastructure and assets at risk of flooding. And I would recommend that you develop and maintain a coastal hazardous hazards database that you can call upon when when we need to look at things. Deteriorating air quality. Air quality always gets worse with warming because the chemistry of the atmosphere changes. And California currently has the worst air quality in the nation, with more than 90% of the population living in areas that violate state air quality standards for ground level ozone and small airborne particles. Now, this we're very fortunate because there has been great progress in the last few years, particularly by the port. But 73% of Long Beach has diesel particulate emission values that are greater than those of 90% of California. And we have so many cars, it's more than 75% of air pollution in the region is related to mobile sources . So we still have some work to do, but we're moving in the right direction. Air quality monitoring stations are critical, green space initiatives are critical, getting people out of their cars and into public transportation or onto their bicycles, complying with regulations. And if you look at the Port of Long Beach, these efforts, they've reduced diesel emissions by 75% since in the last decade. These are very impressive. Some additional approaches to consider would be to install additional monitoring stations not just near the 17 freeway. One of the problems we have is we often get lumped with all of Los Angeles County and within the city of Los Angeles they do it by zip code. But in Long Beach, we get lumped into one big area. That's not good enough. We should be studying the pollution effects in Long Beach. We should inform and engage the public on air pollution, especially children, the elderly, those who work outdoors. And we should continue to promote alternative transportation. Public health. Climate change is one of our biggest threats to public health. You warm the climate and a lot of things change the spread of infectious diseases. And this is a great concern right now with the with the mosquito borne disease and the poor, the elderly, the very young, the homeless and those with compromised health are the most vulnerable. And we have significant populations in some of those categories. We have a lot of plans and efforts that are underway that are good. California Green Building Code, The Heal Zone, Livable West Long Beach Implementation Plan and Cooling Centers. All of those are important moves in the right direction. We probably should include health issues as part of the Sustainable City Action Plan, and I would encourage you to invite public health and local health organizations to participate in the development and implementation of the Sustainable City Action Plan and engage the public in climate change resilience by identifying the health benefits of adaptation. There are a lot of advantages to being a climate resilient city, and many in the public are not aware of those. So building climate resilient communities by building social capital. It's been shown in Katrina, it was shown during Sandy that it's where you have strong social capital and we have strong neighborhoods. You are more resilient and you rebound much more quickly. So that is a program that the city is already in good shape. And we have a program that we're developing. We're applying to Noah for support. It will it involves already a group of MBA students at Cal State Long Beach. We're involving at Jordan High School and a number of others. And we will keep you engaged in that. It will be important to engage the diverse communities and neighborhoods so that they can develop a shared vision of resilience. What is it that they want to protect? What is it they value most? And then to develop tailored messages for each community? And we already have partnerships with two. And I will have three different cities that have signed on with you, Mr. Mayor, to the Compact of Mayors that will have similar city studies going on in parallel with what we're going to do. So I think the way we would encourage the city to form a climate resilience team and to complete and publish a risk assessment plan to review, adopt and implement that plan and to monitor, review and update the plan. Long Beach has a great opportunity. I think we have a head start. We're well positioned to become a model of a climate resilient city, and it not only will protect the city and its residents, but it will get a fair amount of attention on this city. So we thank you, Mr. Mayor, for inviting us to be part of this study. And we will continue to work with you and members of the city council and the city manager's office. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Dr. Schaeuble, if you can just stay up there for a couple of minutes. It's really important work. I know that the whole council has the full report. And I think at this point now the ball is back on on this body's court. And I think it's the council's responsibility. I know that will be thoughtful over the course of the next few months ahead to consider all these recommendations and and your data. Let me turn this over to Vice Mayor Lowenthal.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And thank you, Dr. Schaeuble. I wanted to commend the mayor for making this request and for you to conduct the study and the work and present this report to us. Also your team of experts for gathering all the information and the facts that informed this assessment report that you shared highlights from today. And it's already been clearly stated your presentation as well as the mayor's opening remarks. But climate change is real. This is a different day from over ten years ago, I'd like to say almost ten years ago when I worked at a water agency and we conducted a press conference about new technology to address sea level rise at the Alamitos Superior. And at that time, the administration, the federal administration, your U.S., you're smiling because you know the story. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation sent me a message saying that they were disallowed from participating in the press conference because we made it clear statement that climate change is the reason for sea level rise. And at that time, the president did not acknowledge that. And so none of the staff was allowed to attend. But we went ahead and we conducted that press conference, and your team was very supportive in providing us with the information, as well as Dr. Bill Patzert from JPL. But we have come a long way, and I'm very proud to be a part of this community that has an institution, a learning institution and research institution like the aquarium that can provide such key research and documentation and an assessment of our community. How you ended the slide is really important to me personally. It's a shared vision and that is the Long Beach way. We have never addressed our water quality issues, beach water quality issues, storm water quality issues, trash issues coming down the L.A. River, which I know that Councilwoman Gonzalez and the rest of us are very aware of . We've never addressed that as though that they have geopolitical or geographical boundaries. Trash doesn't know boundaries, pollution doesn't know boundaries, stormwater impair doesn't know boundaries. And we've always addressed it by looking upstream and see how we can support our cities upstream. And so your strategy in your recommendations is very much aligned with the Long Beach Way. That is how we achieve successes for our community is acknowledging that upstream cities have to be treated as our partners and that we have to work with them rather than penalizing them or shaming them for what contributions their cities may provide to any impairment to our source water quality or water quality in general, working with them and collaborating with them. So I appreciate that the approach of a shared vision, we have a shared obligation to support one another as cities and and to build capacity or social capital. As you articulated, it's not just collaborative, but it's really the right way. So thank you. I appreciate you taking science, knowledge, research and hard work and making it very able for all of us to understand, be a part of and really be a part of the solution. Because as one of your programs in the aquarium is aptly titled, it all flows to me. So thank you.
Speaker 9: Thank you very much. And over that last ten years, the aquarium has changed a great deal. And we appreciate your support and leadership. We're in your district.
Speaker 0: Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 5: Dr. Schaeuble, I just want to say congratulations and thank you for a wonderful presentation, similar to what Vice Mayor Lowenthal said. We hold these issues very important to many of our districts, but also our city. We were just in the state legislative committee up in Sacramento and. For the Lower Los Angeles River and making it a larger master plan to ensure that we're getting enough attention as Upper Los Angeles River plans. So thank you for your attention to this and your hard work in all this.
Speaker 9: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman Mongo.
Speaker 1: Thank you for the great work you've done. I guess I have a question for Steph. I know that this body has referred to commissions. The work that you believe is our next steps. Would that be something that we could make a motion to move to the Sustainability Commission to review and come back to us?
Speaker 4: So certainly we do have a number of commissions that and committees that deal with this. We have our Environmental Committee of the City Council. We also have a sustainability commission. They do have a sustainability action plan and they review a number of these things and that work is ongoing.
Speaker 8: We in kind of working with Dr. Schubert, we've done a report to the council as.
Speaker 4: Well in November talking about a lot of the things that the city is doing. And we're certainly.
Speaker 8: Going to be taking this report and merging those efforts together.
Speaker 4: So I don't believe in front of you tonight. And that would be a question for the attorney, whether you can make that motion or whether it's just a receiving file.
Speaker 8: But we'd certainly be willing to work with commissions and with the council and to come back and talk about some of.
Speaker 4: The steps that that we're working on that need to happen over the next several years in order to keep the work moving in this area.
Speaker 1: Thank you. I think it's great when we have someone who comes to the council with a plan and here are the next things that we need from you as elected officials. So I look forward to hearing from the city staff over time on where we're going to go with that. But I think that we need to make those next steps and commitments to those next steps. So thank you for making sure that was in your presentation.
Speaker 4: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember Ringo.
Speaker 10: Thank you, Mayor. I want to also extend my thank you to Dr. Schaeuble. You're doing great work at the aquarium. I was over there earlier last year for a symposium you put forward on sea level rise. And it was a great presentation. And it's great that we had such an institution, such as the Aquarium of the Pacific, looking at at our climate and what changes taking place and how we can fit into that plan to address climate change and make improvements by changing our own habits. One of the things that we always have to look at, we have to see if we see something and we have and we know there's something needs to be changed. It's, first of all, accepting the fact that there is something happening and that we do need to do something about it. And your work at the aquarium is certainly a at the forefront of doing that, of recognizing what's taking place and presenting the facts as we need to see them, to know that we need to have some kind of change taking place. So I want to commend you for that. And it also fits a very well. We just had our retreat this past weekend and we had a report from the Port of Long Beach. And many of the changes that they're doing there to address particulate matter and the increases they have out there, and especially when it looks in regards to my community in the West Palm Beach area, we just recently also adopted a West Side livability plan that addresses changes that we need to do in the West Palm Beach area to lower the the the our carbon footprint, if you will, and have a more sustainable city and increasing mobility out there. So the work that you're doing out there is wonderful and it's great, and I'm glad that you're bringing that forward because that's a first step in recognizing that we need to do something. Thank you for your work.
Speaker 4: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember Supernanny.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Dr. Kubo, for the presentation. And in particular, I'd like to thank you for mentioning and showing a graphic of the Sustainable City Action Plan. As a charter member of that commission I worked on, seven of those are between 2008 and 2014. I worked on those. I wasn't sure anybody saw them, but I'm glad you did. So thank you. But to Councilwoman Mango's point, I think we have the pieces in place, but it's just a protocol we have to deal with. And I actually referred one of the commission members to Tom Modica last week. So this type of idea can be and this is still a receiving file. I get that tonight. But I think we need to find a pathway for your conceptual or your ideas, either to make the staff to get in front of that commission, or I happen to also chair the Environmental Committee too. So what could come in that direction? So I'd really like to see that worked out. Thank you.
Speaker 9: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And Councilwoman Pryce.
Speaker 5: Thank you. Ditto to everything that my colleagues have said. I know that you know this, and I'm sure that my council colleagues won't be surprised to hear that many of the very vulnerable areas in the city of Long Beach in regards to this discussion fall in the third district, in regards to the homes that might be impacted by sea level rise. And so the residents in the peninsula community, in the Naples community have gotten very involved in these discussions. They have attended several forums as of late hosted by the Aquarium and other organizations in this topic. And I know that our office, as a result of the TFF that city staff provided in November, sent out a mass email to our residents, kind of highlighting what the city's plans were going to be. I expect that our office will stay on top of this issue in regards to partnering with staff to move us forward in this discussion and do everything that we can. And I appreciate you making us aware of it. And I asked you to continue your partnership with us as a body and also with us individually, as I think you have a lot of expertize that we we may or may not have. And hearing from you in terms of what we might want to be looking into or maybe what's being talked about in the industry, we obviously want to be doing everything that we can to have a very successful adaptation phase as we go through this process and figure out some long term solutions to mitigate what is coming. So thank you.
Speaker 9: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. With the attorney public comment on this issue, please come forward. Mr..
Speaker 9: SHIBLEY Can I, can I just make one absolute? We love the partnership that we have with this city, and we want it to continue. I can't think of a single city better suited to create the kind of an aquarium that we're trying to create right here in Long Beach. We have enough problems to make life interesting, but the problems are soluble and we have most of the pieces are in place. So we thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Public comment on this. You.
Speaker 4: Larry. Good to hear that. Clark has the address. My first introduction to no Nino type weather was back and it was either 78 or 79. I moved here April 1st, 1978, and it was either that year or the following year that it began to rain on November the first and rained all November, all December and well into January, late and early February. And I remember as December was approaching, we saw on the news what we see here know the past few weeks, houses slipping into the water, beaches being eroded, boats being slashed, smashed up on the rocks. And there was a genuine concern by everybody, particularly the city officials in Pasadena, as to whether or not the Rose Parade might have to be for the first time canceled. And, of course, this is all great fodder for Johnny Carson if you I don't know how you remember Johnny Carson, but about seven days before the Rose Parade , he came up with a great idea what he thought was a great idea, which was that everybody, anybody attending the Rose Bowl parade planning on it, should the day before go out and buy, in addition to the Christian Science Monitor and make a paper hat out of it, and then it wouldn't rain at all. Four days later, he walks out on stage wearing such a hat the publisher erm kind of had. Seen that heart and therapist and I hope that that support. I think, and certainly that wouldn't stop what we're doing now. But that same paper, parenthetically, does a weekly or bi weekly update on the climatic conditions around the world and they turn out they are pretty accurate and so forth. Thanks.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Any other public comment on the climate change climate resiliency report? Yes, sir.
Speaker 3: 000. Mr. Romberg Garcia and the City Council Team Deandra.
Speaker 4: I want to say thank you very much for the. Further further black history celebration.
Speaker 3: You know, I want to capture that country's means in the new year.
Speaker 4: And my birthday is coming with that film. I always feel so much.
Speaker 3: Love from people they care. And now we know the the.
Speaker 4: The El Nino import.
Speaker 3: Anything new being.
Speaker 4: A.
Speaker 3: Kicker here they kick back kick the with that mosquito. So we had to pray and believe and keep open day.
Speaker 4: The virus is spread. No wonder.
Speaker 3: We need more water and rain. It's all things.
Speaker 4: Being. We had so much good time at.
Speaker 3: The unit he celebrates. That Martin Luther King and that was it to perform well. I'm all.
Speaker 4: For you. Remain my birthday, right?
Speaker 0: Happy birthday. Early birthday to you.
Speaker 4: So things. Mayor Robert Garza. Thanks to you all. We'll always remember. Long Beach in that California. Mo where mo believe there is.
Speaker 3: But give the rema. We keep.
Speaker 4: Moving forward.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Thank you very much.
Speaker 4: For coming to my birthday.
Speaker 0: We will remember it. Thank you. Happy birthday.
Speaker 4: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Thank you. Any other comments on this report? Okay. See, now there is a motion by Vice Mary Lowenthal on the second by Councilwoman Gonzalez to receive and file it. Please cast your votes. And, Dr. Schaeuble, you and your whole team. Thanks again. We look forward to the next step. So thank you.
Speaker 1: Vice Mayor Lynn Bell. Motion carries.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Madam Clerk. And I believe it's time for our public comment. Our first series of public comment, we have ten speakers that have requested to speak during this time. First, I have Gordana Cager. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to receive and file City of Long Beach Climate Resiliency Assessment Report from the Aquarium of the Pacific. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02022016_15-1270 | Speaker 2: Thank you. And hearing item one.
Speaker 1: Communication from City Attorney. Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record. Conclude the hearing and declare ordinance. Amending the Long Beach Municipal Code relating to medical marijuana. Read the first time and lead over for the next regular meeting of the City Council for final reading, declaring the urgency thereof and declaring that this ordinance shall take effect immediately citywide.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Madam Clerk. I have a motion by Councilwoman Price and a second by Councilwoman Gonzales. Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 5: Thank you, Vice Mayor. I just have a quick question before we move forward tonight. So the way that this is structured, Mr. Mays, I just want to confirm with you the copy process for the delivery operations. They would have a process they'd have to go through. Once council takes up the issue of whether to allow storefronts, they would have to apply for a copy for the storefront. They don't automatically convert. Is that correct?
Speaker 11: Councilwoman Price Members of the City Council is partially correct. We have a process that relates to coops. If council did authorize the storefront dispensaries, they would be able to apply for a modification to their existing CFP that would permit that activity and the same types of conditions that would typically be imposed for a see a new cup would likely be imposed at that time. So it's it's part of the CPA process, but it definitely will have a public hearing appealable to the city council. Okay. Other protections.
Speaker 5: Because what I'm thinking about is that when they if for the for the companies that apply for the delivery only model our analysis would it be limited to the operation of a brick and mortar site for delivery? No onsite sales? Or would we be looking at the future, the possible impacts to the community, etc., for on site sales when we're making a decision as to the delivery operation?
Speaker 11: If I understood your quip, if I understood your question, the Council would have the opportunity if you wanted to go further with a brick and mortar retail outlet to look at everything you would be able to. You could, in theory, require a separate CFP. We would recommend modifying the original one, but usually that's left in the hands of staff to fashion conditions that would be appropriate to a retail outlet. And the ordinance that we did draft for your consideration already has built into it many of the types of things and requirements perform operational standards that you would expect for a bricks and mortar facility if it went in that direction.
Speaker 5: Okay. So just a I'm just to clarify, though, let's say we're okay with a delivery operation at a particular site, but that site wouldn't necessarily lend itself well to an on site on site sales, whether it's, you know, crime stats in the area, lighting, neighborhood, proximity to a particular problematic site, whatever the case may be, the analysis that we would take for a regular CFP application, it may be that that location is perfect for a delivery only facility, but not for an on site sales.
Speaker 11: That's correct. The matter would first go to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission would have to make a finding that the use at that location, the modification was appropriate. If findings couldn't be made, it would be conceivably denied at the Planning Commission level. The applicant would still be able to appeal that determination to the city council.
Speaker 5: Or they could find another location.
Speaker 3: Correct.
Speaker 5: Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Are we still are we at the start of the hearing here or did we have a staff reporter? No. Okay. So. Okay. So. Okay. Got it. Got it. So. Well, actually, just to make sure. I want to make sure we do. Know. I know this is a hearing. Did we do? There's no oath required in the hearing. Did Mr. Mason, do you want to say anything additional as far as before I go to the second of the motion?
Speaker 11: Well, I if if the counsel would like me to give a staff report, I certainly could. I will say an abbreviated form of the staff report is we did incorporate into the draft ordinance before you. All of the items that counsel did request on December eight. If you would like me to go through those in detail, I'd be more than happy to do that. But if not, that's fine too.
Speaker 0: Okay. Sounds like we're just moving forward because you have started the start of the process, so I know you all have that the material. The second part of the motion was Councilwoman Gonzales.
Speaker 5: Yes. Just a quick question. I think I believe I already had this answered, but the 6% business license tax, we can the maximum would be 10%.
Speaker 1: Is that correct?
Speaker 5: Right now we've set it at 6%.
Speaker 11: When the initiative was placed on the ballot and put before the voters, they voted for a range, starting initially at 6%. But we built into that ordinance that was voted for the ability of city council to raise that anywhere between six and 10%. But that's not part of what's on the agenda tonight. But at a future date. Yes, you could do that.
Speaker 3: Okay.
Speaker 5: And then I just want to confirm in here in your report, the sink, the sanctioned ratio versus versus unsanctioned. Are we still looking at 1 to 6? Is that.
Speaker 1: Correct?
Speaker 5: I remember seeing that in the last report. And I just want to make sure when we're looking at these costs, that if that's what we're facing, this.
Speaker 1: Off of.
Speaker 4: The Eriksson. Assistant Finance Director will answer for staff.
Speaker 1: So, Councilwoman Gonzalez, when we had the varying number of dispensaries, we realized that it's probably more a facet of the demand in the city of Long Beach is more than a ratio of 1 to 6. So if there's only four dispensaries, the ratio might go up. So for this round of analysis, we actually assumed roughly 50 dispensaries total in the city of Long Beach. That would be unsanctioned. Okay. Okay. Great. And I think that's it at this time. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I'm going to just keep going down this list. Did you guys go to the public? Did you go to the public? Okay. So I'm going to just keep going, Councilman Richardson.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. There's a couple questions and then another thought on this. Mm hmm. So I know that we went through months and months of, you know, task force meetings and a lot of resources spent on this and and an iteration of the ordinance. Now, my my first question is, what is the timeline from adoption of this ordinance to full implementation of open retail facilities? Seven. The full implementation.
Speaker 1: Councilmember Richardson. So we worked with the Department of Development Services and other departments to look at when we could actually reasonably do the process. And. We would start with the application process in March of 2016 that would be completed, the copy applications would be done in April and the CP process in November of 16. Planned process check would probably be completed of January of 17. And so January 17 would be the estimated date first delivery dispensary would actually open. Six months later we would have the report back to Council on Fiscal Impact and Safety Issues. That would be July of 2017. So if a city council chose to open onsite store fronts, we would end up having a copy modification process that that mine, which the earliest that could probably possibly be completed would probably be October 2017. And so that would be when we would have the first retail dispensary. Then six months after that April 2018, we City Council would look at considering three additional dispensaries. And because at that point, these would be new locations with a full copy process, the earliest those three additional dispensaries would possibly open is looking like to be March of 2019.
Speaker 8: Okay. So this ordinance, the timeline from today to full implementation puts us at March of 2019. Which we should be in our new civic center, I think, around that time. I think the original intent was to put forth sound public policy and actually take a step in that direction. And that's just not what this is not what's happening today. I think this is really insincere, is a waste of time and resources. My next question is my next question is, will this still have a fiscal impact on the city if we move forward with this? I mean, I know that was a major concern leveled by a number of council members. But I think this proposal, as I understand it, still costs resources that won't be fully recouped. Is that true?
Speaker 1: Councilmember Richardson. So, yes, we did look at both the the upfront cost, the one time cost and the ramp up cost related to implementing and administering this ordinance as well as the revenues that would be received once the the dispensaries are opening or opened. And the timeline that I had mentioned before and when we looked at that, there was a shortfall between revenues and expense in 16, 17 and 18, which we are recommending. If that was the case, we would be using one time resources to get through that period totaling about 2.4 million. And then once we get to seven dispensaries, we would be at a break even point where ongoing revenues would cover ongoing expenses. In order to do that, we did have to ask departments to to reduce some of their their administration costs. And this is all just rough estimates based on a set of assumptions. So the actual results could vary.
Speaker 8: So. So that said, here's here's what I'm thinking. This is not smart in terms of fiscal policy. It doesn't achieve any particular public policy goal. I know that. I mean, we've been through this. So there is not consensus on the council to do a more robust policy. So I don't think we should move forward. So I. And I know that. And I'll just want to say this. A lot of work's been done by a lot of council members. Vice Mayor Lowenthal. I know this most recent motion is Council Member Suzy Price. And I would say that and I want to thank everybody for their hard work, but I think enough is enough. So I think we should. There are we know that there are a number of ballot initiatives happening across the state, potential rumors of local ballot initiatives. If we're not going to give it a good run at it, I think we should stop here. So I'm going to offer a substitute motion to receive a 5/2.
Speaker 0: Okay. There's a substitute motion to receive and file. Just to clarify, Mr. Mays, a receiving file would not move the ordinance forward in a nutshell, correct?
Speaker 11: That's correct. And the current ban that's in place would remain in place.
Speaker 0: Okay. Can I ask you a question? I know we have a couple of speakers, but there were some state mandates as far as dates. I just I just want to make sure that we understand what those are and we can get through the other speakers first. But I, I don't know that those have an impact to this discussion or not.
Speaker 11: A couple of weeks ago, they probably would, but today I don't think that they do. When the original Medical Marijuana Regulatory Act was passed back in October of 2015, there was a provision in one of those three laws that said that if city councils did not adopt a regulatory ordinance dealing specifically with cultivation by March 1st, 2016 , the state law in that regard would automatically be imposed. Since that time, the person who authored that portion of the bill realized that or at least put out a statement that that March 1st deadline was put in there in error. And recently he put forth an urgency measure that now as of today was passed by both of the state and. The Assembly and the Senate to do away with that March 1st criteria, because it had the unintended effect of cities adopting bans because they couldn't get up and running by March 1st. As we speak, I don't believe it has yet been signed by the governor, but the governor has given every indication he will sign that. So the March 1st date should go away. So I feel fairly confident that if the receiving file is passed, the ban would stay in place and the state law regulation in regard to cultivation would not be imposed on the city. That's my best estimate of what would happen.
Speaker 0: Okay. Councilmember, your anger.
Speaker 10: Okay. Point of clarification. In terms of if we receive a file, this report here and there you see a ban would be in place. Should there be an initiative on a ballot? In a ballot initiative pass? What is the status of the ban?
Speaker 11: Councilmember Urania if a obviously would depend on what the ballot initiative was, but if it was a ballot initiative that put forth a regulatory ordinance and it was passed by the people, and assuming the city did not put on like L.A. did a competing ballot initiative, the ban would dissolve. By virtue of that public vote. Okay.
Speaker 10: Thank you. Well, I have to agree with Councilman Richardson in the sense that there's been a lot of work that's been put into this. When I brought this forward with Councilmember Lowenthal, we were talking about creating the task force, and we created the task force wanted to review this. The task force took much longer than I would have wanted to, but it would it did its job. And I want to thank the members of the task force in coming forward and bringing in the report. I also want to thank all the the patients that came forward, who gave their personal stories in regards to what this would mean for them. And and I want to thank, of course, the city attorney. I mean, I think that the they saw one item going forward and got redirected to create another type of ordinance that was completely different from the one that was originally thought of. I wanted my intent at that time were to step out in front of this, to get to place the city of Long Beach in a position that would be at the forefront of legalizing medical marijuana, to put us at the forefront in in the state, to create an ordinance that would be a role of being a role model for everybody to follow. But that did not happen. So what we have here, I think, is very much watered down. I think it's one that is not enforceable. Obviously, when you are transporting a product from one location to another, there are so many different things that can happen within a one mile stretch. There's also no guarantees about the product that you're going to be ordering and or receiving. So there's there's a lot of there's a lot of questions on this. And there's also questions about in terms of timelines. We're looking at full implementation in two years, which by that time we already have probably have something else in place. And we're also looking at getting a a break even point in terms of revenue in two years. So for the first year and a half, you know, the city will be making quite an expenditure on this, an expenditure that we can't and should not be making. And the original ordinance that we had out there would have put us right in place with that right away. In the meantime, it's it's not something that that I can support. So I'll be supporting the substitute motion to receive on file.
Speaker 0: Vice President, Joe.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I wanted to thank Councilmember Richardson for putting forward a reasonable solution to what I believe is not a workable policy. I'd like to thank the city staff, actually, because I don't know how many opportunities I'll have to do this, but especially Charlie Parkin and his team, Mike Mays and your staff for the countless hours that you've put into this issue since I originally brought the item forward back in 2009, and then we brought it forward with current council members. So it's been almost seven years we've been trying to figure this out and opinions vary, but we may have had it right at one point. We may not have, but over seven years, constituencies and communities evolve. I do know that we've worn out many colleagues past and present, but I do thank them all for taking this journey with us. Some of them are not here at the dais today and some of you are. So this issue of medical marijuana will continue to shape and evolve and regress and evolve again and again. And that's the beauty of public policy. There is a back and forth and an ebb and flow, but our job is to actually know the pulse of our community. And what saddens me is that we had so many opportunities to do the job, to do a good job. We called on many people to participate in a task force, and then we really just let everyone down with a policy that's not a great one and not one that's workable for the city, not one that's definitely manageable . And what saddens me about that is, after all that time, we have pushed our community to take to the ballot and sometimes that's necessary. But I think having seven years to get it right and having a very thoughtful council behind the dias today would have allowed us the opportunity to come forward with meaningful public policy, having learned from all of the discussion and input over the last seven years. And so I think and I would like to urge my colleagues to consider supporting this. I think receiving and filing is the best thing to do, to take no action, to not have a new ordinance in place, revert back to what we had and really let the ballot process take place, which, for better or for worse, will be the will of the people we had an opportunity to do right, and we did not. And so many of you know that I'm very motivated by public policy and robust conversations, and I do enjoy the stamina that it takes to get things to the finish line. But I'm also very honest about what the outcome is. And I can honestly say, and I don't hide my frustration, but I can honestly say that what we are considering tonight is not the best we could have done. So I would rather have nothing than have a bad something. So, colleagues, I hope you support Councilmember Richardson. Substitute to receive and file. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilwoman Pryce.
Speaker 5: I, I actually. This is music to my ears. I've been asking for us to continue the band forever, like every other city that this has come to has done since AB 266. So the question I have Mr. Mays I have a couple questions. The first is this. There's been some talk of ballot initiatives. Can you explain to us very clearly what are the ballot? And then what does the ballot initiative process look like? One, if the city has a delivery only ordinance in place and then there is an initiative that allows for storefront dispensaries that would supersede the ordinance. Correct?
Speaker 11: It probably would supersede the ban. Yes, if it was a regulatory ordinance. So in a nutshell, what could happen is the council could put an initiative ordinance on for the public to vote on, just like the council put the medical marijuana tax. If the council did not desire to do that initially, members of the public could start an initiative petition, gather enough signatures to satisfy the city clerk. And there's a percentage of signatures that must be gathered in order to qualify for the ballot. That could go on the ballot. Council. Then, as I mentioned, this happened in L.A. The city of L.A. decided to put a their council, decided to put a competing measure on that could may or may not happen in this case, assuming it qualified for the ballot. I am guessing it's pretty close to too late to qualify for June. Most likely, if it local initiative, it would qualify for November and council could decide at that time whether they wanted to put a competing measure on. And then obviously whichever of the two measures, if there were two got the most votes would pass and then the city would be required to implement that new ordinance.
Speaker 5: And so whatever the new ordinance is, what what the city has, whether it's a ban or a delivery only model, the new ordinance that would be adopted by way of petition would then supersede it.
Speaker 11: If the new ordinance or the new initiative was inconsistent with the ban, the new ordinance would take its place and I assume it would be inconsistent with a ban.
Speaker 5: Right. Okay. And. In regards to the timing of initiatives, can you talk a little bit more about that?
Speaker 11: I hate to put the clerk on the spot, but the clerk might be in a better position to talk about that.
Speaker 5: Someone who did that to her last week. Okay.
Speaker 11: I'll tell you what. We could either we could bring back an off agenda item, if you would like, that could give you the timing about initiatives in general. We could describe what it would take to potentially get it on the June ballot or more likely what it would take to get on the November statewide ballot.
Speaker 5: That would be great. So if we could do that.
Speaker 11: Be happy to do that.
Speaker 5: I just want to make a final. Comment about fiscal impact. I'm really interested and pleasantly surprised that any other council member is mentioning fiscal impact in regards to medical marijuana because this is the first. Other than Councilwoman Mango, she has mentioned it, but this is the first time I've heard some of my colleagues talk about fiscal impact . So let's talk about fiscal impact for a minute there. Since Councilman Richardson refers to my efforts in this process to compromise as a waste of money and resources. So my understanding from the first fiscal impact report that staff wrote was that it was projected that the sales tax revenue from this industry with nine dispensaries would bring into the city $3 million. And the initial costs that were provided by multiple departments were $5 million to enforce the operations, including licensing, police and code enforcement. Then staff was asked to reevaluate the numbers and come back with a different enforcement model so that we could break even in this operation. And staff was able to do that. And what that meant was that rather than having a police based enforcement, we were going to have more of an administrative enforcement, which means for all of the unlicensed facilities that the police department using millions of dollars and hundreds of search warrants to try to shut down that process would go away. And instead, our code enforcement officers would be sending letters and asking people to politely and nicely shut down their operations. And that was going to be our new enforcement model for $3 million in order to break out into a break even situation. So let's not talk about fiscal impact as as a way to highlight the position, because I think it's pretty clear what the fiscal impact of this marijuana statute would be for the city of Long Beach. And by all accounts, any adoption of medical marijuana as an industry in the city of Long Beach is going to have a negative fiscal impact at a time when we need more police officers patrolling our streets and helping us deal with a rise in crime. And that is the reality. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Vice Mayor Lowenthal, them going to go to public comment?
Speaker 2: That's okay, Mr. Mayor. I don't have to have the last word. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Okay, let me go ahead and do public comment. So if you have any comments, please come forward.
Speaker 4: Very good. I go back to what the governor said a year ago this past January. California already has enough potheads. Period. It's from the governor. And he pointed out that's that we are also at or near the bottom of the barrel. In every almost every paradigm of import in the country. Period. Frankly speaking, I don't know. I don't have a friend. I don't know anybody. That smokes marijuana. This marijuana medical marijuana is bogus. Any Tom, Dick and Harry can pick one up. As they say, it is as easy as getting a promise from a politician in election time period. Kids from the high school can tell you how to get it. Period. So you just hold the line? Absolutely no. If somebody wants to move out of the city and maybe develop a policy, if somebody wants it bad enough will pay for their moving out of the city, period. But the council in the third district was absolutely correct. We have enough problems. All right. The country itself, this this state itself is our nature directory. Within the next 30 years, to be this city of Long Beach, notwithstanding that which we get accomplished, which we'll see will be something like you'll find in Guatemala or Honduras, period. A fourth rate city. Below that. And if you don't think that you're clearly out of touch with what's going on, you may be fine. That I can tell you now. Your kids. Kids will be living in something a fourth world country as it is now. So what you need to do is hold the fort. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Thank you. I'm Lynn Figure and founder and CEO of Highway Distribution Group, a legally licensed distributor of medical cannabis and cannabis infused products. I'm here tonight to offer my support for the ordinance, which you have before you and urge you to pass it. I have been a California businessman for over 25 years. I have a background in real estate development in California and in Pennsylvania. I'm also a highly respected music publisher, and I recently sold my company in December of last year. I'm also a producer of concerts nationwide featuring the top touring artists of the last 40 years. For the sake of clarification, distribution as defined by the state of California means the procurement, sale and transport of medical cannabis and medical cannabis products between business entities licensed by the state as distributors. We have been given the responsibility to coordinate all legal cannabis activities in the state of California under our license. We engage in the business of purchasing medical cannabis from a licensed cultivator or medical cannabis products from licensed manufacture for the sale to a licensed dispensary. This is the first positive step in creating a legally accountable business for the sale of medical cannabis in the state of California. My primary objective is to distribute products for patients that is high quality, effectively effective, properly tested, labeled, and most of all has been produced in a facility that complies with the state and local health regulations . I am here tonight to respectfully encourage that you pass the ordinance before you and help us in establishing a reputable and trusted business. In addition, I would also like to respect the request that distributors of medical cannabis be incorporated into your ordinance.
Speaker 8: Our goal is to work cooperatively with the city.
Speaker 4: Officials, law enforcement and health officials and the community at large to understand and address the concerns that exist. We want to establish our operations in the city of Long Beach to create new jobs and taxable revenue that will benefit the local community and economy. We also want to earn the trust of the city and the community at large by giving back through programs focused on eradicating homelessness in the city of Long Beach. In closing, I urge you to pass the ordinance and to include a provision that includes the distribution of medical cannabis edibles and other derivative products in the city of Long Beach. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Hello. I'm Mitch Klaus. I'm CEO and founder of Something Chocolate, a music inspired gourmet box chocolate that's cannabis infused. And I'm also here to encourage supportive of today's audience. I'm an entrepreneur started many businesses over the years in a variety of industries including tech magazine publishing, digital music distribution and gourmet food. And I worked with some of the biggest companies in the world in doing so. And I've created hundreds of jobs in the local, local communities in which we've in which we've operated. And I'm quite proud, quite proudly, even taking one of my companies public on Nasdaq in a Nasdaq IPO and became the largest digital independent digital music distributor in the world, controlling 25% of the content you see on iTunes. I began my company as a regular chocolate company. We have distribution at L.A.X. Airport. You'll even see it at Ralph's supermarkets and in places like the W Hotel, Hard Rock Hotel, Renaissance Hotel and others. I started the cannabis company for reasons that were pretty obvious that the industry needed responsibility and reliability. And my primary objective in producing a product for patients is that of high quality that are effective, taste great or properly labeled tested and most of all have been produced in a facility that complies with state and local health regulations by licensed food managers and food handlers. Safety to our customers and quality of our products is our primary concern. So with recent passage of Mersa, the American Medical Marijuana Regulation and Safety Act recently set forth recent rules and regulations for at the state level. But at the local level, it continues to frustrate us. While the passage of Mersa was a good start to doing things, quote unquote, by the book, the reality is the book is still not completely written, and there's plenty of blank pages in it. And that's why I'm here tonight. You have an opportunity here to start filling in those blank pages, to do the responsible thing, to help guide the industry and do something hard for a change. Doing something new is very, very difficult. This is a teachable moment for you and for us. So we can work cooperatively with the city, with city leaders, with law enforcement, with the community at large to make sure we understand your concerns and can alleviate those concerns in a way that's responsible and benefits the community, that creates jobs and that provides products to the community that is that are safe and tested. I believe this kind of reciprocal cooperation will result in the creation of a template that will become the model for which all city governments in the state and, frankly, in the nation that their will and that they will envy and replicate. So I really urge you to pass this ordinance before you include a provision that allows for manufacturing of edibles and other derivative products in the city of Long Beach. Thank you for listening.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Hello. My name is Bill Napier. Honorable City Council. I've decided, and I think Long Beach will back me up. We'll take two punch ups. And I also want to thank you very much for approving the Breakwater study. Surfing USA. And we'll take to pot shops. And, uh, so we don't have to go out of city further than were able to go by bus or most certainly can't bike it or walk it. And, uh. Two pork chops, please. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Mayor Council members. It is with great sadness that I had to pin this. But I must tell you of my bitter disappointment with this council and the charade that's been playing out now for seven years. My engagement in legalizing medical marijuana and the other civic affairs in Long Beach at this later stage in my life have has left me with this notion that there really is no adherence to constituents needs and wants by this council. A recent 74% approval by ballot and over 30 to 43000 signatures must mean nothing to this Council except neat soundbites and more lip service to patients for 1/2. Think patients needs, not stoners needs. This is medicine, period. Me I'm just a Woodstock generation kid and an all around believer in the idealism of a possibility of a better tomorrow. I kept my hopes alive throughout six decades. To see my country, who I love and I cherish, become more enlightened as I age. But it is now clear that it's not going to be seen in my lifetime. The cause of marijuana legalization that I took up officially 36 years ago is still being discussed in many circles with that decidedly racist intellectual dishonesty of the 1930s . In some California cities, they are rushing to ban the evil that marijuana may bring to their city. Sadly, we're calling it the ban a palooza. This rush to prohibition does nothing to take marijuana away from the cartels, gangs, teens, and the ever growing black market. Again, with the ban, the city loses all control and the tax money that would be generated. Every business report I read says Long Beach needs more money. Now, I might not mind so much, but I've told you this before. Our surgeon general, our would be surgeon general. Sanjay Gupta has connected the dots. Weed number three, CNN special available on demand. He stated For the world to hear that PTSD symptoms can potentially be mitigated by medical grade marijuana. For heaven's sake. Even the VA has recently acknowledged that this medicine should be allowed for vets in states that permit marijuana medical marijuana. However, we have seen the VA bureaucracy and I can imagine it'll take 3 to 4 more years before that gets implemented. But how many vets will commit suicide while Long Beach waits? Why insist that a vet in need must act in a criminal manner in order to receive the herbal medicine that works for him or her? Mind you, this is at the same time as the VA is now documenting the effectiveness of PTSD, PTSD mitigation. Additionally, it is now documented that marijuana can help vets and others to break the stranglehold of alcohol, cigarets and prescription drugs. Think about the devastating pain pills that lead to heroin. L.A. Times. So still, reports evolve as I speak to you that an average of 22 vets per day kill themselves. My adult sons went before Ray Gavlak and Tonya Urunga initially in August of 2009 to beg for med pot rules, begging for VA rules. And this is where we're at today. Just two more seconds, sir. These patients are your friends and your neighbors. Every occupation, every walk of life is in the medical marijuana community. Please stop conflating legitimate medical marijuana patients and perhaps your own beliefs. Thank you, sir. Only stoner teens will be the winners. Again, I say these editorials.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. We're going to wrap it up. Okay.
Speaker 4: These editorials came out over and over saying we next time we got to get it right.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir.
Speaker 4: Times did we get it right?
Speaker 0: Thank you very much, sir.
Speaker 4: We'll see.
Speaker 0: Next speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Good evening. It's an honor to be here. My name is Kyle Turley. I'm a founding member of a group called the Gridiron Cannabis Coalition. I played ten years in the National Football League. One of my partners is Jeff Chase, was one of the original dispensary owners here in Long Beach just last year. A little over a year ago, I moved back to California from Nashville, Tennessee, to take part, particularly as I am from here. So that's another reason. But to take part particular in the medical marijuana program, playing football in the National Football League brought me a number of ailments, brought our community a number of ailments. My brothers have suffered greatly because of their commitment to this dream. If we want to continue to have our children fight for these dreams, to be soldiers, to be football players, and to accomplish these great goals, we need to think about what it is we are giving them to help them along their way. Unfortunately, because of some of these career choices, this leads to long addictions, to prescription medications. Myself personally, 20 year addiction, to prescription medications that went from pain killers to psych meds to anti-inflammatories, and then into psych medications for the last seven years. And dealing with this brain injury that we now are starting to understand, if it was not for cannabis, I would not be standing here today. I would likely be standing next to my friend Junior Sayer, who is not with us, because he was not allowed to understand what cannabis could do for his brain. We heard a lot of things tonight about why this needs to happen in Long Beach, why that needs to happen to Long Beach with climate control. Alzheimer's was a discussion. There is no current medication in western medicine that addresses Alzheimer's disease like cannabis. Cannabis has been shown to reduce and stop the progression of Alzheimer's disease in multiple studies. The fact that in California and I've come back from Tennessee that we're having this conversation, it's quite archaic to me, to be honest. But at the end of the day, I hear a lot of things leading to kicking the can down the road. This no longer needs to exist. There is an initiative on the ballot to move forward, to have something in place and something is better than nothing. I urge the Council to push forward on this ballot, to allow these dispensaries, the new initiative to move forward so that something can be established, much like has been talked wildly about our health care model and that it needs to be improved. But nobody wants to throw it out because it's helping people. Cannabis will save football and it will save many communities, Long Beach included. I appreciate your time. Thank you for your understanding.
Speaker 4: And your ear.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Good evening, Mayor and City Council. I'm Jack Smith. I live at 240 Chestnut Avenue in the first district. I was on the Cannabis Task Port Task Force representing the second district, which is where I lived at the time last summer. Now living in the first district. I don't have a marijuana business. I don't intend to have a marijuana business. I thankfully don't need the medicine that cannabis provides. I don't intend to use it recreationally. My goal and intent in all the attention I've been paying to this effort has been to make sure that our neighborhoods were safe and that these businesses were not a nuisance in the neighborhood. That's why I've worked so hard to help create some regulations that I believe accomplish that while accommodating the needs of medical marijuana in Long Beach. One of the things that I think could be modified now. I usually don't talk if I know I'm going to lose. And I've already counted five votes for the ban. I don't call that a lose. That's always an option since day one to continue the ban. So anyway, the point is I usually don't talk that there's no point in talking, but today I'm going to offer a potential change to the proposed ordinance for you to consider. That might streamline it just a little bit. I was glad Councilmember Price asked the question about the process of changing between a delivery and into a storefront. I believe if you treated the SIU process and the vetting process, that is quite complicated and lengthy and expensive in creating storefront sites. Who could only do delivery. That are then reevaluated in the six month time period. And the only change that has to happen is that delivery is permitted. It wouldn't have to be a modification of the cup. It would just be at that point now. Now, I mean, now that you can have a storefront, you can open your doors. It would be the exact same rules and regulations as if it was a retail operation. But they can't open their doors. They can only.
Speaker 8: Deliver. And when they.
Speaker 4: Have behaved appropriately, come back. And very simply and quickly be able to open their doors for business, then the idea of eventually being able to have as many marijuana businesses as you specify. Right now you're saying seven. At that point, you might have evaluated something enough to know that a different number is appropriate. So I think that you have an ordinance in front of you now that can be slightly modified to clarify that process, process to make it a little more streamlined. Also, the businesses would not have to be a delivery business and in a totally different process for a retail business. The same business could continue in this city, having demonstrated that they're a good business for our city. I hate to see you punt. It is Super Bowl week, though, so punt, if you will. And I would encourage you to.
Speaker 8: Pass the ordinance that you.
Speaker 4: Have with some minor modifications. Thanks.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Jack. Next speaker for final speaker.
Speaker 4: When he was somebody left to phone or something up here present for the. Excuse me. I hope you've all read The Beachcomber. I hope you've all been reading The Beachcomber. I know Ms.. Price thinks Mr. Downing is very dangerous and has said so. I believe she's very dangerous as a prohibitionist. I believe we should recall our city attorney.
Speaker 8: For giving erroneous advice to this council and previous councils.
Speaker 4: By Mr. Shannon as well. He's followed the same line as with Mr. Shannon and the reason we've had 20 years. Of. No action, really. It's because of the prohibitionists inordinate influence over this council. And our local criminal justice membership.
Speaker 8: We need to do something about this, but it isn't what you're doing.
Speaker 4: You need to excuse yourselves from the discussion and.
Speaker 8: Follow state law only. I believe state law says that the dispensary, the the delivery service must be connected to a dispensary. So to have just delivery services doesn't work.
Speaker 4: It won't work. Fiscal responsibility.
Speaker 8: This Council and previous councils and our law enforcement.
Speaker 4: Agency, the Long Beach Police Department, have spent billions. Billions. To avoid dealing.
Speaker 8: With this issue. To keep a ban in place.
Speaker 4: That's the prohibitionist agenda. The prohibitionist agenda is corruption. Clearly it's corruption. Read The Beachcomber if you want to know what's going on in City Hall. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Next beaker, please.
Speaker 4: My name is Nicholas Khemka. I live in the second district. Long Beach has recently developed a program for delivery of medical marijuana, and I applaud the city for that. For many years. There's been a lot of hand-waving by some people behind me, by some people in front of me about safe access. I believe delivery does provide safe access, safe access for patients, safe access for other people who are not users. But in reality, for a lot of people, it's not about safe access, it's about profit. Clearly, some of the people behind me profit from this. And if anybody in front of me profits from it, it conforms to the definition of the elements of malfeasance as defined by appellate courts. My second and last point is that the size of the Long Beach Police Department has decreased from about a thousand officers to 700, and that's 300 officers less to deal with documented cases of murders. Attempted murders, arson, illegal drug use and sales. Assaults, batteries and large numbers of property crimes. And note that this also lowers our property values and it interferes with other people's constitutional rights to live peacefully and safely. Allowing storefront storefront dispensaries to be reestablished. Might also meet some of the definitions of malfeasance. And this, in turn, opens up the city to lawsuits. And that's taxpayer money. I beg the city to adopt a delivery only model. For marijuana, medical marijuana. And that safe access for patients and it's safe for everybody else. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Final speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Hi, my name's Stephanie Dawson. So I'm a resident district to my.
Speaker 4: Address is on file. I'm going to be very brief.
Speaker 8: The Rand Corporation recently came out with a very expansive study that surveyed both medical and recreational patients. I think going forward for both for regulation purposes and for whatever audience comes out of this this process, again, I would be in strict opposition to the current audits that that's being proposed for a myriad of reasons. One of which being, if you look at the particular at this survey that the RAND Corporation recently concluded, the particular section on concentrates and edible production within the city of Long Beach is not going to be serving the interest of patients. One of the things that they came out that one of the interesting things that came out of this because of the survey was a result showing that medical patients, one, spend more money on their own on their weekly amount of marijuana than admitted recreational users, and they are more likely to book to use vaporizers and edibles as a means of consumption, something in the range of 70% for both vaporizing and edibles versus 90% for smoking flower, which is mostly associated with recreational use. This means that without a clear manufacturing license or the ability availability of commercial kitchens under an ordinance, a license activity that under. So, by the way, we're going to be creating a negative environment that will more likely suit recreational users than actual legitimate qualified medical patients. That is the present ordinance as constructed. I urge you, please, to disregard it entirely and to start anew that you have a good day.
Speaker 0: Thank you. With that, I'm going to go back to the council. There is a motion and a second by Councilmember Richardson to receive and file, which would essentially not move forward with the ordinance. And a second by Vice Mayor Lowenthal, please, Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 5: Terms. If the city council adopted an ordinance that had buffer zones in place for brick and mortar operations and a subsequent ballot initiative was passed hypothetically with no buffer zones or less buffer zones. What would happen then?
Speaker 11: In that hypothetical, the buffer zones would disappear the in if if the ordinance that we had on the books was inconsistent with the one that was voted on, then the the voted on measure would take precedence.
Speaker 5: So regardless of what is in place prior to a ballot initiative. Early speak the. Because it would be inconsistent with the ordinance. Presumably that would be the reason for the ballot initiative, correct? Okay, great. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Bye. Okay. Vice Mayor Lowenthal.
Speaker 2: Thank you. And I appreciate Councilman Councilwoman Price's questions. I don't want there to be a supposition that the ballot measure would have taken place if this council had actually developed a good policy. A lot of the partners that are motivated behind the ballot measure were also working with this council very honestly and very sincerely to develop a policy, come up with the buffer zones, all of which had agreement and general agreement. So none of that. Was in place and therefore folks are going to the ballot measures. So I don't want us to be left with this impression that this ballot measure was going to happen anyway. So it's okay. Whatever policy we had, if we had a good policy, I assure you, no one would have gone to the ballot. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 5: A quick question about the ballot information, Mr. Mays, you said you would be drafting some sort of information for us. When would that be likely to come back? Do we have to formally ask you at this time?
Speaker 11: But I hopefully would be able to prepare that by next week and send it to you on and off. And the item and it would basically just describe what the ballot initiative, the local ballot initiative process was.
Speaker 1: Okay. So that would.
Speaker 5: Be by next.
Speaker 1: Week or so. Thank you.
Speaker 0: A county councilman Richardson.
Speaker 8: Just want to be clear, the motion here that I or doesn't and my comments haven't said that I plan on or I haven't heard from the City Council that it plans on placing an item on the agenda. What I said was what I said was I you know, I have heard of initiatives happening both in the state and locally around this issue. To clarify my position. I don't think if if an idea was a good idea, it's okay to bear a fiscal impact if it is, you know, additional hours in the library, if it is expanding summer hours for be safe. Those things all have a fiscal impact. And I'm okay with that because those are good ideas that it sound public policy. What I'm saying here is if that's not if that there's not true consensus, if no one on the council is truly expressing something that's a true compromise motion, then we shouldn't proceed on this process. I'm not saying anything about a ballot measure in the future. If someone puts forth a ballot measure, I honestly believe that if we put forth sound public policy, we probably wouldn't be in a position where we hear from the community about ballot measures. So I just want to be clear. I'm not saying that we should stop this and then start a ballot initiative on behalf of the city council.
Speaker 0: Okay. So that is that they're going to go and go to a vote, which is Councilmember Richardson's motion to receive and file. How I was just alerted by the clerk that the rebooting the voting system, is that correct? It's still not rebooted. Okay. So I'm going to I'm going to have to take a hand vote.
Speaker 11: Just to be clear, Mayor, this would be the substitute motion, correct?
Speaker 0: This is a substitute motion to receive and file. And Mr. Mays, the city clerk, told me that the voting machine is not working. So which would do a hand vote or.
Speaker 11: A hand vote would be fine.
Speaker 0: Okay. So what we're going to do then is, is counsel. So if you are in favor of the motion, which is the substitute motion to receive and file. Oh, the voting is a backup. Okay, just kidding. So forget that. Sorry. Is the motion back? Is the motion loaded, Madam Clerk? Okay. Motion is loaded. Councilman Richardson's motion substitute members. Please go and cast your votes on the motion.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Motion carries. Thank you. And with that, we're going to go ahead and go to the next item, Madam Clerk. | Ordinance | WITHDRAWN
Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by adding Chapter 21.66; and by repealing Chapter 5.89, all relating to Medical Marijuana; declaring the urgency thereof and declaring that this ordinance shall take effect immediately, read and adopted as read. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02022016_16-0083 | Speaker 1: Item number seven. Report from Disaster Preparedness and Emergency Communications. Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving the emergency operations plan citywide.
Speaker 0: Councilman Austin. Is there any public comment on the item?
Speaker 4: Please come down. Larry. You're good. You work as the address. I am suggesting that. At this point, the city should undertake the following action. They did return the responsibility of the police dispatch. To the police department. And the fire dispatch to the fire department. Period. Over the last year, I've been before this council and also through one of the police review commissions or whatever else. There's a serious lack of training. Relative to. The operators that are answering the phone. I don't know where that is. And we didn't have that much of a problem until this merging. So I'm suggesting that you give very serious consideration to returning the. Communication paradigms. To the police department. They will have the direct responsibility. And the fire department will have their direct responsibility. Quite frankly, I have absolutely no confidence that these people that the present paradigm would be able to handle an efficient manner, a major disaster period. So before you rubber stamp this, I think this needs to be given very careful consideration. I'm not sure how often you call, but there's it's an absolute absurdity, period. They have no cognitive skills relative to what needs to be done. In my view. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Got some roasted.
Speaker 7: Yes, Mr. Mayor, I'd like to get a brief staff report on this shirt.
Speaker 4: Mr. West. Reggie Harrison. Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council. The item before you.
Speaker 8: Is to adopt a resolution approving the emergency operations plans and operate and authorizing the city manager to amend and update the plan on a periodic basis. The while the causes of emergencies vary greatly.
Speaker 4: Earthquakes, floods, tsunamis those.
Speaker 8: Impacts that we encounter with these various emergencies, the potential effects of the emergencies do not change a lot in terms of loss of property, loss of life, sheltering needs.
Speaker 4: Etc.. So those things.
Speaker 8: Are constant when we deal with an emergency. And so what the emergency operations plan does is it provides an organizational framework by which we can manage these kinds of disasters.
Speaker 4: The the the plan.
Speaker 8: Defines the responsibilities for city staff. Who is responsible for notifying the public of a disaster? Who is responsible? Who is responsible for providing for food and.
Speaker 4: Shelter of residence?
Speaker 8: Who is responsible for coordinating necessary resources through the county and through the and through the state?
Speaker 4: So our plan.
Speaker 8: Identifies all of those responsibilities that act. It authorizes the activation of the.
Speaker 4: Emergency operations center, as well as the expanded duties of.
Speaker 8: Designated staff. As we talked earlier about the the newly approved emergency procurement. Documents that we've recently entered into. It also positions the city by having a plan in place that positions the city to be in a better place for.
Speaker 4: Reimbursement for FEMA in terms of grants and.
Speaker 8: Reimbursement for our expenses associated with disasters.
Speaker 4: So it puts us in a position where able to identify a plan that we have in process. We've we've coordinated the plan with all.
Speaker 8: Of the city, with all the city departments. We have also coordinated our plans with the County Office of Emergency Management, as well as with the State Office of Emergency Services as well. So our plan, we believe, follows all of the FEMA guidelines and we request your approval for it.
Speaker 4: And that concludes staff's report.
Speaker 0: Thank you. There's a motion in a second. Members, please cast your votes. We already did. Public comment. Motion carries an excited please. | Resolution | Recommendation to adopt resolution approving the Emergency Operations Plan; and authorize City Manager to amend and update the Plan on a periodic basis or as requested by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02022016_16-0091 | Speaker 0: Thank you. There's a motion in a second. Members, please cast your votes. We already did. Public comment. Motion carries an excited please.
Speaker 1: A report from Economic and Property Development and Financial Management recommendation to execute an early works agreement between the city, the harbor department and plenary more civic partners to continue the design development of the Civic Center project for a limited period of time. District two.
Speaker 0: Okay. Any public comment on the item? Come forward, please.
Speaker 4: Very good. You click as the address. I sent you guys each an email. I don't know if you have seen that access and you'll see it as super over Super Bowl day. NBC Today they had the Academy Award winning Marie actress Helen Mirren, who is going to be doing the Super Bowl spot for a Budweiser. And the thrust of it they are to be commended for it is they're going after drunk drivers. And essentially she spends 15. She spends the entire I don't know if it's two or 3 minutes essentially creating a new orifice in the rear end of someone that's drunk. And she concluded at the end that. Drunk people are so bad. That if they died and left their. Brain to medical science, it would be rejected. And that immediately, the moment she had mentioned that, I thought of this council relative to embracing this buffoonery. Relative to the City Hall Project. The only intelligent way to approach this is I have mentioned the last couple of meetings is one. On this terra firma here. We build two economic engines, a hotel and office building. Number two, the port, the city hall, together with the Port Administration building, will be built back out in the port period. And then the school, the main library will be interface with the Paradine over the art school, so forth, which will name after Marian Anderson. That's the only intelligent way to do this. And I was very glad to. And that was an excellent retreat you had. And I remind you of what you were cautioned about from the bond expert relative to your. Well turned out to be your personal exposure in this day and age. All the words good, bad and ugly have to be out there. Know, it's my understanding that in closed session you have been advised that there is nothing wrong with this building in terms of earthquake stability, so forth. And I find it very difficult to believe that you'd be able to put a bond out there, not only for this, but for anything else, if you were to follow a course of action. That would suggest that your brain has either been impacted, if not by alcohol, by maybe that which. Is Pablo in Flint, Michigan, or Porter Ranch? Very it. Rethink your for your own financial stake.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Mr. Goodyear.
Speaker 4: Check it out with your spouse.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Good evening. My name is Roger Suarez. I represent the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. I'm here to speak on this issue. The city is gambling with large sums of taxpayer money. Here on this Early Works Agreement motion, the city management is solely responsible for being in this predicament. The AM was ready to come to the table last year at the beginning of October and made requests for information early on. City management was unresponsive to our requests to meet and confer at this time. At that time. And it wasn't until just recently that the majority of the information was provided after being strung out in piecemeal fashion for months. We still can't get answers to some of our questions as these managers at the table don't seem to know the answers and don't know who to get these answers from. This lack of transparency and willingness, ability to bargain in good faith in the prescribed manner is what led us to this predicament, not the IAM or its members. You can build your Taj Mahal while city workers will continue to qualify for food stamps and you can continue to manipulate the work hours so they don't qualify for the Affordable Care Act. The act. The act. Excuse me? The act actions you are being asked to sign off are are reprehensible. Please honor the oath you took. To protect the community, the city. And more importantly, your own labor force your employees. Stop sanctioning whatever the city manager wants you to do. You're the council. It is your decision. Mr. Work, Mr. West works at your pleasure, not the other way around. The IAM continues to be ready to meet and confer in good faith. We've got a problem here and it seems that the problem has been put on our shoulders. We're the ones that are not cooperating. We're being asked. To go along with an agreement that has taken place. Do you give up? Our work rights to the new civic, civic, civic project for 41 years. We weren't asked to be a part of that. Now you're asking this community to pay $1 million, $900,000 a month so that you can preserve some commitment and some building funds a month. And if you look at the fiscal impact of the letter that stated today that you have before you from the city manager that he approved, the fiscal.
Speaker 0: Impact says.
Speaker 4: There's no guarantee that you're going to get that money back. It's right there in black and white. This is a huge gamble. It's $1,000,000 a month. I ask you to really think about this? Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. There's emotion and sickened on the floor to approve the agreement.
Speaker 4: Mayor Garcia? Yes. Sorry to interrupt. If I could do a couple of small changes to the early works agreement. May 1st is a Sunday. We'd like to modify the Early Works Agreement to expire April 29th, which is a Friday. Secondly, plenary more is in the process of changing its name, so we'd like to have the early works agreement effective for successors and assigns as well. And that's it. Okay.
Speaker 0: Council made a note of those two changes. There's a motion on the floor. Members, please go and cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Next item, please. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager to execute an Early Works Agreement between the City, the Harbor Department and Plenary Edgemoor Civic Partners, LLC, to continue the design development of the Civic Center project for a limited period of time. (District 2) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02022016_16-0084 | Speaker 1: Report firm Financial Management and Development Services recommendation to receive supporting documentation and to the record regarding the Equity, the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act. Public Hearing and adopt resolution approving the issuance of multifamily housing revenue bonds. District six.
Speaker 0: Is there any public comment on the item? Mr. Greer.
Speaker 4: I. Part of my comments echo what I told the council in Andrews last Saturday and so forth. I took Atlantic up to the to the meeting and I generally don't go up that route because it's not close to the Marine. I'm not around that area very much, but I was very impressed, very impressed with the housing that starts at Atlantic and PCH, then going north for about 8 to 10 blocks. It looked like a housing section that you would see any place in Belmont Shore or any other mills or any other place and so forth. And if this mirrors that, I think it's well worthwhile. However, however, I still have the same concerns relative to this is a bond measure. Period. And your exposure is tremendous given the kleptocracy, the corruption. Not only in the state of California that flows down into this city, which is there's a few fountain heads of that here, period . And if you didn't notice, the FBI has now moved into the city of San Francisco relative to the sheriff's department. And that, of course, is the the stomping grounds of she that the United States Circuit Court and the U.S. Ninth Circuit. Opined, was responsible for an epidemic of corruption. Right now, the nexus between that and our mayor is something you're going to have to post on those bonds, if not your individual financial liability, that of your spouse. Is in jeopardy. So I would suggest that you check and the smile from the Peter Principle of city manager will not protect you. I would suggest you seek your own counsel, period. For the protection of your family as well as the cities. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. There's a motion and a second. Members, please cast your votes.
Speaker 4: Krispy Kreme.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Next item, please. | Resolution | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record regarding the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act public hearing; and adopt resolution approving the issuance of multi-family housing revenue bonds by the California Municipal Finance Authority, to benefit a partnership to be formed by Mercy Housing California, a nonprofit corporation, in an amount not to exceed $40,000,000. (District 6) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_02022016_15-1336 | Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: 13.
Speaker 1: Communication from Councilwoman, Mango Chair and Economic Development and Finance Committee recommendation to approve the establishment of a Veterans Affairs Commission and declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code relating to establishing a Veterans Affairs Commission. Read the first time and laid over for the next regular meeting of the City Council for Final Reading Citywide.
Speaker 0: There's a motion and a second councilman, Mongo.
Speaker 1: I'm just excited that the veterans will have a seat at the table. Our committee considered Rex Richard Councilmember Richardson's suggestion. We think it's an excellent one. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Councilman Richardson. He's fine.
Speaker 8: So thank you so much. The Eady enough committee for processing this and bringing it forward. I think it's certainly worthwhile and it seemed like low hanging fruit. This is one of the first things we took on when the new counsel came to office. I know that it took us a while because we had to go through the budget. There was some fiscal impact, but it made a lot of sense to do and it was a good idea. So I'm happy you finally made it to this step. Thank you so much. Let's get some commissioners, get it online and get some commissioners appointed.
Speaker 0: Any public comment on the item signal? Please cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Item 15. | Ordinance | Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by adding Chapter 2.60 establishing a Veterans Affairs Commission, read and adopted as read. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01262016_16-0067 | Speaker 3: So thank you, guys. If I can have the curve, please read the first item.
Speaker 4: Communication from Councilwoman Price. Councilwoman Gonzalez. Vice Mayor Lowenthal. Councilwoman Andrews. Recommendation to request the city manager to report back in 90 days on the feasibility of establishing a percent for arts policy as an ongoing funding source for public art in the city.
Speaker 3: Thank you. I'm going to turn this over to Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 6: Thank you. This agenda item actually was initiated by you, Mr. Mayor, during your comments at the state of the city. So I want to thank you for initiating this item in this conversation and getting it started. And as you said, at the state of the city and as I wholeheartedly agree, a city cannot thrive and be a place where people visit and live and offer exposure to the youth without a strong arts programing, without strong commitment to the arts, and without a wide variety of options in terms of different types of arts that people can enjoy and participate in in the community. So the purpose of this item is really to get the conversation started and to ask our city staff, led by our city manager, to look at all the different models that are adopted around the nation to support arts programing in various cities. And my intent with this particular item is to really focus not on a particular organization or a particular type of art, but really talk about how we can bring about more support for the arts in their totality. Visual arts, theater, arts, music, everything that we would put under the umbrella of arts, we as a city should be supporting, regardless of the organization or the entity or the the person that's pushing it. We really should be focused on how we provide arts programing and arts opportunities for our residents and our communities. So this is obviously something that is very important to me and my council colleagues. On a personal note, my family and I partake in just about every arts opportunity that we have, the opportunity and the and the time to participate in our kids. It's there growing up with arts in their life and they are very lucky to live in a city like Long Beach that has so many great programs already and so much potential for additional growth and outreach in terms of the great work that we already do and that we have the potential to do. So I hope that my colleagues will support this particular item, which really just asks us to be educated further and gives us some options on how we can go about getting funding for the arts. So thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Councilwoman. I know you made that. You made the motion, Councilwoman Gonzalez, to me the second.
Speaker 6: I also want to thank the mayor for this. I think during State of the City, I counted all of the different responsibilities he gave us as a city council. But this is one that I'm most excited about, and I'm glad that Councilwoman Price brought this forward, and we had the support of our other council colleagues in bringing this forward. I, too personally share the passion of arts and theater. I serve on the board of the ICI tea. I absolutely love discussing art and music with a lot of our downtown residents. I just did my first my holiday pictures with my family in front of the Powell mural, because I just absolutely love the fact that we have these places here in in the city. I'm going to have a first birthday I made in Long Beach. So that's also very exciting. And I think all of you here collectively have given so much to the arts and have made our local community so much more vibrant than it than it can be. And I see so much more potential with that. So I am wholeheartedly as well, like Councilwoman Pryce supporting this item. I think it's an opportunity and an avenue for us to get more information back to see what is possible. I know with our former blue ribbon committee there have been discussions. Our Arts Council, our local grassroots community associations like Kalb. I see a friend here and so many of you have also participated in our local events. So this may be an opportunity as well to see how we can support continuing local events like Day of the Dead and like other events that have happened so very often in our city. So I look forward to this. I look forward to seeing the information come back from our city management staff. And I thank you all for being here.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Vice Mayor Lowenthal.
Speaker 9: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I wanted to thank Councilwoman Price for including me. In this motion, many of you in the audience have been working on having the city. Adopt and include an envelop more of the arts in the various projects that we're able to do. And as many of you know, we had an opportunity to do that when we had redevelopment and when we were doing far more projects. And you have, in the absence of that, found ways to continue to show a vibrancy in our community through the arts. We can feel that in the texture of the different projects are working on. So I'm looking forward to finding a way for us to include this as part of just the way we operate. It needs to be a part of the way we operate. And I know that it's the present for the arts program is active in at least 27 states around this country. There's no reason why the city of Long Beach can't do it. And I look forward to hearing back the different options on how we can bring this back because we won't have redevelopment back. And so we'll have to look to ourselves to be able to find this beauty and enrichment and culture in all of our public facing efforts. And and for that, I thank you thank you for your patience and your guidance on this issue. Thanks.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Vice Mayor. Next up is Councilmember Yaw Ringo.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Mayor. Ah, gracious. Right. Art, for art's sake, MGM, the lion. I want to thank the mayor and council members Priceless Northern Solace and Andrews for bringing this forward. The art is huge in terms of not only Long Beach, but for our communities as a whole. Having been a former community college trustee. I also see the importance of programs in our schools, in our in our K-12, as well as in our community college and in our university. Because that's how we learn and that's how we keep students busy. I don't think I need to harp on the fact that when we keep young people busy with either playing music or acting in theater or painting or doing any of the numerous parts of arts and crafts and and other things that are that are important in the arts world, that we lower crime, we we divert their their attention from hanging out and being not laden with gangs and making them do something creative or helping them do something creative. So I would want to.
Speaker 2: Include.
Speaker 7: In this study that as we move forward, if we can connect with with the schools, with the K-12 and the community college and university to help them with their programs. We hear every year that when there are budget cuts in education, one of the first programs to go always in the schools are arts programs. And so we need to find a way to support them as well in regards to being able to sustain their programs and keep them going and not have those programs be the first to go with it because it's a low lying fruit. We need to keep arts is important. It's important to our community and it's important to public safety as well as all aspects of our community life. So. Just want to throw that out there in terms of when we continue with the study city manager, if we can also be inclusionary of our educational entities as well.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Councilman Andrews.
Speaker 2: Yes. Thank you, Mia. You know, first of all, I want to thank Councilwoman Price for asking me to sign on to this item. You have a number of great artists living in Essex this week, and I know that they would agree with me in saying that public art is very much needed in our city. It creates an attachment to one community and inspires others. It also reflects the unique diversity that Long Beach is made up of. With that said, I'm looking forward to hear a report back from our city manager. Thank you very much.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Councilmember Richards.
Speaker 5: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I want to thank Mayor Garcia for introducing this idea. I want to thank our council colleagues for bringing this forward. All of the very familiar faces we see in the audience who are engaged in one thing or the other related to art. I personally believe that art is a core and critical element to any urban revitalization, urban renewal effort, and we throw this term around all the time. Uptown Renaissance art is core to this, is key to this. I unequivocally support this. I think public art also sends a message to the public that, you know, you know, we are alive, we're vibrant, we are engaging, we are communicating. I'm looking forward to seeing the results of this feasibility. But what I'm really looking forward to is figuring out creative ways to utilize art and specifically public art as a tool to help revitalize some of our neighborhoods, like I've seen in Philadelphia has a mural arts project, which is really cool, where it's like areas of town that had a bunch of vacant space and blight. And they began painting murals. And now they have one of the best mural programs in the nation where you can literally go and see 4050 murals is a month backlog just to go to these neighborhoods no one would ever enter in just to see, you know, 70 foot mural of Wilt Chamberlain or whatever. Right. Really cool art. So this is this is what I see as a as an effort for us to get serious about art the way Philadelphia has. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 4: I know I've met with some of you and talked with others of you at community events. And I think that one thing that is constantly forgotten, but not in my mind, is the impact and role that arts play in our economy. Arts are linked to jobs. Arts are linked to thriving business corridors. Arts are linked. And I don't just mean arts in the typical way that some people believe a mural or a sculpture. Though I would have appreciated an ice sculpture in the median at Wardlow instead of bike racks which were controversial. I mean, it would have been great to have had a fun to pull from at that time. It's also important the arts that we talk about that are linked to our job readiness programs and the arts that are linked to our we go to programs and many of you have been partners in a lot of that. And so I first want to thank you for all you've already done. Many of you know that there's hard budget times ahead and we have to look at what we get a return on investment with. And many of you know that I've written some some things on the impact that the arts have on the economy and jobs . And so I believe arts are an area similar to infrastructure where you get that return on investment more quickly because it really impacts the neighborhoods more quickly with those things. So thank you to each and every one of you if you haven't already read the L.A. Aces report on how arts drive the economy and museums drive the economy and tourism. Please do. It's remarkable, and I hope that it's all in our minds and ready to go when we have to make these tough decisions.
Speaker 3: Thank you. And Councilmember Austin.
Speaker 1: Thankfully and I think I'm last, but I wanted to also weigh in and thank the mayor and my council colleagues for bringing this item forward. Creativity drives everything in our city, particularly today. But I think arts also help us maintain a balance here in the city of Long Beach. And, you know, it's so part so much part of our identity and our DNA as a city to have creative residents, but to also to to honor and and support creative efforts of artists of all types in our city. In Eighth District, we also obviously have the Expo Arts Center, where we we profile art and we try to push a lot of events to to bring the community into who can benefit from such arts. We have Long Beach Arts and I mean, obviously we're extremely supportive of our Arts Council City wide. I'd just like to just echo all of the comments that have been made here and and ask the staff in their, their efforts to provide us a report back on options that you be artistic and creative because we understand that this may not be something that is a line item in our general fund, but there are, I think, options out there that will will meet that that need as well. And so I would just ask that you do that and you know, thank you for the arts community for coming out and being supportive of this. If it's 1%, we'll figure it out. Thank you very much.
Speaker 3: Thank you. So I'm going to make a few comments before we go to public comment, which we'll do here in in a minute. But let me just first start off by thanking Councilwoman Pryce, as well as Vice Mayor Lowenthal and Councilwoman Gonzales and Councilman Andrews for authoring this item. I think that for a lot of you out there and I know most of most of you that are out there, this is something we've been talking about now for probably a good year, a little over a year. And it was a commitment I think I made to all of you early on that we would get here and that this was important not just for me personally, but really for the city and every great. City in America has a thriving art scene. That's just a fact. And you can't have a successful city without artists being a important part of that and and the culture that comes with with artists. I want to just begin by saying thank you, because I know that we're passing an agenda item tonight, but it's also a culmination of a lot of work. And I don't want to, you know, pass on the night without recognizing some of the efforts that actually got to this point because this didn't happen. You know, just because I woke up one morning and wrote it into a speech, it happened because a lot of people worked really hard for many years to advocate for this, and sometimes with not a lot of support and other times with community grassroots support. And I remember the blue ribbon commission that was started years ago, maybe five or six years ago, that made a recommendation in this direction. I think about the recent Arts Council conversation around 1% and the information and report that came out of that study as well. And I would hope also, Mr. West, that as we do the study and you kind of look at best practices, that we look at those two recent contributions to the debate as starting points as far as ideas as well. And so I think what the we'll make sure that that's something that that's included. And I also want to just thank you for, you know, keeping the the hopes alive. It's been a I think, both exciting but also very difficult few years for the arts. And there's a lot of transition happening. I mean, the economy is better. We're starting to see some good news coming out of of people reinvesting. But there's still a lot of support. And 1% for the arts program, by the way, is very common in most large cities in the United States. This is not a unique phenomenon. This is this is excelled in most big cities. And we had tight hours in the past directly to our redevelopment agency fund. Most cities weren't doing that. And so we did that for us. And it worked for us for a time. You know, it could have worked better in many ways, but it was what it did, its job in some respects. And now we don't have any sort of percent for the arts now. That's not to say that the city doesn't commit itself every year to putting money towards the arts. And it does. And in fact, in the last two budgets I've proposed and this Council has been affirmatively increased modestly, but increased funding for the arts, which I want to thank the Council for doing for the last two years as well. And so what we're really hoping is that and I think what Councilman Price mentioned is we're going to take a broad look at what a 1% for the arts policy to get, kind of what the best what the best ones out there are. So we can maximize this into something that really works for us. The more that we can do, the more inclusive it is. I think we all agree is better and we want it. We want to have the model 1% for the arts program in the country. We want this to be the model for for the country. And just to. And just to close, I think that what's exciting to me is that this program should really be about all of the arts. And it's it's not just, you know, it's not just the symphony and the Long Beach Museum and I city and the opera , but it's also Cal State, Long Beach and the University Art Museum over there and the work they're doing. And it's also. KALB And the individual artists that are kind of working. Some of the guerrilla artists that are out there and doing other work, you know, in the neighborhood. So I think it's really for for everyone. And I think a good 1% for the arts program really supports all and whatever we all end up deciding is the funding mechanism and the process will get there. That's not that decision is not done today. That will be done months from now with plenty of opportunity for conversations from there. So just thank you all again. And I'm going to open this up now for for public comment. So please come forward. Just say your name, please. For the record.
Speaker 9: I'm Victoria O'Brien, the executive executive director for the Arts.
Speaker 4: Council for Long Beach. I have the pleasure to work in District one.
Speaker 9: And live in District two. And I'm here just to say such a huge.
Speaker 4: And heartfelt thank you. Mayor Garcia, Vice Mayor.
Speaker 9: Lowenthal, council members, city manager West and.
Speaker 4: Esteemed other staff and leaders here tonight. I could not be more thrilled. We are so appreciative.
Speaker 9: Of your leadership.
Speaker 4: In bringing this item forward.
Speaker 0: And by we, I mean.
Speaker 4: Everybody. Would you all.
Speaker 0: Stand?
Speaker 9: Everybody who is here for the arts tonight.
Speaker 4: Stand. But this is just to show you a small representation of what we believe the feeling.
Speaker 9: Is out there tonight on behalf of the arts and cultural community.
Speaker 4: In Long Beach. Thank you so much.
Speaker 9: This subject has floated ever since.
Speaker 4: The last 1% for the arts went away with the redevelopment agency. As you've.
Speaker 9: Mentioned, it's come up time and time.
Speaker 4: Again in studies and.
Speaker 9: Surveys in research. And so we're just here to say that we will do whatever we can.
Speaker 4: To support, facilitate help in any way that we can to add to the research, to facilitate discussions. We just want to.
Speaker 9: Continue to work with.
Speaker 4: You and to express our appreciation for this great step tonight.
Speaker 6: Thank you very much.
Speaker 3: Thank you very much. Next speaker.
Speaker 2: Please. Excuse me. Good evening, Mayor. City council members and city staff. My name is Antonio Ruiz, publisher of Plaza magazine. Com. I want to thank all of you for considering this motion to explore percent for the arts as a funding stream. I was a member of that Blue Ribbon.
Speaker 7: Task Force where.
Speaker 2: This very issue was discussed, and I'm glad to hear that even though it says in the motion public art, which is traditionally meant a lot of a lot of things to a lot of different people, I'm glad to hear that you're talking about really a very broad definition of it. We did discuss in that task force and in other meetings the the importance of including in that discussion funding to arts for arts, education for artists, community arts organizations, arts support resources, performance and exhibition venues, and a very long list of other needs that we've identified over over time. In addition, the task force recommended that an arts and Culture Trust fund be formed to receive the money and dispersant. And there are numerous models around the country that can be studied. I'm hoping that you'll take a look at those models. Craig Watson, who's the executive director of the California Arts Council and a former executive director of the Arts Council for Long Beach, has indicated that he would be happy to send us more information on trust funds because he, in fact, was the person who brought it to our brought it to the task force. Therefore, I want to thank you again for the motion and thank you for supporting the arts.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Next speaker.
Speaker 2: Please. My name is Mark Zeder. I own a gallery here. A lot of honorable council members. Mr. Mayor and Mr. City Manager. For me and many artists, this is the beginning of a very important conversation. Setting aside percent for art in Long Beach would be a great start. I know that spending money for art is a huge challenge and at the same time it's a great opportunity to make smart choice dialog between art community and the city government is crucial. Art is a nature given people's ability to self express themselves. We know it as visual arts, performing arts, literary arts. No matter how we defined a monetary need for self-expression, it has to do with helping people and people's ability to be engaged in creating art. Kids, youth. Adults and older generations. Hands on creating art. In the past, money for the art.
Speaker 7: Was often.
Speaker 2: Spent on things like public entertainment. Strange looking objects in the middle of our streets or on abstract decorations, questionable space enhancements, and many other things which in result did not help to activate the community in creating art at all. All good inventors, all good intentions were present. However, facilitating the development and maintenance of environments where art processes can be practiced is rarely addressed. Yes, I believe facilitating environment for art is the most important cultural need in Long Beach. Just to make things even more worth of study, one more element a basic requirement to engage in art are love for self-expression, money and space. All in once, please think about the answer to the question How many residents can engage in art right now? Who has that ability to afford space supplies and exhibition location at once? My answer is not enough. Therefore, the role of government support is imperative. Percentage for the art idea is a fantastic start. Myself and many of my artist friends would like to make ourselves.
Speaker 7: Available to all of you.
Speaker 2: For dialog. Let's sit down and work together as a language community.
Speaker 7: That cares about our cultural.
Speaker 2: Reality as a token of an effort to educate and inform. For over a year, every Sunday at a lot of gallery, we host the lecture at 3 p.m. and discussion called What Is Art? It is offered free of charge to anyone interested in the subject. And with you I think you have on your desk introductory page of that class. And of course, you're invited to join. Now lastly, I think society expects people to be creative, competitive and full of passion to work outside the box. Yet the very source of those abilities, the process of creating art, has been neglected. Let's change that forever and for better.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 0: Mr. Moon and the council. Excuse me. I'm Renee Simon, a resident of the third district. I'm here to speak in support of the proposal to establish permanent, consistent funding for the broad range of arts offering in Long Beach. Written Art, performing art, painting, sculpting, dance, design, art. I've got a terrible cold and probably others I can't even put a name to today. As a member of the former redevelopment agency. During the nineties, we created the program of 1% for the arts. As it applied to the downtown area, developers were asked to set aside 1% of their total development costs to provide some kind of public art generally associated. Oh, thank you. Generally associated with their development project, we enlisted the Arts Council of Long Beach as our partner in helping to select and recommend projects. You can see some examples of the result in, for example, the lobby murals in the landmark Square Office Building, which was, I think the first such project, as well as various sculptures along Ocean Boulevard. That program established what can indeed be adapted as a workable model for another funding strategy. To my knowledge, we had no significant resistance from developers. The reason, I believe, was that as investors. In the city, they could see the value of this public art in increasing the value of their properties. Today's issue is somewhat different in seeking a funding strategy for arts programs in general, but I believe the concept is perfectly adaptable . By encouraging the expansion of our strong, diverse arts culture in Long Beach. You'd be increasing the value of investing here, increasing the city's attraction as an arts destination, and increasing the quality of life for all our residents as our city continues to welcome new development. Attaching a percent of that growth for art assures a steady stream of public funding and a strong message that Long Beach finds value in the cultural growth of our city. I would hope that you would consider carefully the two most important elements of such a funding strategy.
Speaker 3: And we're running out of time. So I'm going to let you finish with one more.
Speaker 2: Absolutely. Go ahead.
Speaker 0: One that it will provide consistent, dependable funds for our present and future arts programing. And second, that it reflects the Mayor and City Council's strong policy support of the arts in Long Beach. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you so much, Renee. Next speaker.
Speaker 2: Good evening, council members. My name is Daniel Calzado with Coldwell Banker, Coastal Alliance. I live in Belmont Shore. I want to thank you for the forward thinking of Long Beach and how. The Downtown Association of Long Beach has done a phenomenal job building the downtown area to capitalize on what we're talking about for the arts and give young kids a chance to show their art and create a career doing so, helping their lives for their entire life. I could totally see shutting down Pine Street for one month a night, having downtown Long Beach, Artwalk. It'll help the local economy. All the bars and restaurants. And it'll also be a family affair so local artists can sell their art and have bands playing stuff. I could also see a public gallery where local artists can exhibit their art publicly and also have the chance to sell their art. And if done properly, these two ideas could be cash positive. Everything I'm saying is all to attract vibrant, young, entrepreneurial millennials into this city, which will bring companies and people who want to live here for the rest of their lives. So that's all I wanted to say. Thank you very much.
Speaker 3: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Good evening. My name is Kelly Torello. I'm the executive director of the Long Beach Symphony. I'm also the volunteer president of the board of directors of the Association of California's Symphony Orchestras Helping California's Orchestras Thrive. I've been a proud homeowner in District five for 18 years, and I've lived in districts three and four for a decade before that. But I work in District two. And as you know, the Long Beach Symphony is a world.
Speaker 0: Class.
Speaker 4: Ensemble, the only symphonic orchestra in the region and the seventh largest in the state of California. You may not know that we.
Speaker 9: Serve 50,000 residents of Long Beach every year, 10% of our population.
Speaker 4: From every single one.
Speaker 9: Of your districts that totals tens of millions of.
Speaker 4: Residents over our 80 year lifespan. And we're not going around. We're not going anywhere. We're going to be here a very long time. We are proud to be a major force in this city, in the.
Speaker 0: In the.
Speaker 4: City's arts and cultural offerings. We look forward to expanding and being part of your renaissance to meet greater meet the needs of more Long Beach citizens. And I wanted to thank you so much on.
Speaker 9: Behalf of the board of directors, our musicians.
Speaker 4: And the tens of millions of residents we will serve. Thank you for making this a priority. I personally am offering my services to make sure that our mutual dream comes to fruition. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you so much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Very good. You are fully supportive of this measure. With the exception of a couple of things. First of all, I wouldn't do a 1%. I'd go at 2%. Number two, for immediate funding, easy source will cut the mayor's travel budget by 50% and the council budget by 35%.
Speaker 3: Which is very much.
Speaker 2: I want to make sure that the arts organization and I saw some articles in the paper without engender doing this, that the arts organization comply fully with the California Public Records Act, as well as the Brown Act and keeping any records that may contribute to that. I'm a big fan of opera. And I really think we should push that. And a lot of people mistakenly mistakenly avoid opera because oftentimes it's in a foreign language. You can't understand it. Pavarotti. I think it was about five years before his death demonstrated that you didn't need to understand that language. After he finished, I believe it was don't quote me, I think it turned out and at the Met, he got a tremendous standing ovation, as always. And then he as an encore, segway into and without telling anybody, saying 11 and a half pages at the Hartford New Haven Railroad Times schedule, timetable, and no one knew the difference . As a matter of fact, it was the first time in the recorded history that a two and a half minute standing ovation over the fact that the 605 at a Stanford would be arriving 20 minutes late period. So it makes no difference what the language is. But I think we really should push for opera. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you. We have a great idea if you guys saw the front page of the calendar section of the L.A. Times today. But Lobby Chopper was on the front page of the calendar section of the L.A. Times today. So. But fantastic. Their show right now is amazing. Next speaker.
Speaker 4: Good evening, everybody. Thank you, Mayor Garcia and the city council. My name is Jan Hauer and I'm the president of the board of directors for Long Beach Camerata Singers. We are your choral organization and I have both board members and singers here tonight supporting your measure. We're very grateful that this is being considered, and I think you'll find both economic return on investment when you do your study, as well as return on investment in terms of the city's reputation. So in closing, I would like to say we sing your praises for this measure.
Speaker 3: Thank you, guys, next week.
Speaker 4: Good evening, Mayor. City council members. My name is Tasha Hunter and I am currently on the board of Directors for the Arts Council of Long Beach. I'm proud to be on the board of directors and I want to first say thank you for making this a priority. The 1%, yes, of.
Speaker 9: Course, we would love more.
Speaker 4: But thank you. That is a tremendous effort. I also have the honor of currently working with Long Beach Community College, where I see so many students every day who are artists and to know that they potentially have a job in the arts because we're raising community youth that are so creative right now. I have one right here that is a young artist and I can say without the arts, there's a lot of energy that could be spent in a bunch of different ways that could not be could be in effective ways. But the arts help strengthen young people, all people. And bringing in Long Beach is so beautiful all the way around and seeing the joys in the arts that we have here, it will not only bring people from other parts of the community, other parts of the city, state, country. If we continue this, it will definitely be a premier destination place like some other cities that we have. So I want to say thank you and I want to let you know that Long Beach and art matters.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 10: Hello. Mayor Garcia and council members. My name is Sayan Supersu. I'm a member of the Arts Council here, the Language Arts. I also work with the Cambodian community and partnering with the Arts Exchange. So I want to give you a personal story about how art saved my life when I was growing up here in the nineties. If you've been around a long beach that long, you know what took place at that time. So I'm not going to go into detail about it. But for me, being involved with the art literally saved my life because it inspired me to stay focused in something creative. And now I'm back in the community to actually teaching high school kids salaries here with the art and partnering with the arts exchange to teach them how to be an artist and what careers they could have by bringing other artists in to present and do a workshop. So I'm here to push for the 1%. And, and and thank you for your time.
Speaker 3: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Yes. Hi. I have some correspondence copies that I would like to submit for each of. It just reinforces what I have to say tonight. And my name is Paula McComb. I'm a resident here of Long Beach. I've been here many, many years. Grew up here. And of course, I am an artist. I paint abstract, representational art. And I happen to be a member of. Of the Cultural Alliance for Long Beach. I just want to say, dear Long Beach council members, please give some conscious consideration of voting for the arts proposal that's placed on tonight's agenda. Though our great city, Long Beach, has undergone many cuts in programs in the recent past due to California's economic challenges. I believe that it is now an optimal time to seek new ways of providing. A new portion of the city's budget back to the arts. Several artists in our community, including myself, have collaborated in groups through nonprofit arts organizations. Such as kelp. And we did this to promote many of our artworks over the last several years. The proposed additional funding to the arts from the city government will assist artists more readily in the creation and recognition of their art forms and that support spaces of audiences of Long Beach to. To appreciate. An experience. I'd lastly like to speak of my daughters. I had two daughters that have attended Long Beach School System and who are now young women. And they have gone onward to pursue careers in the art field. So there's no doubt. That our younger generation of artists will benefit from the establishment of a percentage to the arts policy as an ongoing funding source for the public. Thank you for your consideration.
Speaker 3: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Good evening, Mr. Mayor. And City Council members. My name is Kenny Allen and I'm the managing director of Evolve Theater. I'm here just to say thank you so much for your support for the arts. And and I have a short statement to read on behalf of the art exchange. And the 1% for the Arts Fund has historically had a huge impact on the amount of art produced in Long Beach and consequently improve the quality of life for its residents for decades. This new legislation will again guarantee that art be stitched into the very fabric of our city. One development at a time. The many enduring, successful projects and programs previously created around town with this fund are a testament to the importance of these dollars. And I am very grateful to the mayor and members of our City Council for their support of this endeavor. And that was from Nico Galvez from the Art Exchange. Thank you very much.
Speaker 3: Thank you very much. Next speaker.
Speaker 4: Hello. My name's Rene Tanner. I'm an artist and a resident here in downtown Long Beach and my professional life. Previously, before I moved to Long Beach, I was a public art project manager in King County, Washington State. I worked for an agency called For Culture, and I'm here to say it's one of the oldest and most established public art agencies in the in the country. And there's not a project that goes down that the first thing people say, whether it's a dump or a road or a jail, is where's our public art? And that's a little bit what we need here in Long Beach. I was shocked when I moved here that percent for art went away. And I'm so proud, Mr. Mayor, that you've reinitiated this concern and that it's on its way. It's going to happen. I'm one of the people that's like, if you really want to model, let's go for 2%. I tried to change my sign, but I didn't have an aggressive let's go for 2%. If you want to model and let's be realistic about what public art funding is about. It's 1% for the 99%. It's 1% for it brings the thinking of artists into every public endeavor, every construction dollar spent, whether it's a park, whether it's this or that. Artists are at the table and artists are engaged and they're bringing community identity to the forefront. This is how you do it. This is what a great city does, and I'm so happy that this is on the agenda. It's my mantra and I'm a believer and I'm back in you 100%. What do we got to do to make this happen? Final word. We got to have it in the civic center and it's not too late. We cannot build this civic center without a percent for art. And we can we can make it happen. Whatever you got to do, make that be the catalyst for this program. Bring it into play before we start construction on those projects. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Good evening. Mayor and city council members. And fellow Long Beach residents and creative community American Luna, Long Beach artist and volunteer member of the Cultural Alliance of Long Beach. I want to thank you for your support for this 1% for the arts. And from sitting here and here and everything sounds like we're all on the same page. And this is great news. I know it's early in the process, but you know that I would like that we consider all areas of art and that's been mentioned before. That it supports all the creative community, creative organizations. Also that it supports our youth. Our youth and our education is very important. I myself am a product of the Long Beach. Educational system and arts was fundamental for me. And having been away from from negative things in my environment growing up. So I'm here and this is for me, this is very personal. I would like to thank.
Speaker 1: The community.
Speaker 2: For their support and everyone that's here and that we continue this dialog that 1% is a start and that it's a necessity so that when the economy goes bad that it doesn't go. Hopefully the economy doesn't go bad, but that this doesn't go away. Instill this in our youth. Thank you very much.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Next speaker.
Speaker 10: Good evening. My name is Brian Trimble and I am the interim director of the University Art Museum at Cal State Long Beach, which is in the third district. And, you know, I just wanted to say, since I'm representing Cal State Long Beach, that we have a university here in town that boasts one of the largest schools of art in any public institution in the nation. And as a university, we train artist. And, you know, the arts are an economic juggernaut and especially in Los Angeles in the southern southern California region. It is a multibillion dollar industry. And so what we do with this 1% is we're actually modeling for these kids and these students that are growing up here in our city, that they can work in their fields, that they can become artists, that they can be able to live their lives as creative people and make a living and contribute to their communities. So. And Long Beach State is a great partner in the arts to this city. And I really encourage you that when you approach this project, that you do tap into the expertize that is in this room, that is in our community, because we do have it here. And hopefully they will help you find your way in this. And I'm going to I'm not going to say if we do the 1%. I'm going to say when we do the 1%. Okay. And lastly, I just want to say, I really agree that we take this broad based approach to looking at 1% of the arts and that we don't just focus on something like public art, that we do bring in other elements, that we look at education, how we connect to the school districts. And I really want to make sure that when we do this, that we focus on bringing public art to every district in our city and that we don't just focus on the downtown area. Okay. So thank you very much for your time.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: Good evening. My name is Maha AFRA. I didn't prepare a speech. I'm talking.
Speaker 9: From my.
Speaker 6: Heart. I'm the director of the resident dance company at Camp, the Cultural Alliance of Long Beach. And I'm the chair of the dance department at Cypress College, and our students go to Cal State, Long Beach. Okay. It's amazing school. I'm here to advocate for this education because I feel that is.
Speaker 4: Like the poorest member.
Speaker 6: Of the arts. We've been operating at SCAD as a dance company, not only dancing, but also offering classes to senior citizens, to children and to youth. Out of the grace of Mike Wiley, the owner and the volunteers of Camp. Please, please help so we can expand our classes and our community outreach, not only at Cal, but other districts. That's not only art, but also dance makes a big difference in people's life. Thank you. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you so much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 0: Honorable mayor and.
Speaker 6: Honorable council members. I Karen Dhesi, artistic director, producer of International City Theater. And I want to thank you for your support of this idea and your shared understanding of the arts and from what you've expressed and how much you also value what we all do. And I hope it's not just.
Speaker 4: Public art but fine arts and performing arts as well, because we all make a difference. I produced Produce.
Speaker 6: Five main stage productions and six education.
Speaker 4: Programs that serve.
Speaker 0: Every district.
Speaker 6: And every demographic from 4 to 104 in our great community. And I think Shakespeare might say.
Speaker 4: The arts.
Speaker 0: To think.
Speaker 4: Perchance to dream. Thank you so much.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Next, bigger piece.
Speaker 4: My name is Cheryl Lake and I am a resident of Long Beach.
Speaker 0: I'd like to thank Councilman.
Speaker 4: Eric Garner.
Speaker 0: For speaking up in behalf of children. I have been involved in arts all.
Speaker 4: My life and in very much everything but painting. I'm not talented in painting.
Speaker 0: But I do understand that each person, each child has this inner ability to express themselves in art. They need that opportunity. I pledge my self as a volunteer to help in any.
Speaker 4: Way I can, and I do.
Speaker 0: Appreciate children and their their impotent help, their potent talents that are inside themselves that they would desire to express. Thank you.
Speaker 4: For the 1%.
Speaker 0: And please do not forget their children.
Speaker 3: Thank you so much.
Speaker 4: Good evening. My name is Liza mitchell. Many of you know me, the founder of Artists Art Program and the curator for the Hotel Maya currently. I'm thanking you as well because it's economically something you guys are going to be able to translate from the arts to how it can be reality by this 1%. I look back on these six years. I've lived in Long Beach right.
Speaker 2: Before the.
Speaker 0: Crash. I moved here.
Speaker 2: And I was able.
Speaker 4: To do what I did. I just closed my 38th gallery and empty buildings.
Speaker 2: About two months.
Speaker 4: Ago because a vibrant artist was able to earn enough money to rent it and and live there and make it a studio. I did that with a small stipend of $250.
Speaker 2: A month from the.
Speaker 4: Dolby. And because I sold a painting, I bought a Warhol when I was in college for $900.
Speaker 2: And I sold.
Speaker 4: It for $55,000 when I got laid off as.
Speaker 2: The GM of a media.
Speaker 4: Company during the crash.
Speaker 2: So I would say something I want you all to.
Speaker 4: Think about as well, that you're not only investing in the intangible of your children's futures in the art, but I believe.
Speaker 2: Detroit got out of.
Speaker 4: Trouble by selling four paintings. It is something that if perhaps you had a commissioner that oversaw all of your assets.
Speaker 0: That you're going to be creating with this.
Speaker 2: 1%. It's something I.
Speaker 4: Really, really. Thank you, Mayor. You've been such incredible supporter, Suja and Linas as well especially. And thank you for bringing this up and following through.
Speaker 2: On your thoughts and your your beliefs in the years.
Speaker 4: That I've known you. I really appreciate.
Speaker 2: It. Thank you. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Sylvia. This is our last public speaker. And we'll go to the vote.
Speaker 1: By Tom Stout live in the Wrigley Information File. Art is important. I was a shop teacher. My major was industrial art. Sort of a stretch, but it still was. There's a lot of mechanical arts that are pretty amazing art. Elementary, middle high school are like most art programs are suffering. Same as industrial arts programs. Money gets tight and music art are some of the first programs that disappear. And they're not the ones that come back very quickly. You know, so, you know, there's public art, private art. I mean, I like a friend of mine's a sculpture. He has three sculptures at Long Beach State. His name is James Russell. He's got sculptures in Cerritos. He's got sculptures in a city of industry. Matter of fact, he has them all over the world. Are polished stainless steel. They're beautiful. I traded them a car for one of them. He got divorced and he didn't have his wife got the car, so I built him a Volkswagen. So I you know, I'm not wishing them ill health, but. It's, you know, art's important. I mean, industrial arts is just important to me. I mean, there are if any of us ever have an option, go to the SEMA Auto Show in Las Vegas if you want to see rolling art. They are there. I mean, there was a stainless steel sculpture that you actually drove. It was polished stainless steel. It was amazing. How in the hell the guy had enough time to do it? I have no no idea. I mean, every piece had to be polished, then welded in place, and this thing was made up of a thousand different pieces. And I just wish vocational arts had as much support as the arts do. You know, Lombard City College, thanks to Miss Turanga. Cut out 13 vocational arts programs. I think automotive, when you figure you watch Barrett-Jackson, you have cars that sell for hundreds of thousands of dollars or millions of dollars. They're rolling pieces of sculpture. People value them. I value people that are craftspeople that can build and rebuild cars. I mean, they are truly artist. A friend just displayed a car at CMA GTO. The owner spent $400,000 on it. Why? Beyond me. But it was a good payday for him. So. Arts are important. Support them. You know, it's one of the first things to go. And it's one of the more important things. I mean, anything you can learn to do with your hands has meaning, whether it's woodworking. Auto body programs, whatever. So, you know, we'll this thing, you know, I hope it survives. You know, and there's a lot more people, you know, on the high end of this district that really support it. So do what you can.
Speaker 3: Thanks, Tom. Well, thank you. Thank you for that. We're not going to go out and go to go to a vote. Members, please go and cast your votes on the motion.
Speaker 4: Motion carries.
Speaker 3: Great. Well, congratulations, everybody. Again. Thank you. Thank you all for coming out. I know you have been working on this for a long time, so thank you all. We'll all be in touch soon. Thank you. We're going to transition into our next our next item, which is item three. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Manager to report back to City Council in 90 days on the feasibility of establishing a percent for arts policy as an ongoing funding source for public art in the City; and report back on similar models cities across the nation use to fund public art programs. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01262016_16-0069 | Speaker 3: Great. Well, congratulations, everybody. Again. Thank you. Thank you all for coming out. I know you have been working on this for a long time, so thank you all. We'll all be in touch soon. Thank you. We're going to transition into our next our next item, which is item three. We're going to just we're just going to hold for about maybe 30 seconds or so and let some folks exit before we start. Thank you. We're going to go ahead and transition to our next item, Madam Clerk.
Speaker 4: Report from Financial Management Recommendation to Receive and File Memorandum from Financial Management entitled Responses to Questions from the December 22nd, 2015 study session on the city's infrastructure needs, along with the revenue measure, options, presentation or direct the city managed manager to provide additional information relative to the implementation of revenue measure options or direct the city attorney to prepare all documents necessary for a possible revenue measure in the city citywide.
Speaker 3: Thank you. We're going to turn this over to staff. I know they've got a pretty extensive presentation. A lot of it, I think, is answering some of the questions that were asked at the the study session. And so I'm going to turn this over to Mr. West, and we'll just go from there.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mayor. Council members. As a follow up to our December 22nd presentation on infrastructure needs, city staff was asked to work with the city attorney and the city clerk to bring back revenue options for the City Council to consider. This topic has been brought up many times over the past several years. A version of the presentation we were about to give was put together in 2012, about four years ago at the request of the City Council at the time. Revenue options were also brought up last year at the City Council retreat and this year during the budget process, our assistant finance director, Lia Erickson will present the revenue options present and will be available to answer any questions you have and receive any direction you may put forth. And she'll be assisted by the finance director, John GROSS. Lia.
Speaker 11: Good evening, Mayor, and members of City Council. First, I will talk about the current tax rates in the city of Long Beach. Then I'll cover the different types of tax measures, general versus special taxes. I'll then talk about the various tax measure options and then some considerations related to the tax measure options. And then finally, some next steps. First I'll go over the current tax rates on for property tax. The city receives approximately $0.22 of every property tax dollar, which equates to about $735 for a 3300 $50,000 assessed home. For u u t, the rate is 5%. For example, a combined utility bill of $150 per month would equate to or generate $90 per year in tax for u. U. T. On the sales tax. The city receives $0.01 for every dollar spent in Long Beach, which equates to $68 based on average taxable sales per resident of $6,800 a year. For transit occupancy tax, the rate is 12%. That equates to $18 for $150 for a night. Our real property transfer tax is currently at $0.55 per $1,000 in sales price, and that equates to $192.50 for that same 300,000 $300,000 assessed home. And then the business license tax varies. But for a retail store with five employees, the cost is $385.40. There are two basic types of taxes. There's a general tax that can be used for general purposes that would go into the general fund. And then there's also a special tax for a specified purpose that would be detailed in the ballot measure. These different types of taxes have different requirements for votes, voting both on the city council side and also on the electorate voting side. The citizens are also the type of voting requirements differ, whether it's a general election for the city, which would be the April primary or the city June runoff, or if it's a special election, which would be any other election, including state and federal November elections. There are some exceptions to the requirements that are listed in this chart. So for instance, a transaction in use tax always requires two thirds of a vote of council, even if it's for general general purposes. And the parcel tax is always considered a special tax for and requires a vote of two thirds of the people, even if it's for general purposes. So any specific ballot measures and timing and voting requirements would need to be consulting with the city attorney's office. So this chart, this slide lists the different tax measure options that I'll be covering today. First the parcel tax. This is based on a fee per parcel, not the valuation of property. The parcel fee may vary by types of parcel, so a single family could have one type and a commercial could have a different rate. It may be designed designed to exempt certain classes or types of property, and it can include a sunset provision and or an annual CPI adjustment as it's a tax levied on property other than a property tax is considered a special tax, so it will always require a two thirds majority vote of the electorate. For illustrative purposes, the chart shows what a $50 residential parcel fee a year and an annual parcel fee for commercial .0366 square feet and that would be 13.8 million. And then the chart shows different varying amounts that can go up to $33.1 million a year. Next, the existing utility users tax, which is imposed on the consumption of utility services. Currently r u. U t is at 5% and covers electric, telephone, gas and water utility services. It generates $38.6 million from in taxes and 15. In 2000, Long Beach voters passed Measure J, which decreased u u t rates by 5%, phased in over five years. This reduction eliminated 15 50% of the city's T revenue, which would have resulted in an additional 38.6 million in 15. The next slide shows what a 1% increase in the U. U t would would generate, which is about $7.7 million for each 1%. Also, this can be a general or special tax. And you can see in the chart the Long Beach rate at 5% compared to some benchmark cities. In addition to expanding the existing utility users tax, we also have the option of Irene of expanding to additional utility services so we could impose the utility users tax on sanitary sewer, refuse collection and cable television services. If we use that current 5% UUT rate, we could generate 800,000 for sewers tax 2.1 million for refuse and recycling collection, which excludes private haulers which already have a franchise fee. And we could also generate $5 million for cable television. Next I'll cover the local sales and use tax, which is levied on sale, storage use or consumption of tangible personal property. The current sales tax rate in Long Beach is 9%, which is split with the state at 6.5, L.A. County MTA at 1.5, and Long Beach receives 1%. In FY 15, Long Beach received $59.4 million in revenue from this tax per state law. The city could add on a transaction and use tax also sometimes called a district tax of up to 1%. This works generally the same as the sales and use tax. However, there are differences into how and where this tax is applied, so the figures below are rough approximations. So for illustrative purposes. Point 25 tax increase could generate 12 million up to a 1% tax, which could generate $48 million per year. This also could be a general or a special tax if it's dedicated for specific use. However, in either case, it does require a two thirds vote of the council to put on the ballot. This next chart shows the the combined sales and use tax rates for benchmark city's other local communities and those cities in L.A. County that also have increased sales and use tax through the transaction and use tax increase. You can see that La mirada, Pico Rivera and Southgate already have an increase of 1% of the transaction and use tax in addition to the normal 9% rate. Next, the business license tax. We currently charge a business license tax that varies by the type of business and does include an annual CPI adjustment. Other cities charged license taxes on a wide variety of basis and increments, making some comparisons difficult for 15, the business license checks generated $12.7 million. An increase of $50 per current business license account could generate approximately 1.5 million annually. This could also be general or special tax. Next is the oil barrel tax. The city currently taxed its oil production by volume, which is called a barrel tax for two two purposes. One is $0.15 per barrel for general purposes, and the other is $0.28 per barrel. And that's the rate as of June 14 for public safety purposes. This is called Prop H and that does include a CPI index. Citywide, we we did produce 13.3 million barrels in 15, which generated 5.7 million for both general fun and prop age. Other cities use different indices to calculate their barrel taxes based on last year's numbers. Every 10% saw a ten cent increase in the city's current tax rate, which generate approximately 1.3 million. However, production and is lower this year as anticipated, were lower, so the amount would probably be lower. The oil severance tax is a value based oil tax and is based on the percentage of actual sale price of oil or on a rate from published price index. To achieve an equivalent $5 million from this tax, we would need to institute a tax of 0.65%, which was based on the 15 average sale price of $57.96 a barrel. You can see on the table the various rates that would need to be charged based on last year's numbers. I once again priced in production are being impacted, so these amounts are probably conservatively too high. Culver City is the only city known to be assessing the severance tax. Next is a transient occupancy tax, also known as Totti, which is a hotel bed tax paid for the occupancy of a room. The current rate is 12%. For downtown area, there is a self-imposed business license surcharge, which gives us an effective rate of 15%. The total generated $23.9 million in revenue in 15, with 17.2 million of that going to the general fund. So every 1% increase in the rate would generate 1.4 million to the general fund. The table below shows the total rates to compare to benchmark cities. And once again, this can be general or a special tax. Next is the parking tax, which can be levied on public and private lights located in the city. And it could be based on a percentage of total parking revenues or a number of spaces this would not include on street metered parking. We currently do not have a parking tax and parking lot operators would be required to collect the tax and remit the collections to the city. We have an estimate of about $1.7 million from a 10% tax on the city owned parking lots. And we have a we don't have a solid estimate for private lots, but it's anticipated that that could be up to another $1.7 million. It could also be general or special tax. This next chart shows the city's benchmark cities and their parking tax rates. A total of 25 cities in California do levy a parking lot tax, including San Francisco, L.A. and Oakland. Real property transfer taxes next. And this would be a charge that is a charge that is applied to the transfer of ownership of real property. Our current transfer tax is a dollar $0.10 per $1,000 sales price. The county retains half a $0.55 along beach retains $0.55. We currently receive about 1.7 million per year and the state law sets this rate. But as a charter city, Long Beach can, with the citizens vote, approve its transfer tax at a higher rate. However, if this fee is increased, the county retains the original dollar ten and the city will receive the rest. So to double the current annual revenue amount of 1.7 million to 3.4, the current the city tax would actually need to be $2.20 per thousand dollar. This could also be general or special tax. And this next chart shows the transfer tax rates of our benchmark cities. The emissions tax can be levied as a gross receipts tax charge for entry to specific entertainment, sporting, recreation and or amusement activities. Or can be imposed on a consumer on a per ticket basis. It can also be extended to include gym memberships and spas. The cities that often find do emissions tax are the ones with major sporting venues or amusement areas like San Francisco, Pasadena, Pomona and the cities you can see here listed in the table. This could also be a general or a special tax if dedicated for specific use. Next, I'll briefly discuss some funding mechanisms for infrastructure. The city does have the ability, with the vote of both city council and the public, to do general obligation bonds. This is an ad valorem tax or property tax that applies to the assessed value of taxable property. Bonds can only be used to finance acquisition or improvement of real property. So capital improvements versus operations like public safety, a strong credit rating by the city does mean lower bond cost for the city, and this requires a two thirds vote of both the city council and the electorate to do. Other financing sources include a community facility district. However, this must tie to a new development and assessment district in which must tie to the benefit of the real property that's that's been benefiting from the improvement or service that's going to be funded. And then also lease revenue bonds, which are currently used right now on a case by case basis for financing of infrastructure and equipment. Now I'm going to go over some of the considerations for these tax measures. The parcel tax, which would be a new tax, is predictable and reliable that is usually viewed as another form of property tax. A utility user tax could be either an increase or new expansion, and this does have a relatively large tax base, but it's based on commodities, some of which are in decline like telephone. The local transaction and use tax would be an increase to our sales and use tax. Potentially could affect consumer shopping habits. However, our consultants have not noticed a difference in other cities that have implemented this tax. This is also sensitive to economic conditions and would grow in a strong economy in decline in a recession. The business license tax would be an increase. However, this is a revenue increase, relatively small compared to other options. Oil taxes would be an increase in perceived or new and perceived impact very few taxpayers directly. And it potentially could result in decreasing oil production in Long Beach. The transit occupancy tax would be an increase, which potentially could be detrimental to convention bookings and tourism and relatively small revenue compared to other options. The parking tax would be new and that would impact few private parking lots and have revenue relatively small for those lots and high cost for the city to minister and also the high costs for the city's parking garages. The real property transfer tax would be an increase, which actually the implementation benefits the county at the cost of the property owner first and then the revenue increase is relatively small compared to other options. Emissions tax is new and this could be detrimental to special events, booking and participation in life. And also the revenue increase is relatively small and then the funding mechanism for infrastructure is limited to real property acquisition improvements and so cannot be used to fund operations like police or fire. So here are some next steps. Should the city council wish to proceed with a ballot measure? City Council would need to decide on a measure type and tax amount, develop a ballot measure language and determine timing of the ballot measure. The next general election for the city is the April 12th, 2016 primary. However, that filing deadline is passed. The following general election is June seven, 2016. The runoff election. And for that to meet that date, City Council would need to adopt a resolution in February to meet the March 11, 2016, filing date. And depending on the measure, it would either require a simple majority vote or in the case of a transaction and use tax or general obligation bonds. A two thirds vote of the city council. The November 8th, 2016 election will be considered a special election for this city. And in order to meet that date, a resolution would need to be adopted in July to meet August 12th filing date. And depending on the measure, it would either require a simple majority vote of the Council for a special tax, a two thirds vote for a transaction and use tax. Who are unanimous vote of council on a declaration of fiscal emergency for a general tax. The cost of the election will depend on the timing. Other issues on the ballot. And if city or the county conducts the election. If the city conducts the election, there would be no additional cost for a general election with citywide candidates on the ballot. However, this is not the case in six. The next citywide election is 2018. It would cost 1.6 million for the city to conduct a special election, if only the city. Every city measure was on the ballot. And for the June election to expand from the even districts to all nine districts, it would be an incremental cost of 900,000. If the city conducts the election and it's during one of the regularly scheduled elections for June or November, it would be 560.
Speaker 3: I'm sorry. I think you mean the county, right? I think you said the city. What? I think you mean the county.
Speaker 11: Oh, I'm sorry. Of the county. Thank you. It would be 565,000 for the June election and 433,000 for the county to conduct the election on behalf of the city for the November. We did not ask the county to cast out a special election just for the city only measure. This concludes my presentation and I stand ready to answer any questions you may have.
Speaker 3: Thank you. I'm going to thank you for that. I'm going to make a few a few comments and then I'm going to turn this over. There's a I think everyone's plugged in to say a few words. And I know this to be a lot of questions tonight, which I think are really important. I just want to just start by just kind of taking this back a little bit. I think that it's important to note that this this is a conversation I know that this council but other councils have had, I think, for for many years. I think that the largest challenge in front of us as a city and I mentioned this at the state of the city, is our $2.8 billion need when it comes to infrastructure and capital infrastructure. We're talking about our sidewalks, our streets or alleys that are in in terrible condition are public buildings. But most importantly, those streets that connect our neighborhoods and the systems that connect our neighborhoods. And it's not just the streets, but an incredibly important part of our deteriorating infrastructure. As many of you also know is our water systems, our water conservation systems or storm drain systems. The systems that protect our neighborhoods and improve our water. Our water quality are all crumbling. And while we have and the city continues to invest significant dollars every year, there is no question that no matter how much we invest, our our systems and our infrastructure continue to get worse because we just don't invest enough. We'd have to substantially increase that investment. And obviously the city currently can't afford to do that. And so we are in a in a difficult position when it comes to infrastructure. And I mentioned that my state of the city and I think most most folks understand that there is a need and that if we are going to , as a community, have to have a conversation about how we pay for a world class city and how we move forward and ensure that our community is strong and prepared for this next century. In addition to the incredible infrastructure needs, we also have other needs now. These are different needs. But while this is, I think, focus on infrastructure, I don't want to leave out the fact that this city continues to have challenges when it comes to ensuring we have enough police officers on our street and that we have enough paramedic response times and firefighters to patrol our communities. And so we have a lot of needs. And certainly I think infrastructure is the largest, but those are our public safety needs and our infrastructure needs are critical for the success of our future. An interesting fact is that I think if you look back at the history of Long Beach, it was it's been 25 years since Long Beach voters actually increased any sort of revenue. So I think it was 1991 was was the last time. But as far as any general obligation bonds and that's been I think it's been the 1960s since any of that has has has happened. And so while others around us including other cities in the county, certainly Long Beach City College and and and Miami Unified, which we have supported, the city of Long Beach's has not. Increased revenue significantly. What we have done is decreased in many ways government. We've eliminated more than 700 positions in the last ten years. We've leaned government believe we've made it more efficient and we've also partnered with our employee unions, particularly our city employees, our firefighters and our police officers to enact pension reform. And that pension reform, as we all know, saved the city and is saving the city over $250 million over the next ten years. So pension reform has been in place. We've eliminated 700 positions, including, by the way, police officers and firefighters. And we have tried to be as efficient as possible with the resources that we have. And so as we move this conversation forward tonight, I know there's going to be a lot of questions which which is which is really important. I want to just mention a few things. The first is and these I think are important as we move forward. One thing is and I think there's you know, I think there's beginning to be reports about about this issue in the media and conversations. As a reminder, this city council can't raise tax revenue or investments. This body can't do that by a vote of the body. The only people that can actually bring in this type of revenue are the voters of Long Beach. And so the council cannot, on its own, raise the taxes that were being discussed in this conversation. I think that's an important distinction that sometimes gets lost in headlines or in articles I read. It's this body can't do that. Only the people can do that. In addition, I just want to leave us with two thoughts as we as we as we move forward. The first is as we consider possible investments and possible revenue measures, I think there's two things that should they're important to guide our conversation. The first is that I personally don't support any new tax investments unless they sunset and unless they end. I think that good tax policy should always sunset and end. And I personally don't believe in ongoing types of revenue sources. And so I think smart revenue measures come in when there's a need, there's an investment made by the public, and then they sunset out. And so it's a more responsible way, I believe, of doing any type of revenue measure. I think those are always the best types. The second thing I'll say is one of the things that's really necessary in the city is to strengthen our reserves. Now we have actually already a strong emergency reserve. We have a strong or growing rainy day, rainy day fund, which has actually grown a few million dollars over the last year, thanks in large part to this council and the one before for adding to it. But I'm hopeful that any conversation about revenue begins also with this idea that we need to, first and foremost, also strengthen reserves. And so if this council and if we decide as a community to move forward and voters have a chance to weigh in, my hope would be that any new measure would include a significant increase to our reserves to ensure that future years are stable for this community in the long run, and that we don't go back into difficult deficit years in the future. And so those are important things. And as we all know, reserves also help with future credit ratings. We already have pretty decent ratings, pretty good ones. It'd be great to have to have the best. And so those are our two things that I think are important as we move this conversation forward. And I also just want to want to mention as well that over the course of the next couple of weeks, I know I plan to and I know I'm sure other council members do as well. We plan to have conversations with folks in the community. I certainly a meeting with community some community leaders and business leaders next week as well as a variety of other folks. So it's important that we kind of hear and what they have to say as well as talk about the the incredible need that we have and challenge that we have in front of us. And so with that, I'm going to turn this over to to the council, starting with Councilwoman Gonzales.
Speaker 6: Yes. I want to first thank our city staff, our financial management department. This was a very great presentation, very thorough. I think what I gathered from it was that we have a lot in front of us. We have a lot to certainly consider. And I agree with what the mayor states is that, you know, almost $3 billion in infrastructure needs is is definitely an undertaking that we have to not turn a blind eye to. We actually have to face it head on and look to see what other alternatives there are in our city in terms of opening up new revenue streams. And so at this point, you know, I certainly believe that, you know, we have the opportunity to present this and look at what we can offer our residents and see if it is something that they want to do in terms of infrastructure. I also think as well, just, you know, along side our streets and sidewalks and alleys, you know, we had a great infrastructure report from our mayor. Before that I had brought forth Safe Alleyways Project that looked at some of the dirt alleys that we still have in our city. And I'm still in awe that we have alleys in some places that also do not have sufficient lighting that adds to our issues within public safety. And so I think that getting those reports and then having this plan in place would be, you know, kind of good timing for us to look at all this. In addition, I think as well which compounds the issue is unfortunate the are one time funds many time rely on our oil revenue and we know right now that we're below $30, which is pretty bad. The economy right now is, you know, in that sense, isn't doing well. And so I think that we do have to look at other opportunities. I do have a question, though, a couple of questions that may have been answered. I just wanted to ask them first, when was the last time we had a ballot measure of this sort in our city?
Speaker 2: Mr. MODICA So I think the Mayor pointed out the last time that we had a significant revenue measure that was, you know, for general purposes, it really provided a tremendous amount was back in the 1990s when the suit was raised in 1991, 92 in that area. We have had some smaller measures. It was Prop H that was very specific and the medical marijuana. But neither one of those are considered general tax measures that support, you know, the, you know, city government. You know, those are very limited in specific taxes.
Speaker 6: Okay. Thank you. And then are you t. Currently it's 4%, eight percentage points lower than los angeles. And when was the last time that was in the report? But. When was the last time that we did anything with our user utility tax?
Speaker 2: So the you t was actually changed in 2000, 2000 and it actually went down. So it went down from 10% down to 5%. So it stepped down 1% each year. After that, the city has taken an action to clarify the u u t. But the voters may remember that they voted on a u t that didn't generate any additional revenue that was just to comport to some changes in federal tax law. So but we've actually gone the other way on the U. T not an increase.
Speaker 6: And should we I know currently we're going to receive and file this, but if we should move forward with bringing this moving this along, we would be able to clarify language or look at language that we can put forth on the ballot.
Speaker 2: Yes. The city attorney can talk to you a little bit about what that process would look like. But we've outlined there are two options. There's June and there's November. June would require some decisions in the next couple of weeks. And April is really not an option at this point anymore.
Speaker 6: Okay. And this wouldn't have to go through any other committee like elections oversight. This can just be done here. Just to clarify that.
Speaker 2: That is correct.
Speaker 6: Okay, great. Thank you very much.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilmember, your.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Mayor. You very much outlined the challenges that we have with not only our infrastructure, but also with our public safety. Also included in there. We're looking at closing of libraries, parks, recreation programs, and also we're looking at the increase and the spikes that we have in crime and of course, the needs that we have with our fire services. So I think that when it comes down to the issue as a whole, I'm glad this is being brought forward because we are being challenged and we do have issues that we need to look at. We're looking at every year we're deferring maintenance to another year and as as we defer those costs increase. So we do. I'm not saying it's urgent, but it is pretty pretty much there in terms of what we need to do in reviewing this this issue here. I was very much concerned back in 2000 when we looked at the utility users tax and the effect it was going to have going from 10% to 5%. And the the impact of that was immediate. And we haven't been able to recover since it was an immediate $80 million hit because it was half of our half of our budget that we would get from the utility. And we've been struggling ever since. As a former city employee, I was I was very much aware of the impact that the utility had on our budgets and on our need to lay off a number of of of individuals from their jobs and also the elimination of a number of programs that had that had to go away. And we're talking about even now, as as we talk about the increase in crime, you know, our gang unit had to go away. So we have to look at ways that we can bring back some of those programs. And I'm looking at at the possibility of what's taking place here would be the the seriousness of looking at the at a at a new building, a new revenue stream for for us to look at the the concern I would have, obviously, because there's a lot of different machinations that need to take place, whether we go for a general or a special, whether what the threshold is with the electorate and what the threshold is here on the on the city council, whether it's a simple majority or two thirds. So we we have to look at this seriously. Obviously, we're going to receive and file this document today. We're going to have more discussion on this later. I'm sure that there's going to be some other additional questions that each one of us will have as we move forward with this. In terms of what the timeline we're going to we're going to choose whether it's June or whether it's in November. But we do have to look at it very carefully because we want to make sure that we get enough of of information out there for the electorate, for for the residents to evaluate and was looking at this to give them the time that they need to determine what they can or cannot support. So I'm glad that we got this this report very thorough. Some of the questions that I had coming in were answered in regards to a general or a specific election, the November versus June versus the November election. Those questions were answered for me as well as Councilmember Gonzalez clarified right now in terms of the whether it's a committee of the whole city council or an elections committee. So he's not going to be coming to the elections committee. It's going to be the committee of the whole. But I think that that's what we need to keep in mind, is that there's going to need we're going to need some time. We're going to need some time to take this out into the community, get their feedback and get get some guidance as far as what we can and cannot do personally. As I mentioned before, the U.S. tax went from 10 to 5. And I think if we were to look at the you that you you the uut opportunity, it would be it would not be an increased tax. It would be a recovery as far as I'm concerned. You know, it sounds like semantics and it probably is, but it's not. When it comes down to the big hit that we took in 2000 and trying to recover some of that money now where we're at, you know, for the future in looking at that tax here. So looking forward to the continuing conversation.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Councilman Richardson.
Speaker 5: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I want to thank staff for this presentation. I remember the president the similar presentation back in 2012. I want to thank the residents who have already sort of reached out to me about this issue. You know, I see some of your comments from from Ardoyne, the Hamilton neighborhood. I see. I hear you. I, I. I do plan to. You know, I don't know what the answer is at this point. I know that there are a lot of questions and that we have to grapple with those questions. But I do plan to go out to the community and talk with our North Long Beach leaders and have an honest discussion about the circumstances in the state of our our you know, our infrastructure and our services. My thoughts? I have a number of thoughts and a number of questions related to this. You know, it's no question that our streets and sidewalks are failing and that the longer we delay maintenance, it becomes more and more expensive. I know that we have a number of dirt alleys in Long Beach. I know that certain neighborhoods north of Artesia and north of 91 Freeway still do not have sidewalks. And the fact is, our district annual allocation for sidewalks, just it it just won't cover it. It's not enough for us to really keep up. I was interviewed last year some time by Univision and had to actually explain why we as a 21st century still do not have sidewalks in all of our communities. And then in terms of our facilities is no question. I'm a proponent of of of making sure that we have a Highland Park community in the future. But the truth is, demand is growing. Our facilities facilities are failing. The Highland Park Community Center is literally 90 years old, and we're still utilizing that building today. 90 years old. There are issues with asbestos. There are seismic issues. The community has grown over the last 90 years. That is a community center we designed a long time ago. Will not meet the community center today. Literally, it serves 20% of Long Beach, its population, the 1985 zip code. We can't continue to ignore that. We can't continue to ignore North Long Beach. And this isn't simply any park. This is one of five regional centers. And I want to just ask it's Parks and Recreation here. I want to simply ask the question, what is the distinct difference? How many how many regional centers do we have? And what is the distinct difference between a community center and regional center or a park in a regional park?
Speaker 2: Honorable Mayor, members of the City Council. Councilmember Richardson We have 26 community centers throughout Long Beach that serve primarily our youth, age 5 to 12 afterschool programing. Of that, we have five regional centers, including Halton, Silverado, Eldorado, McBryde and Chavez, that offer a more robust offering of programs and services, which include our teen population in addition to senior programing. So that's really the distinction there, the teen programing and the senior programing at those five locations.
Speaker 5: So these five locations. And thank you. Thank you, Mr. Scott. So these five locations across town are typically situated next to high schools, are typically spread out from one another and typically larger. And they have additional they have additional functions that they have to provide. It's one of five areas that provides senior senior services and teen services. And that's critically important given our very young, our aging community and our very young community that's developing. And it has a lot to do with public safety and crime. We've done well. But to demand and request that our police officers, our public safety personnel continue to do more with less. When we see the national trends increasing, that's a recipe for disaster. The truth is, we you know that our we're at historically low levels in our police department. And and, you know, I don't I can't quote how many decades it's been. I won't get into that. But it's time that, you know, we've seen the reports. It's time to double down on public safety, stumbled out, time to double down on violence prevention. Now, in terms of response services, I think it's no secret we had a big conversation last year about the loss of Ramadi and what that means for our our paramedic response times in our services. And a few months ago, we had a conversation about and we really dissect it. What does it mean when we go from nine paramedic rescues to eight? What is the impact on those services? And I think the fact that we had that conversation then is really relevant today because there is a real difference and a real strain on our system. As a matter of fact, is the fire chief around? Can Chief Terry, can you just elaborate? Is there a distinct difference between when we go from a certain level of paramedics and our system to and we take out just one paramedic. So if we go from nine paramedics to eight, what does that materialize and actually look like on our paramedic system?
Speaker 2: Mr. Mayor, Councilmembers Councilmember Richardson, as I have discussed here before, our system is comprised of all the parts and they work in concert with each other. So in the event you reduce our resource capability by taking a resource out of service, what ends up happening is the remaining resources will need to pick that up. So by removing one resource, it does have a tremendous impact citywide on our system.
Speaker 5: And you know, and thank you so much. I think that is something that is a tremendous context for this conversation that we've actually seen the difference in what happens when you have a big hole in our system. And so this is you know, I personally believe it is a responsibility of our city to provide public safety, to make sure that we can respond to emergencies and actually in a timely manner. And, you know, the fact is, the numbers, the number of of, you know, incidents that we have is staggering. It's continue to grow the number of emergency calls that we have. But we are at modern. We have the lowest levels of paramedic response to respond first responders than we've had in modern history. So the truth is, I mean, this is a tough conversation we're going to have to have. I was watching earlier this week, I saw that the Gazette's editorial board released a piece that I thought was was very reasonable and hit the nail on the head I shared with my social media. And in plain talk it made a good case. It essentially said that we've been fiscally prudent. We've made, you know, significant reductions in our budget. We've, you know, I'm paraphrasing, but we've cut our staff. We've cut our staff to the bone. We've been more efficient. We've partnered with our rank and file to reform pensions. The belt has been tightened. That's the truth that, you know, there is no more fat on the bone to cut. And so. That said, you know. Deserve a voice. They deserve to weigh in and say how they you know, what they believe our city should be today and in ten years. Do they want to balance the budget at the risk of, you know, slow response times? Hundred year old community centers, asbestos crumbling? But before we commit to that, there are there are, you know, some conversation need to happen in our city. We need to make sure that we're aware whether or not we're going to continue to build a second tier city. I think that this the presentation also, I think it was interesting and I want to throw this into the air that there was a $700,000 difference between a June election and a November election. So that makes a lot of sense to me to go with the cheaper election, which it's looked like was June. Am I correct? Mr.. City Manager That June was, it was like $700,000 cheaper.
Speaker 11: Councilman Richardson, the June election is conducted by the state. His 560 are sorry. I keep on saying the wrong thing. The county is $565,000. The November election is 433,000 and is the estimate. The November election, though, would be considered a special election by the city and would require a two thirds vote of the public for a special a special ballot measure unless a unanimous vote of city council declaring a general emergency was declared for a general election. General tax measure on that that item.
Speaker 5: Yeah. I didn't hear that. I was I was looking for the slide, but it was at the $700,000 difference and I catch that.
Speaker 11: I think what you're looking at is if the city conducts the election and it was just a special election that the city did in November, that would be 1.6 million. And then if it was in June in the city conducted it, it would be 900,000. So that is a $700,000 cheaper if the city conducted. But even more even less expensive. Expensive would be if the county conducted the election.
Speaker 5: Okay. So so that said, I mean, it makes a lot of sense to me to do a June a June election. What the what the measure looks like, not quite sure. But I'm going to go out I'm going to talk to I'm going to talk to my residents about this issue and have a really, really tough conversation . So thank you so much for your time and I look forward to what this turns into.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Council Member Austin Thank you.
Speaker 1: And I will try to be brief. I know that we're going to have a lot of comment from the council here. I want to thank financial management and staff for this report and putting it together so, so quickly, expeditiously. We asked for this just a few weeks ago. And this just shows again. I think the quality of our staff to give us this information is such a timely manner. This is unfortunate in some respects because I think it falls short of the $2.8 billion addressing that need. But it does give us some options to enter in an avenue to make significant improvements in our infrastructure. And I know there's been conversation here about public safety as well, which we do need to address. I'll speak on that as well. I think when I talk to my residents, the infrastructure and public safety are among the top concerns. These issues are universal. No matter how much of our residents home values are or what neighborhood they live in. If you go into some of the nicer neighborhoods in the eighth District and little Cerritos, you'll find that our our curbs are falling apart. Our sidewalks need to be repaired. Alleys and Bixby nodes are dirt and pothole laden. And in the north Long Beach, we have crumbling streets. This issue infrastructure resonates with our residents and they live it and see it every single day. And they look to this council. They're looking to the city to fix it with limited resources. And it's very difficult. And I said this before, it's very difficult as a as a city leader, as a elected leader in the city to not be able to address those critical needs. When residents when it rains, you know, there are puddles in front of people's homes for days on end. And they want it fixed. They want it fixed now, and they really don't want to hear the excuses. So having these options in front of us give us gives us the ability to at least say, hey, we can have a conversation with our voters citywide and put the question to to them, to our residents, whether or not and how. They'd like to see the infrastructure needs fixed. As many as I've spoken before, many of us I've been involved with the state led committee and over the last year particularly have been advocating for state funding for for infrastructure needs on the local level. I'm encouraged that something may happen, but I don't think we can depend on Sacramento to fix the vast needs that we have here in the city of Long Beach. I don't think any local government is smart to depend on a revenue source from the state to do that. We have to control our own destiny. And I think Long Beach is really at a crossroads. We need to decide whether or not we want to be a world class city or we want to be a third world city. I mean, and it's just that simple. We are if we don't address our revenue today, if we don't address it very soon, we run that risk. And I don't think any of us want to see that. And again, this is this is a conversation that needs to be had with our residents. I think on the public safety front, maybe one or nine and one is 47 I'm sorry, 47 has had an impact on rising crime numbers. And the city was not necessarily we didn't have a five year plan or a three year plan to adjust for that. But we know now that that we need to make adjustments to our public safety needs, and I'm prepared to do that myself. Personally, I'm curious to know how much revenue was lost. And this is a question for financial management. How much revenue was lost with the decrease in the utility users tax? Over the period of time that it was. It was has been been a revenue source left.
Speaker 11: Yeah. Councilman Austin, if we had it at the 10% rate, we would be collecting $38.6 million more per year. And so that's the amount. I mean, if you wanted to run it over the ten years.
Speaker 1: And I'd be just just off the top of your head and I know I'm asking a lot of you right now, but how many, for example, public safety officers would that fund?
Speaker 3: So it's a guess over 25 years, whatever the number would be approximately.
Speaker 2: Right. Over how many years?
Speaker 3: Well, it's been 25, I think, since well, 1991 is when it was raised. And then what year was it?
Speaker 2: It was.
Speaker 3: 2000.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 11: Right. So, well, the last ten years it's been down to four or 5%, you know, and then the five years before that, it went down incrementally, 1% a year, but at an average cost of about 140,000 a per officer, it would be about 275 police officers.
Speaker 1: So that that's pretty consistent with the the the downturn in terms of the loss of officers over that period of time here. We're down over 200 officers today. And I think that's an important point. I'm not going to go back and Monday morning quarterback or or go back and say, you know, what should have been done. I know personally, I didn't think it was a wise move to do that then. But but that that was a pivotal point in this the city's makeup to to to to really impacted our ability to to deliver services. And so I just wanted to go back and make sure that that that point is clear. Also, I there were a couple of taxes or options that you you you laid out regarding the number one was a parking tax. And I'm not sure what that would generate. I imagine it was rather low. But did you have a number? On that.
Speaker 11: Councilman Austin, we looked at a 10% tax being being able to generate about 1.7 million on the city owned parking lots. And we don't have a good estimate for private lots because there there aren't as many of those and we don't have the knowledge of them. But that could potentially be another up to 1.7 million for a total of about 3 to 3 and a half million dollars for a 10% rate.
Speaker 1: And the real property transfer, do we currently have that? Correct.
Speaker 11: Now we do we have a $0.55 goes to the city and we that generates $1.7 million per year. If we were going to increase it, we could we would have to a minimum double it to get the 3.4 million instead of 1.7 million. And the rate would actually be $2.20 per $1,000. You can see on Slide 19 that some cities have doubled it and some cities have gone even higher. One thing that's not on Slide 19 is there are four cities in L.A. County that have increased it Culver City, Pomona, Redondo and Santa monica.
Speaker 1: Thank you. I'd like to just also just lend my support from the mayor's comments. I think it's a very responsible and fiscally prudent for us if we were to move forward with this, to create a reserve fund. I think that is unnecessary. And shows, like I said, prudence and good faith to to our residents. And and I think a sunset clause is is is necessary as well. I think that's responsible. If we were to move forward with something, I don't know what that looks like. I want to. I want to. Have a conversation with my residents as well and in some time to be able to do that. I'm pretty certain that that most people will recognize the need to improve infrastructure, to improve public safety, because these are common themes that that I have heard from my constituents during my time in office . And it's one of our biggest challenges, I think, facing the city. And I'm glad we are having this conversation finally, because I think it shows a. It's a tough conversation. It's going to be a tough conversation to have with our residents, but it's a necessary conversation. And so thank you all for bringing this forward and thank staff for the report.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Next up, we have councilman manga.
Speaker 4: Thank you. In the past several weeks, we've seen the presentation of the $2.8 billion. And I've had lots of discussions with residents and sometimes calls into our offices asking, are we as a city really suffering in terms of within the budgets of each individual department? What they see out in the community is the streets and sidewalks. And I'll tell you that I've reviewed many of the departmental budgets, many of the department heads of said in very long meetings with me and my staff going through the details. And in any organization that's constantly changing, things are going to come up and things are going to change. And I think that an item I have coming before council in a few weeks will help us focus on those things that can be changed to ensure that we are regularly reviewing both our budgets, our structure and other things that have been brought to our attention and or things we think we should look into. A lot of great work is done by our city auditor, Laura Down, and in that we have seen that some departments have fared a lot better than others. Some are struggling a lot more than others. And there is no way through traditional measures we would ever be able to overcome the surmountable costs that we have inherited from our predecessors who treat streets and sidewalks as a one time cost. Streets and sidewalks are not a one time costs. Streets have a certain lifespan to them. And I think that we'll get to that in a quick second. But I want to first start with appreciating my colleagues who supported my efforts with increasing sales tax revenue through recapturing the leakage we'd been losing to our neighboring cities. I think the messaging has been working. I think that more people come up to me now and say. I drove to Ralphs instead of shopping at Albertsons in Lakewood. And I know that not every district has the same opportunities to leave the city. As Councilmember Richardson and I have, and that we border so many other cities where people have choices to spend their money. And I think that as people recognize that the town center is one of our biggest sales tax revenue generators, they come to the town center instead of the Lakewood Mall. And those are important decisions that they continue to make. And as we've been watching sales tax revenue, we've been able to see some healthy changes. But I would like to take a quick second to ask Miss Erickson or Mr. GROSS a question. I'm sure you know, I know the answer to, but I think it's really important for you to explain which is our annual sales tax revenues. They do fluctuate. What percentage of those, though, are considered ongoing revenues that we count on despite the fluctuation?
Speaker 11: Council cuts women mango. We what we do is we work with an outside consultant to to determine a revenue estimate. And they do have a high medium and an a low revenue estimate. And we tend to do on the more conservative side and an estimate on the low side in part to have a more conservative base for our actual sales tax that we need for operations. And they do look at past sales tax performance and things that we know like for instance a Walmart closing in factor that into those projections and we meet with them quarterly.
Speaker 4: And I appreciate the renewal of that contract. I think we're doing a great job with that organization. I appreciate the significant number of updates they've made to the reporting that I think makes it a lot easier for us as a council to to look at and monitor where we are and what we can do and what messaging we can do to help certain business corridors that have been very successful and other business corridors who have been struggling. But I drive the community and experience the streets in our neighborhoods. And when I walk the city, I, like many of you, am frustrated. I came out strong in supporting every effort to increase what we can do in terms of what can we do to bundle some of our streets and sidewalks so that we get more for our money in my district alone? Well, I guess I should say. Well, when I talk to neighbors and neighborhood leaders, I'm very open with them about the grading of our residential streets. I think it was an amazing investment that this council chose to invest in to get an actual street grade for every street in our district. Because when people call and they tell me what we know, which is my street is terrible, my street needs a complete overhaul. I'm able to say, yes, your street is terrible. It is below the rating, which is acceptable. It is a 55 and we have a dozen streets that are below a 50 that are prioritized above you because at least in the prioritization of the fifth District, one of the things that we've really embraced is that we try to pave and invest in the worst streets that are most closely clustered to get the most for our money. It has nothing to do with who calls the most. It has nothing to do with who has the most voters. It's based on where is that need and how can we stretch that dollar as far as we can? In my district, streets alone make up more than a $40 million need. We as a city budget 38 point something annually citywide among nine districts. And so that doesn't even include the need for park bathrooms to be repaired that are in despicable quality for our youth, the water fountains that are inoperable that need to be revised and repaired. ADA Ramps Restoration of some of our most important task forces, I think it was mentioned earlier, are getting task force is really important and if we move forward with this marijuana ordinance, we're going to really need to talk about what it's like to talk about a high impact drug team because federal agencies are less likely to do supportive enforcement, at least as Chief McDonald had previously said under his administration. Once we enact our own and so we really need to take on some of that responsibility because we need to protect our neighbors. And so. I would, of course, want to hear from my neighbors and the neighborhood leaders before making any big decision on this. So I encourage people to reach out and call our office and see me. We have several community meetings planned over the next several weeks in the South Dakota neighborhoods and several others that have reached out. And I definitely support reserves because if we had been properly budgeting or reserving, we wouldn't potentially be in this situation. Mr. Crombie What's the average life of a main corridor in our community for a street? Or another member of the community that knows.
Speaker 3: Mr. Beck.
Speaker 2: Councilmember Mongo It depends really on the corridor and how frequently and heavily utilize it is. I think 20 years is average for a main corridor and it's extended beyond that for residential streets.
Speaker 4: How many and beyond for residential?
Speaker 2: Closer to 40, depending on again the frequency of its use.
Speaker 4: So when I take a street in the fifth District and public works comes back to me and says, for you to repair that district, that street, it's $350,000. I believe that after we repair that street, we need to take a 40th of that and put it into a fund. So in 40 years, when it's time for that street to be repaired or maybe 38 or maybe 42, we have the money ready and willing to go because it pains my heart to say not only do I not have the money to pay the street, I don't know when I will have the money to pay for your street because the amount is so insurmountable and the backlog is so great, and the amount of additional degradation annually by not making the repairs when we should have has been difficult. So while I support the mayor's idea of reserves, I support dedicating dedicating a percentage to infrastructure that is measurable in terms of what it costs to repair things on a schedule. If you have an air conditioning system and it costs $10,000 to install and it needs to be replaced every ten years, you should put $1,000 away every year. And I know that's an oversimplified version of that, but I really feel that for us to be a first class city, in a city that has neighbors who as we are in the baby boomer generation and some of them than baby boomers are selling their homes and downsizing. Our streets need to be just as great as Lakewood, who paves every single one of their streets at the same time. Because when people are making a decision on where to buy a home, those streets make a difference, those sidewalk repairs make a difference. And the values of our homes are one of our top priorities to our neighbors. It is the lifeblood and the nest egg that they've really invested in. And I feel that it is crucial that we as a council deliver to the taxpayers what we have promised them, which is a safe community. And that does not only include public safety, which is very important, but part of a safe community is the quality of our streets and sidewalks because we want a walkable and bikeable and drivable community. So thank you. I look forward to hearing what our options are. And I, I know there's some other details that we can go over later related to the Brady Burns bill and a few others that would impact different types of taxes that we can talk about offline or maybe in a two from four to the council. Because I know that while the consultants have said that sales tax would not be reduced, there are concerns from certain sales groups, including car dealers, about what that means to them and how that impacts them. And I think you've answered some of those detailed questions through some some communications we've had. But if that's an area that we decide to explore, I'd like to really work through everyone on the council fully understanding what our options are to ensure that people don't start purchasing their cars in other cities with a reduction in our sales tax revenue, because I think we've worked really hard with the Association of Car Dealers to ensure that people are getting the message that buying your car in Long Beach makes a big difference. So thank you for everything so far, and I look forward to hearing more from my colleagues in the community.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 6: Thank you. I wanted to thank staff for the report that was very, very informative. Just had a couple of questions and then a few comments. What is the difference in terms of practical application between the city administering the election and the county administering the election other than the lower price tag with the county administration?
Speaker 2: I think actually the clerk would probably be the best position to answer that question.
Speaker 6: I'm not used to turning my head this way for staff questions. This is.
Speaker 4: Weird. But yes, Councilwoman Pryce. So the difference between the city clerk conducting the election versus the county conducting the election for the June runoff, is that. Well, the the county is going to be conducting or coordinating with us for the June election. So essentially, if we turn around and then conduct our ballot citywide ballot measure, then we would then again run into the issue of doing a. A concurrent election, so duplicating efforts and such.
Speaker 6: So it makes more sense to have the county administer it if we were going to administer it and it's actually cheaper.
Speaker 4: That's correct.
Speaker 6: Okay. So there's no there's no advantage to us doing our own election. Okay. Okay. So in regards to the presentation and just to clarify, any action by the City Council would ultimately. Lead to the voters deciding whether to impose a new tax. That wouldn't be something that council is doing. Is that right?
Speaker 2: That's correct.
Speaker 6: Okay. So just a few comments and I echo a lot of what my colleagues have said tonight, and I look forward to talking with my constituents about this, too. And ultimately, regardless of what we decide to do, this is an issue that really needs to be decided by the voters. When I started running for office, which was in December of 2013, and I started to go to community events and talk, I remember, you know, probably because of my background and kind of seeing where the trend in crime was going. I felt that public safety was the number one issue that we needed to focus on in the city. And I remember it being at a community meeting in the third district, and I remember a resident standing up and after I had said with the two or three top priorities for me would be and listing public safety as the first, she said, You know what? Your priorities for the district are all wrong. Public safety is not an issue. And the third for us, the bigger issue is, you know, and she listed some of the issues that that she believed were the main issues. And granted, this was a kind of a special group that was focused on a particular area. But. And what I said at that time was. You know, people don't start off committing violent crimes. They start off committing small theft related crimes that, you know, a lot of times get brushed off as not serious. And in that kind of an environment, and when we have the addition of some of the things that we've seen in terms of statewide initiatives that take away the incentives for mandatory treatment and such, there's there's no question whatsoever that crime is going to rise. And that's something that I saw after AB 109 passed. And it's definitely something that I have seen proven to be true in the criminal justice system over the last year. Now, when I go to a community meeting and the third public safety is for sure, absolutely, without a doubt the number one priority for my district. You know, a lot of times we sit up here and sometimes I have to, you know, bite my tongue because we're all trying to do our best for the city. But we're also all very protective of our districts. And our public safety structure is not designed to be broken up by districts. It's a citywide approach. And sometimes I'll have my colleagues say, well, you know, Councilwoman Price has all these fire stations in her, you know, district, or they have all of this and all of that. You know, I have the slowest response time in terms of nine one. One paramedics is in the third district and it's an island village. And we have communities in the third district that are hard to get to that have response times that are over 10 minutes long. I had 911 respond to my house last week around this time while I was here with all of you. And thankfully, I live right next to a fire station and the response was amazing and the firefighters were amazing. And on a very private level, we're going to express our gratitude to the team that responded to our home. But the point is, when you're and my kids called 911 and when you're in that kind of a situation, the response of the fire department getting to your house in a timely fashion is the only value that you care about in terms of what the city is doing for you at that moment. The only thing you care about is 911 getting to your house as soon as possible because your family member's life is in danger. I experienced this last week and everybody in this city should have faith that 911 is going to respond to their home within a couple of minutes, not 13 minutes, a couple of minutes. That is the one thing that we should be promising and guaranteeing to our residents. And if we can't do that, we're falling short and meeting their expectations. So, you know, I think and, you know, we've seen a 15.9% increase in crime citywide. We have seen property crimes on the rise, theft related crimes on the rise. And we're asking our police department and our fire department to do more with less. And I've said repeatedly, looking at the deficit years that are coming ahead, I cannot imagine a scenario where I personally I speak for myself would ever vote to reduce the number of police officers or firefighters or fire resources that we have available in the city. I would probably vote to cut many other things, but those are two areas that I cannot imagine I would vote in favor of. So going into the deficit years, I mean. I have shared with this council very openly that I don't know that the amazing work that the council before us did in trying to cut costs by use of. Policies such as proportional share. I don't know that that would work for us moving forward because we have a public safety crisis in California that we did not have at the time that we instituted those policies. And so for me, going into the deficit years, I don't know where the cuts are going to be made. I really don't. And so it's a matter of of really taking a hard look.
Speaker 4: At the.
Speaker 6: Resources that we have available to us. Looking ahead at 2019, 2018, 20, 19 years that we are expecting to see major budget challenges for the city and granted, yes, they're not as big as budget challenges as they were in the past. But we can't lose any officers right now. We really can't. We can't lose any fire resources. And so I think this is a conversation that we need to have and figure out how are we going to pay for this? And, you know, I think ultimately it's going to be a decision that our voters are going to have to decide what where the value proposition is and where they want the resources spent. I agree with the comments that my colleagues made regarding infrastructure. We have the ability to pay one street a year. One street a year. So I represent more than 50,000 people who live in the third district and I can promise them one st a year. This year we actually did some very creative patchwork and we paved portions of a couple of streets in order to be able to serve a couple of different communities. We had our team go out and drive every single street and make a list of where we felt the need was greatest. It was a ridiculous process to service, you know, just a few small streets. That is that is problematic. Fortunately, through the great work of our city staff, we were able to get some grant funding to fund the repaving of Ocean Boulevard and a couple other major public works project. But that was really because of creative grant writing efforts by our team, which I'm grateful for, and I don't know that those are sustainable funding options for us. The deferred maintenance option or discussion is huge. We have no option for deferred maintenance. We have city buildings and facilities and we've talked about this before as a council. I'll use the ranchos as an example. The ranchos have a partnership with Long Beach Unified School District. Every Long Beach Unified student in the grades that are targeted for the two ranchos visit the ranchos. Both of the ranchos every single year. And yet we as a city do not have the money to be able to take care of some of the infrastructure needs of these city facilities, historic city facilities. That is a shame because it's it's very, very important that we maintain these beautiful, historic gems that we have in the city that a lot of the newer cities don't have and can't claim. So I'm glad we're having this discussion. I'm curious, to me, tonight was more just about information. I learned a lot in terms of the various options that are available. I can tell you that, you know, I personally I know this is something that the voters ultimately decide, but I personally would have trouble with any sort of additional burden that we would place on our business owners with any increase in licensing fees. I think we've made great strides as a city to be business friendly and attract more businesses here, and I do not want to do anything that would deter that. But beyond that, I'm open to hearing and talking and sharing with my constituents their thoughts. But, you know, when people call me and say, how are we going to how are we going to deal with this public safety crisis? I say we need more officers. I mean, that's that's the solution. There's only so much community watch groups can do. We need more officers driving up and down the streets because that is a proven deterrent to crime. That's just a fact. We need paramedics that can respond in time. That's just a fact. It is what it is. I'm so grateful for the work of our fire department and our police department. This is not at all a reflection on the work that they do. They do amazing work. Their leadership is fantastic. I cannot imagine a city that's doing as much as they are with the limited resources that they have. And for anyone who says, you know, there's a lot of fat and we're wasting money, you have no idea what you're talking about. You have no idea what you're talking about. I challenge you to actually look at the books and stop the rhetoric, because that's not what we've been focused on for the last two years. We've been living very prudent times here in the city of Long Beach, and that's just the truth. So thank you. And I have no questions. Thanks.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Councilmember Supernova.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mayor Garcia. And I guess I'd like to start off on a positive note has been too positive tonight. So I have some good news for Councilmember Gonzales. Oil is not below $30 a barrel. It closed tonight at $31 a barrel. So we can all appreciate that. I'm going to I have a very just a couple of questions, but one is very specific on the on the parking tax for staff. You said that you didn't know exactly how many private lots we have. Do you know if that would include Cal State, Long Beach and Long Beach City College?
Speaker 11: Councilman. Councilman. Supernormal, I. Those would if they're if they were open to the public, you know, and there was public parking, then they would be included. And so we don't know how many private it's more we don't know the revenue estimates from the private parking lots.
Speaker 2: Okay. That might be a great resource, but I'm I'm in a parking impacted district. And one of the chief complaints is the price of parking at Cal State Long Beach. That's something I really want to scrutinize moving forward. Councilwoman Pryce mentioned remembering her campaign days and see if I can remember mine. Oh, yeah, it was less than a year ago, and I talked to a lot of residents in the fourth District. And specifically the hot button issue one year ago was a utility users tax. So the first question I have is what was it before I think you said 10% and where would that put us on this list here of all the cities? I think that would put us at the very top and put us above Los Angeles, is that correct?
Speaker 11: Council member, super or not. It was at 10%. And this is just of some of the the benchmark cities that are listed on Slide eight. There are other cities in California, though, that are at 10% or higher.
Speaker 2: Okay. So this is just a regional listing here that that you showed.
Speaker 11: Yeah, it was like some benchmark cities. So, for instance, Santa monica is at 10%, SEAL Beach is at 10%. And those are not listed on the chart.
Speaker 2: Okay. Also, I think Councilmember Price mentioned, you know, the idea of putting this in front of the voters. If we do decide on a on a June date for the election, 128 days, would that be enough time to run a campaign on this and educate the voters? Oh. Council Member Councilmember You know, the council's decision is really whether or not to put something on the ballot. At that point, the city really doesn't get involved in whether or not there's a campaign. We don't spend city dollars on a campaign, so we wouldn't be able to answer that question right now. But that those are the legal deadlines as you have a certain amount of time to make a decision to put it on the ballot. Okay. Thank you. Also, with all the analysis of these various taxes, we've never it's not described as to whether or not some of these taxes are regressive. And that was certainly a topic one year ago when I was walking my district. And I'll just give you a dictionary. Dictionary definition. Definition of a regressive tax is a tax. It takes a larger percentage from low income people than from high income people. A regressive tax is generally a tax that is applied uniformly. This means that it hits lower income individuals harder. Would you describe the utility users tax as a regressive tax?
Speaker 11: Councilman. Super or not it the rate is uniform. If someone has a smaller home, their actual tax amount would be smaller. So if you had like a five bedroom house, your utility bills are probably higher. So it does vary. But I, you know, I can't answer if it's so it has some reactionary aspects to it, but it also has some non regression aspects to it because it really does vary by the size and your consumption of utilities.
Speaker 2: Okay. Thank you. I think it's all I have.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Councilmember Andrews.
Speaker 2: I yes, I thank you, Mayor. You know, I myself I really think that this is you know, I know that this is the right thing tonight in asking the city manager and the city attorney to explore options for revenues and has for the city of Long Beach. You know, our mayor and the city council has shown that we have been very smart in using taxpayers money to pay for city services. And making every dollar count for much needed infrastructure improvement. When the recession hit very few years ago, we made it necessary cuts to ensure. Long Beach didn't go broke. And still, we found a way to provide services to the people of my city. It was painful. It was the right thing to do at that time. Now it is appropriate for us to look at revenues, you know, incentives so that we can continue to properly serve the people of our great city . You know, the impact of public safety is a deep concern of mine. We have had an impact on federal, state and county early release programs with little or no support from these agencies. As a result, crime has crept up from the historical low, and we cannot expect police to do more with less. I'm not sure we will even keep up with the current police level with only one police academy a year. And in saying that, you know, we think of I'm sure that the retirement rate of our police force would maybe 80 or 90 individuals retired at a certain age. And we can only, I think, have 50 an academy. And you would think that only maybe out of that, maybe maybe 25 of them will, you know, move on. And that will let you know that we're still below the level that we would need. Well, you know, when we talk about public safety. And I know in my area, most crime they talk about is public safety. And that is very important. Infrastructure, we know we need that. But like I say, I think our most important thing, especially yet in my district, they talk about, you know, police and fire. And this is why it's so important to me when I think about things that we know we have to do, it's a must that we do that. How are we going to get the money? We're going to have to find a way. I've also been concerned with the cut of that fire department that has taken over the past seven years. We've had cuts, six fire engines, one truck company cut, rescue 12 that an engine eight, engine 15, engine 17, engine 18, engine 23, engine one or two and truck 14. We had three fire station with no fire engine in them, station eight, station 17 and station 18. Now, with that said, individuals, you know, I'm going to leave all of this up to our chief of police and the chief the fire chief, because I know what the decisions they're going to come up with, something that we know will definitely take care of the city of Long Beach because of the fact that we have ideas, we have things that we know we have to do. But I think I put total confidence in our chief, both for fire and police. And this is what we're going to do when we have these discussions to let them know that we're behind you no matter what decision that you make. So in the city of about 500,000 people, our fire department received about six 60,000 emergency calls for services each year. That a lots of calls and it makes Long Beach Fire Department one of the busiest fire departments per capita in all of America. So what I'm doing is am. I'm requesting the following from the city manager. Please ask the Chief of Police and fire to list or reduce or eliminate positions or programs in the past four years and what the report priorities are for each department for restoration with the corresponding costs from financial, financial management and each team. And I support this action tonight and look forward to seeing the options that you present to us and when it returns to the city. And thank you very much.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Councilman. Vice Mayor Lowenthal.
Speaker 9: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I wanted to ask the staff about how we assessed our infrastructure needs. I know all our colleagues here addressed the various aspects of our needs, ongoing needs, whether it's infrastructure, public safety, other services. But the $2.8 billion in infrastructure needs that the mayor mentioned and highlighted. Could you describe for us how we got to that?
Speaker 2: So, Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council, Vice Mayor I'll take a crack at it and then Craig Beck can join us and add additional if we need to. So what we did is we, you know, we have a number of different lists where we try to assess what our capital needs are. We look at our street backlog. We've done a project paper management plan just recently, and that gave us a very robust number of an accurate assessment of our street impact. Air street needs are. We're in the process of doing that on our sidewalks. We've got capital needs in our parks. We've got technology infrastructure. And so the $2.8 billion in the presentation that we gave you back in December, December 22nd was really an estimate over the ten years. It's not engineering assessment. It's not to that level. But it really is a pretty well-grounded estimate of what our need is, and that if you were to fund that over ten years, it'd be roughly $280 million projects, and it's by no means a complete list. There's certain projects that could be added there, some that might be addressed through other needs. But it's a picture kind of snapshot in time of what our needs are.
Speaker 9: Thank you. Mr. Beck, did you want to add to that?
Speaker 2: Actually I think Mr. Modica summarized it well. I would just add that some of the categories that were included on that list include streets, bridges, sidewalks, alleys, public safety facilities, storm drains and pump stations, community centers in our parks. Parks, amenities including restrooms. Energy efficiency improvements such as LED lighting and technology. Infrastructure.
Speaker 9: And does that. I may have missed this. Does that include our water systems as well in that infrastructure estimate?
Speaker 2: To my knowledge, it does not. And if you're talking about potable water, right, you're talking about storm drains, then? In some aspects, yes.
Speaker 9: Right. I was talking about potable water. Thank you. And Mr. Mota, Modica city manager, the mayor also alluded to the rainy day fund that was established with the former council. Could you describe what the set aside is and what the policy is or the finance manager?
Speaker 2: Actually, I like Mr. GROSS to answer that. We are set we set aside half a half a percent of of.
Speaker 1: Our surplus.
Speaker 2: Revenues each year. And we have, I believe, several million dollars to set aside. Yeah, I did that. Answer your question.
Speaker 9: It did. And and while that doesn't sound like very much, it really was quite a bit to do at a time when this council was considering the huge deficits that it it was starting ten years ago. Councilman Andrews and I, as well as Councilmember Richardson, who was staffing a council office at the time. Really? Walked into a council that looks very different from our state of financial affairs than than it does today. And Councilmember Price is right. The deficits that we are looking at going forward will feel. More steep, even if numerically they are less because we have cut all the fat. And so it could be $100 million less than what we had to do over the last ten years. But it will feel much more difficult to extract those those cuts. And it's not even savings. I don't I don't I hope none of us refer to that as savings or actually just cuts. There is really nothing to save when you are operating on a very lean, lean set of services, lean set of operations. And as it was stated earlier, the city services, including public safety, but all of the other quality of life services that the city is part of in making a city and providing the city life is a . It's beneficial to all of us. Councilman Suber not asked about the regressive tax. Something I'd like us to also consider is not not just whether a tax is regressive, but when we look at the proportion of dependents on on our services, whether it's police and fire. Councilwoman Gonzalez just shared with me what the December numbers are for calls to police and fire for service just in the first District for the month of December. And it was over 700 calls, and that might be proportionally different from another district. And so when I think of the term regressive and the impacts that we have, the disparity and the dependance that we have across our districts on public services, we have to regard that as a citywide issue and a citywide policy. I've worked in water services, potable and recycled water services for almost 20 years now, and in the late nineties, then-Governor had created the state's commission on building for the 21st century, and it was to identify the infrastructure needs for the entire state. And I don't recall what the sum was. I think it was in the hundreds of billions of dollars, while ours is at 2.8. But one thing that was very glaring for me at the time in observing the process and also looking at the report is. That it was a moment of truth on infrastructure planning and investment, and it highlighted the long silence and really terrible state of inaction that we had experienced as a state. And we were looking at what this bill would be. And these were just public infrastructure items, such as highways and roads. It did not address what we needed to do at our local level. And I'm proud of this council that had very, very, very fiscally prudent policies and had the ability to cut the reduce the 700 positions that the mayor talked about and to save more than $250 million over the last ten years on pension costs and has leaned this government, as he said. But in leaning the government, we still kept our eye on maintaining quality of life. And so. For me. And I hear from all of us, everyone that has spoken, that this doing more with less is not sustainable going forward. The question now becomes, now that we have stabilized our economy here locally, our our city operations and our budgets, what is the city that we want to be today and what is the city that we want to be going forward? Not paying as you go is a very painful exercise in in water. We actually have a fund called Pay As You Go. And there are other funds to to address infrastructure and capital needs. But that it's a very direct statement pay as you go when you're in a fiscal deficit, paying as you go makes it very difficult , especially when you're looking at a $2.8 billion bill for just infrastructure needs. And as we've seen in the city of L.A., on their tree trimming schedule and their sidewalk schedule, they could be at it for dozens and dozens of years and still not catch up because it is hard to catch up. And so I'm thankful that we're not in that dire a situation, but we are in a dire situation. And we do need to look at solutions and we do need to collectively come up with a response that we perhaps we decide we ask our voters or not. But I'm delighted for the opportunity for us to be able to look at this, to actually have a conversation about the future where we're not struggling to just crawl out of the struggles of the present. I think it's a great opportunity. I mean, I know, Councilman Zubrin, I said this was a depressing conversation or not very good news, but it is a great opportunity to actually be able to talk about what the future of this city can look like if we make certain policy decisions and budgetary decisions and if we ask collaboration from from our residents, what can the city look like? That is a very positive conversation for me. And doing more with less is not sustainable. And. And I echo councilwoman. Price's statement that anyone who thinks that there is fraud really has not done their homework, that hyperbole and invective and rhetoric and all of that really has to stop because that is just the purpose of that is just distraction. Ten years ago, before I ran for council, when I was working on improving our development projects here in downtown Long Beach, I had coined the phrase about our city, and it's not a nice phrase and and I wasn't happy to call our city that, but I said that we we suffered from a collective municipal inferiority complex. We did not think that we could actually deserve better or do better. And so we took what was good enough. And I think what we have to do is. Look at ourselves today and exercise some confidence. We have city employees that are talented. We have city employees that we have to compete to to have them work with us here as opposed to work elsewhere. I think paying for talent is what you do in every industry, and I am not embarrassed or shy about the fact that we will pay for talent because this city deserves it. And so let's crawl out of that collective municipal inferiority complex that this city suffered from for so long and that we have actually come away from. And let's not revert to that and let's join with our residents and look at these solutions together and ask them what it is that they want this city to be going forward. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Vice Mayor. I think everyone's had a chance to to weigh in. And I know it's an important topic, so I appreciate all the questions. Public comment. Please come forward.
Speaker 2: Good evening, everyone. I'm Jack Smith. I live at 240 Chestnut. That's in Plymouth West in the first district. Ten years, not ten years ago. Six years ago, when I was running for council, the term revenue enhancement came up and at one of the public forums I reminded everybody that that was really a government term for tax. It occurred to me about halfway through the terrific presentation this evening how many times that word showed up. And it occurred to me also that that is probably the most reviled word in the history of humankind. Tax. When I was a kid and suddenly my life needed more money than my father's allowance was providing me, I went to my father and said, Well, we need to increase the tax I have on you and get me some more money. And he responded, No, there was another word in front of that. You can fill in the blank yourself. So I had to do something that I think this city can do. I had to delve into economic development. I had to go find other means of raising money. Not by taxing my family. I mowed lawns. I babysat. I created my own little business. I did whatever it took. We have an economic development commission that I believe has some of the smartest, most powerful movers and shakers in our city. They are really an incredible group of folks. Now, you just sent them a hot potato on the minimum wage increase. The meat of what they want to do is help this city increase its revenues and therefore increase the amount of tax it has coming. That will solve the problems that you're talking about without necessarily increasing the taxes. I found it interesting that probably the largest number. Of increase was in the sales tax. That was the biggest possibility there. Now, rather than increase the sales tax 1%. Why don't we increase the tax base by 1%? Don't you imagine our very, very good economic development commission might be able to do that? I would suggest you take the time over the next few months. Not rush into throwing something on the ballot that will cause the voters to say that word. No. And let the Economic Development Commission come up with a plan for you. Do what you want them to do. Don't send them off on some ten year plan or something. Do something right now within the next year or the next few months and make some real suggestions. There are smart group. They know what they're talking about and increase the revenues in this city that therefore will increase the amount of taxes that we collect without raising taxes. Thanks.
Speaker 3: Thanks, Jack. You also you'll be happy to know that that's actually next on their agenda. And so the the economic blueprint is actually on their agenda at their February meeting. And I know they're all looking forward to that. So thank you. Our next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Laurie Angell. I live in the eighth District and I have to mirror an awful lot of what Jack said. This is we're looking at tax increases and not really looking at opportunities to increase revenues, actual revenues like bringing in industries. We have industrial space in the ninth and ninth district that's just fallow that could be utilized. So we haven't even really looked at that. And, you know, we need to do some work on that. A tax increase should be the very last resort. And we have to look at the commitments that have been made over the past couple of years that helped.
Speaker 2: To get us into this situation.
Speaker 4: I mean, the Civic Center, how much is the additional cost per year for the new civic center? How much money have we lost in sales tax incentives? So we've taken away the sales tax revenue that we would have received from some of the largest sales tax generators as a business incentive for them to stay. Well, they're here and they've been here for decades, so I don't imagine that they would be leaving. So continuing to eliminate your sales tax revenues to provide incentives isn't really helping you at all. I think that if you are to consider taxes, it does have to be the last resort. But if you are going to go down that dangerous, bumpy, scary road and probably be denied, you need to have a very robust.
Speaker 2: Discussion with.
Speaker 4: The public, not throw at them at the last minute. This is what you think that you need and this is how you need it. That's why the last measure failed. There were budget discussions several years ago and Mayor O'Neill was here and General Manager Gerry Miller was here with the entire community. I mean, hundreds and hundreds of people showed up and we discussed the budget in detail and there were stations for every element of the budget for the people to decide what they thought might be best. So you're saying that it isn't really your your.
Speaker 2: Problem.
Speaker 4: To put a tax measure, but how you packages package it is everything. The options are huge and that's where you need to rely on the public if you're even going to plan on going down that road. But if you can figure out a way to increase the value of our property and our homes and don't influence that with poor decisions about land use, then you might be getting somewhere as well.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Next speaker, please. This is our final speaker. Mr. Good. He wants to come down after this. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Like most of you seeing this sign before, I had to break it out from an inventory. I'm really sort of shocked that this is like Groundhog Day. I've lived here since 1986 and every five or six years. This Hogg's. Come on again. I mean, it's ridiculous. We did it with Mayor Foster. You know, he came up with this measure I concoction. That was terrible. It was free money. You guys could have spent it on anything you wanted. That's why it died. You talk about raising money. He raised $700,000 from California to New York. What the hell is somebody in New York care about my street? He just called in all these chips. He's a lobbyist. Now you're going to do the same thing again. We heard Lakewood Mansion. Why is Lakewood in better shape than us? One word, two words. Contract City. It's a lot less expensive for them than it is here, no matter how much money we have here. The residents, taxpaying residents will never get the benefits that city employees do. The family will always come first. It's been said by this council many times that our first priority is to take care of the family. And when you try to run this mayor, this proposition, I around $700,000 in just about every department head in the city was out there stomping for it. Your latest study says that only 23% of city employees actually live in the city. That's pretty amazing. So all those people that are asking us to raise our taxes, take their check and go to another city. That study you did on minimum wage, you even mentioned it up here, 23%. I thought that was only police and fire. You know, none of them live here. Well, 23% is about right. 25. So I think you need to rethink this drastically. You talked about cutting 700 positions. That was that those things were kept. The police department used theirs to fund overtime. They even admitted it when a department had to make a cut, they cut a phantom position so that give it a rest. The pension reform. You said if we have such great reform, wire pensions, $100 million. Why are they going to go up between 130 and $150 million by 2021? And then from 2021, for the next 20 years, we're going to be paying that $150 million. It's not fair. The family shouldn't come first. Residents should you know, they they had a article in the paper to. But that $10,000 club it used to be. Thank you.
Speaker 3: Mr. said that.
Speaker 1: It was a 200,000. Now we have a three times. Thank you. Members of that $300,000 club sitting here.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Very good in a number of points. First of all, let me start with a very. On point. Astute observation the councilman from the third district led. Mention a relative to increase the crime. And that's not going to get any better. That's what we can expect in that ratio of increase for the next ten years. Later on in the month, we're going to have the details of why that. But if you just check the birth rates at the hospitals and so forth, you can project that out. But I think you have to take a few things that come sharply. Hopefully it's sharp in people's mind is obviously. The rebuild of city hall as projected and as people want is dead D.O.A. buried? What will happen? This will be replaced with either an office building or a hotel. All right. Library will be at the Renaissance School. A paradise in there. And the port will relocate where it should from which it the area should never left in the first place back within the port period. It was the disease process of kicking them out of there to start with. But one of the things I think you need to address yourself is the fact that within the next certainly 90 days, 220. There will be a federal master administering this city. And if you don't doubt that, how fast that has been pushed up in the agenda. Look at the article from the L.A. Times last week. Relative to the Speaker of the Assembly. Coming out and supporting the attorney general to rebuke Kamala Harris. Who the court opined had almost all but suggested she resign for the epidemic of corruption she has engendered. The who but a crook which supported another crook. The feds have now realized that the original epidemic of corruption, which is slowly moving to pandemic, has surpassed their pandemic level and is now we are California. California is in a state of what's called kleptocracy. And if you don't know what it is, look it up. Gail EPP. G o. C. R e. Y. Period. They recognize that. So we will have a federal master to oversee what needs to be done. I'm not sure what the answer is, but I do know that we can expect with a federal master overseeing the city, just like they're overseeing the L.A. Department, the L.A. District Attorney's Office. Now, whether that was for incompetence or not for corruption. We can get a better handle on what we're going to have to do. And it's not going to be pleasant, but at least we'll know. It will be honest.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Facing no other public comment. There is a motion to receive and file the report as presented by city staff members. Please go ahead and cast your votes.
Speaker 4: Motion carries. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to receive and file the memorandum to the members of the City Council from the Department of Financial Management dated January 13, 2016 entitled, “Responses to Questions from the December 22, 2015 Study Session on the City’s Infrastructure Needs,” along with the Revenue Measure Options presentation; or
Direct City Manager to provide additional information relative to the implementation of revenue measure options for the City; or
Direct City Attorney to prepare any and all documents necessary for a possible revenue measure in the City, to be returned to the City Council for a vote to place the measure on a ballot. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01262016_16-0079 | Speaker 3: Thank you. Next up, Madam Court, do you want to read the next item?
Speaker 4: Please report from City Clerk recommendation to adopt a resolution providing for the appointment of Darryl Super nine to the Office of Council Member for Council District for the term of four years and the cancelation of election in Council District four, previously called by the City Council or receive and filed this report.
Speaker 3: OC with the motion and a second Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 6: Although I'm tempted to ask a lot of questions on this one, I'm not going to.
Speaker 3: Count some Councilmember Ringa.
Speaker 7: Congratulations. Council member Supernormal. Well done.
Speaker 3: Councilmember Richardson.
Speaker 5: I guess we can go ahead and bring them back to the council. He's done an okay job.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 3: Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 4: I'll have to disagree with Councilmember Richardson. I think he's done a fantastic job being a council member who borders my district. I have significantly appreciated his partnership on a lot of our business initiatives, and so I'm going to give him an A-plus. And we've been filling out a lot of reviews. I'll give him a five out of five.
Speaker 3: Councilmember Austin.
Speaker 1: I'm just going to call him Lucky.
Speaker 3: Councilman Gonzalez.
Speaker 6: Is it possible to do this for all of our elections, by the way? I'm just saying. No, I it's been a pleasure working with Councilmember Super now. So if this is any space to do that, I want to say a great job.
Speaker 3: And Council member.
Speaker 2: Andrews Council member who.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Vice Mayor Lowenthal.
Speaker 9: So does he have to stay in the back if we don't act? Is that is that why he left? Yes. I just want to congratulate him. Thank you. Yeah, let's not vote with delay.
Speaker 3: I just want to add before we go to a vote, Councilmember Super now has been a complete delight to work with. He is has high integrity. He's a hard worker. He's got a good staff. And I think he's been a great addition to this council and body. I think we've all really enjoyed working with him and we want to congratulate him. He was clearly doing such a great job in the district that no one chose to run against run against him. And that, I think, says a lot about his his first year or so that he's been on the council and it even been a year, it seems like. So congratulations council member Superman and any members of the public on this item seeing none members, please go out and cast your votes.
Speaker 4: The motion carries for the first time. | Resolution | Recommendation to either A.) adopt resolution pursuant to the provisions of Long Beach Municipal Code Section 1.21.070, providing for the appointment of Daryl Supernaw to the Office of Councilmember, Fourth Council District for the term of four years commencing on the third Tuesday of July, 2016; and the cancellation of election in Council District Four previously called by the City Council on November 10, 2015; or B.) receive and file this report. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01192016_16-0033 | Speaker 0: Thank you. Next item 15, please.
Speaker 1: Communication from Council Member Richardson. Chair Federal Legislation Committee recommendation to request the approval of the 2016 federal legislative agenda.
Speaker 0: Thank you. There's a motion. Can I get a second, please? There's a motion in a second. Is there any public comment on item 15? CNN councilman, did you have any report, a note? Yes, I do. Go ahead.
Speaker 11: It'll be short. First, I want to thank our committee members, Councilmember Gonzalez and Councilmember Mungo, for working very long and hard on approving this agenda. I also want to thank Diana Tang and city staff for their hard work. This was completed in a timely manner and we did have a great deal of discussion. We've created a strong agenda that's more organized. It's easier to read and strongly impacts our city's key priorities. One portion I'd like to point out is that we added certain elements. I'm pleased to say that we've supported policies and legislation that would require background checks on ammunition purchases, supported legislative policy, and grants that allow our CDC to fund guns, gun violence. And IT studies and data collection. And we're doing a lot to ensure that our workforces are we keep a priority on on our workforce. So so that said, I move this and ask for your support.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilman Mangold, you have any comment for your second?
Speaker 1: I think that this is much improved over prior years. I also think the city staff and I look forward to our trip to DC to represent the city and ensure we bring back more revenue that we deserve.
Speaker 0: Councilman Gonzalez.
Speaker 12: I too. I just want to thank the committee for certainly being open to adding gun control in the in the agenda, as well as for Diana Tang to be as organized as she is and just continue to go back and forth with us with dialog to make sure that we're we're really strengthening the document is as needed . So thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. There's a motion on the floor. Members, please cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. Let's see. Next up, can we get the next item, please? I believe. Item number 717. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to respectfully request City Council approval of the 2016 Federal Legislative Agenda as recommended by the Federal Legislative Committee. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01192016_16-0015 | Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. Let's see. Next up, can we get the next item, please? I believe. Item number 717.
Speaker 1: Report from Long Beach Airport recommendation to award a contract to Jacobs Engineering Group to provide a comprehensive feasibility study for a Federal Inspection Service facility at the Long Beach Airport in an amount not to exceed $349,000. District five.
Speaker 0: Mr. WEST.
Speaker 5: Mr. Mayor. Council members, this has been before the Council a.
Speaker 3: Couple of times for tonight's meeting. Our executive director of the airport, Bryant Francis, is going to talk about awarding this contract for the study.
Speaker 7: Good evening, Mayor Garcia, members of council. On July 7th, 2015, City Council authorized the city manager to proceed with the project to conduct a feasibility study regarding the potential development of the Federal Inspection Services Facility at Long Beach Airport. The airport immediately began working with purchasing department to prepare a request for qualifications for RFQ on August 28th in RFQ was issued by the city's purchasing department. Next, a pre statement of qualifications meeting was held in early September with potential proposers. On September 23rd, the deadline to submit statements of qualification. Three proposers officially stated interest after internal review. All proposers were deemed qualified and were notified by purchasing of the opportunity to present to an evaluation committee consisting of airport and purchasing staff on October 12th. Of the three presentations, the evaluation committee believed Jacobs to be the strongest and best suited for this project. Therefore, in late October, Jacobs Engineering was requested to submit a scope of services as well as a cost proposal, both of which were received several weeks later. After reaching a successful agreement on scope and fees with the airport purchasing, posted the notice of intent to award to Jacobs Engineering Group on December 14th. This began a ten day protest period of which none were received. Jacobs Engineering is one of the industry's leading providers of global comprehensive aviation services. They propose to use in-house consultants and a short list of subcontract consultants to conduct the study. The components of the study will include airport market analysis, airport scope and capability, financial feasibility, economic impact, assessment of environmental impact and security risk assessment. The City Attorney's Office will conduct a risk assessment of the potential threats to the airport noise control ordinance and a plan to mitigate impact at neighborhoods and schools from environmental and health impacts. Should the airport noise control ordinance become invalidated? Please note that this component will not be covered by Jacobs sports consultants. I felt it important to mention, however, as it was a direct counsel request to have this component included as part of the overall study. And it will be covered. An additional counter request was to hold community meetings. We will work with Council District offices to schedule those meetings that would like to convene a meeting for the airports east side or districts four and five and another for the airport's west side or for District seven and eight. These meetings will be to formally introduced the feasibility study team, review the components of the work which will be conducted, and to answer questions and which in the meetings to be in an open house format and that they will be held very close together in date, helping to keep costs in line as members from each firm will be represented and many will be traveling from outside of the area. Based upon the timeline submitted by Jacobs. And barring any delays, the findings of the feasibility study will be finalized in July 2016. Staff will return to city council with members of the Jacobs team to present those findings soon thereafter, likely in August. Tonight, Mr. Ron Siki of Jacobs Engineering is here and is available to address the Council should you have any direct questions for him? This concludes my report and we are happy to take questions at this time.
Speaker 0: There is a motion in a second, but Councilman Mongo and Councilman Price. Did you have it? Do you have it? Do you wanna go to the public? Councilman. Okay, any. Any members of the public want to speak on this? This is a contact. Adam, please come forward.
Speaker 5: Very good to see you guys. I'm just curious what to make sure that when we've had these community meetings, have we reached out to the four year olds, the five year olds, the seven year olds, the pictures of the people that were here last week and here today? I think we should get their viewpoint, even though they're, you know. In most cases do not are not 18 and don't have the cognitive skills that as you hopefully advance in age, you do get to forget. And I recognize there's a good intent. But let's make sure that. When we get input, we get it from mines that are fully developed. All right. Thank you. And I recognize oftentimes some of the decisions you make do not suggest that they're made by developed mines. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Next speaker, please. Thank you.
Speaker 2: Good evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Laura Silver.
Speaker 13: My address is on file. I'm a resident of Long Beach.
Speaker 8: I am opposed.
Speaker 2: To the scope.
Speaker 1: Of the International Airport.
Speaker 13: Expansion Feasibility study. I'm not opposed to the study.
Speaker 8: But as it stands before you, it has.
Speaker 2: Frightening implications.
Speaker 13: Because staff.
Speaker 2: Has bundled with project.
Speaker 8: Design and last.
Speaker 2: Year Council voted in.
Speaker 13: July to proceed with a fact finding and.
Speaker 8: Fact.
Speaker 13: Facing a research project.
Speaker 2: You stated fact.
Speaker 13: Based decision making is how you want it to proceed, and I applaud you for that. And I just urge you with.
Speaker 2: I know many.
Speaker 13: Of you have graduate.
Speaker 8: Studies to.
Speaker 13: Refer to your background in research design and the principles of research design are that you look for the facts and then the facts inform you whether to proceed or not.
Speaker 2: One of the facts.
Speaker 8: Are, well, some.
Speaker 13: Information I have here is this is from city.
Speaker 8: Prosecutor Doug Halbert on to.
Speaker 13: 2015 in February. We're just a casualty of another airline wants into the airport and all slots are allocated. So to answer the question, which is a great question. The crisis will.
Speaker 2: Come when someone sees an opportunity here in.
Speaker 13: Long Beach so that the type of opportunity will dictate who challenges us and in what form. If a judge simply wipes out the entire ordinance, Long Beach would have no local control. No direct control, even though we own.
Speaker 2: The.
Speaker 13: Airport. Aviation landings all handled by the federal government. The fact that we have a curfew and night, you can't fly over the lateral runways. 25 are so bad now that Councilman Mongo is your area that's protected with the ordinance.
Speaker 2: Without the ordinance. It's a frightening prospect. So going into an international.
Speaker 13: It's a very.
Speaker 8: Risky.
Speaker 13: For all of us, those of us who live in the airport impacted areas. We know that.
Speaker 8: We don't want that for you. And so I would urge you to look at the scope of this.
Speaker 13: Feasibility study.
Speaker 8: And don't go into a almost shovel ready design. Just see if you want to go with it. Or rather.
Speaker 13: So it's a matter of adjusting the scope of this. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Joe Sopel My address is online, Mr. Mayor. City Council Members and Staff.
Speaker 6: Council Members Mongeau Pryce, Gonzalez, Lowenthal, Andrews and Richardson.
Speaker 3: Have a choice. Instead of unwisely.
Speaker 6: Spending $349,000 on whether allowing Customs facility at Long Beach Airport might be.
Speaker 3: Feasible, they should make it. They should make a joint.
Speaker 6: Substitute motion that we hope council members, your Ranger Super Now and Austin would support.
Speaker 5: To first direct.
Speaker 6: A serious study, analyze and overdue discussion.
Speaker 5: To first decide whether to expose the.
Speaker 6: City to a new.
Speaker 5: And uncontrolled risk.
Speaker 6: To the only protection Long Beach currently has from locally unregulated flights. With no nighttime curfew in all runways.
Speaker 3: At all times. It is a fact.
Speaker 6: Not an opinion, that if a.
Speaker 3: Long Beach Council majority.
Speaker 6: Were to allow a customs facility desired by one tenant.
Speaker 3: Which is JetBlue.
Speaker 6: The city would be powerless to limit it to one carrier.
Speaker 5: The Council's approval of a customs.
Speaker 6: Facility would effectively incentivize provide the economic bait, enabling an entirely new class of countless international operators, passenger and cargo to seek flight slots that might be unavailable under Long Beach's protective ordinance. The minute all slots are filled, any one of that entirely new, large and powerful class of international operators would have an incentive.
Speaker 5: To potentially destroy Long Beach is protective airport ordinance. Mm hmm. If Long Beach airport management has.
Speaker 6: $349,000 to spare, I urge the Council to divert that some to be put aside as part of a permanent legal defense fund to continually.
Speaker 5: Protect our ordinance from those who could do us harm.
Speaker 3: Instead of inviting others to do so.
Speaker 6: I stood in front of you when we talked about an FBI study, and I thought 5 to $10000 was going to be a lot of money for this study.
Speaker 3: And now staff is asking for $349,000. If you vote yes on that tonight, you're effectively voting yes on international flights. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Next week, please.
Speaker 5: John Doe lottery address on file. Mayor. City Council. First, I'd just like to say a long.
Speaker 7: Line out there. I'd give some kudos to the strong start.
Speaker 5: There are probably good 20 of them that were.
Speaker 7: Hoping to get in here.
Speaker 3: And weren't able to. So. Are you guys going to have a long night?
Speaker 7: It'd be nice to be up here tonight to thank you for declining fees. Unfortunately, that's not the case. Instead, I ask why waste $385,000 before you even see if an office could put our noise ordinance at risk? All of you are on record stating that you are in support of the noise ordinance and don't want to put us at risk or it at risk. I would request that you pay an outside counsel like the one that defended us in 2001.
Speaker 3: Against.
Speaker 5: American Airlines.
Speaker 7: To even see if the noise ordinance is at risk. If we move forward with an office, why spend that 385,000? You know, as recently stated that the state of the city is strong. And I just put to you that we do not need an international airport to continue making this a strong city.
Speaker 5: We need more.
Speaker 7: Police. We need more fire. We need infrastructure. We don't need an office. That's not going to bring any money to our general fund. So, again, I would request that you if anything, let's look at the noise ordinance first. And if that's the case that it's not going to cause any issues, then move forward. Don't waste $395,000.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Makes bigger peace. Good evening. I'm Marshal.
Speaker 3: Dostoevsky. I live in Bixby Knolls.
Speaker 5: I oppose this. This international facility. And, you know, I just wanted to.
Speaker 3: Say that the one thing that this is going to do, this is only going to benefit JetBlue. I mean, JetBlue is in a kind of in a bad situation because they are competing with Southwest Airlines. Southwest Airlines goes to Mexico, goes to the Caribbean. JetBlue is based out of Long Beach. Doesn't have the the flights to go to. Doesn't have the right to go to Mexico because there's no international facility.
Speaker 5: And I think that paying $349,845, that JetBlue should pay this money. They should pay this because it only benefits them. I mean, is this.
Speaker 3: A city that just backs corporations or is this a.
Speaker 5: City that backs the residents and the people of Long Beach? And I know.
Speaker 7: That my.
Speaker 3: Home is affected by this, and many other people in my neighborhood are affected by this. So I would say that JetBlue should pay the money or we should that.
Speaker 7: That they're.
Speaker 3: The ones that benefit. So I wanted to thank you for allowing me to speak. Good evening.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Next week, please.
Speaker 13: Good evening, Mayor and council members. You have not publicly discussed the Fresca study from 2013, which today is still relevant.
Speaker 8: I'm going to ask that you take that into serious consideration tonight. Now you're being asked to approve.
Speaker 13: The accurate number is $349,845 to provide you with additional information to make an intelligent decision on whether or not to approve the request for international flying. The only reason that this is back before you is because the cost has gone beyond the city manager's limits of $250,000. Each one of you have publicly stated that you support the coveted noise ordinance. You were simply asking for additional information to make a more educated decision. Yet this contract that you are asked to approve tonight includes the following services wording is directly from their websites. Jacob Engineering starting with aviation planning, site development and asset management to architecture and engineering design through to construction support, commissioning and long term facilities management. We are able to help our clients connect all of the critical, critical aspects of their facility to provide an excellent experience for their traveling customers.
Speaker 8: In the U.S., we have.
Speaker 13: Worked in more than 80 commercial airports, and in the past 15 years we have successfully delivered 12 major aviation programs totaling more than 15 billion. Lacoste Consulting, a boutique advocacy advisory shop offering strategic marketing network and capacity expertize for the aviation industry. This team is comprised of industry veterans from Large International as well as low cost characters. So the airlines are involved in this. Franka Fresca and Associates, a transportation and consulting firm, the firm that provided you the 2013 study that you have yet to discuss publicly. Fresca and Associates is dedicated to helping our airport clients establish best in class financial practices so that they can realize their goal of providing superior facilities and services to their customers. Somers, a top engineering firm that specializes in transportation segment Fonterra. They were involved in the 2001 airport expansion proposal. Applied Research Associates International Research and Engineering Company Lee Andrews Group, a full service public affairs and strategic planning firm that special specializes in public outreach and Jacobs and young construction cost consultants. Each one of these contractors has a history and vested interest in moving this project forward. This additional information study that you requested goes beyond the consideration to determine if this is a good, viable project that will benefit all of Olive Long Beach. We ask you once again tonight to consider all of the material you.
Speaker 8: Already have collected comments made by our.
Speaker 13: City prosecutor Doug Halbert, and the historical consequences related to the Long Beach challenges. Please receive and file this this request.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Speaker Please think this is our it looks like our final speaker on this item. Okay. Yes, sir.
Speaker 5: Yes. Hello, Robert. How you doing? City Council. My name is Steve Uptake. I'm a retired bisexual man living here in Long Beach. I've worked all my life. I do not have a criminal record. And I have requested over and over again that the city and the airport put in a noise monitor in the south by southwest part of the airport, which there is not a noise monitor. And you have a law or something about that. And you should put one there, because not only are you flying more of those little airplanes over my house and dropping fuel and oil on top of us that live there and the kids that live there, you're also flying big jets over my house that just started. I don't know. You didn't tell me about that one either. Now, let me change the subject. Okay. I'm actually going along with you here, guys. But you got to think big. You know what Hong Kong did? They got up off the coast over here like you did when you built the port. They built up an airport where you can have the biggest international airport you want. And that way it could be done where people aren't going to complain about it, like me.
Speaker 3: About airplanes falling out of.
Speaker 5: The sky on top of their heads or drop in oil or whatever the heck comes out of them. And then you could build yourself a big airport like Hong Kong. And I think some other country has built an airport off their coast also and have an international airport because there is a future if we don't blow ourselves up. And that way you could have your international airport. You know, you should think about things like that. And then you could have all that real estate over there to make another gazillion dollars on. I'm not against making money. It's about, you know, how you treat people. And the thing of it is, is that building up another airport off the coast is something you should consider. Yeah, it's going to take time and money, but that's that's life and, you know. So, in other words, I'm not against expansion, but trying to put an lax over in that hole where L.A., Long Beach is, it's, you know, lots of luck with that. You know, it's not a matter of if a plane is going to fall on Long Beach.
Speaker 3: It's a matter of when.
Speaker 5: And I sure as hell don't want to be under it. If you drop it in the ocean, that's a better chance of survival anyway. And so and that's my pitch, you know. In other words, put a noise monitor in the South by Southwest like you're supposed to so you can monitor the system and think about maybe putting that you could work with Orange County. They could probably between here in Long Beach, build up something off the coast, a real airport like Hong Kong, like it's already been done. It's not in science fiction, it's already been done. And that way you can have your international airport, you can make a gazillion dollars, have a future for the kids in the future and give these kids 15 bucks an hour.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. So that closes public comment on I'm on another item. Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 1: I think studies are important. And I'm not saying that anyone here or at least I'm not committing to voting yes or no on the FISA. But I believe in what the very first woman said, which is a study is really important to know the viability. Airport Director Do you believe that this study has greater impact than to any one carrier? Would you elaborate on that?
Speaker 7: A Council on mango. We we do believe that in terms of the users of this facility, should it come to fruition at some point in the future, it would extend beyond a single carrier in JetBlue. It is true that JetBlue submitted a formal request to my attention at the end of February, which is what began this process that we are here to discuss this evening and consider. However, we do believe that there will be other beneficiaries at the airport in terms of others of of our tenant mix, including the general aviation community Gulfstream, which has a major completion center there on the West Coast operation for the completion of their aircraft. So we do believe that there will be other users beyond JetBlue for for that facility.
Speaker 1: I think it's interesting, you mentioned Gulfstream. They've increased employees by, I believe, 200 this year with all high paying jobs. Would you say that when this study comes back, should it not be beneficial to the city that this would potentially put the item of the international terminal as a know to rest forever? Or at least the imaginable long term future.
Speaker 7: Well, so I certainly wouldn't say forever, but. But what I would like to see is the results of the study. And and that, I think, will be very telling in terms of giving you the council the information that you need to make the informed decision as to whether to proceed with the project. There is nothing in this scope that will include design. They will look at potential sites for the fires to be located on. They would look at things in terms of potential scale, but there will be no design of a facility itself. We would come back to council with the full results of this study before any of those determinations would be made and those will be made by you.
Speaker 1: And Councilmember Austin did an excellent job about six months ago when we discussed this previously of ensuring the robust nature of the study. Have all items requested by Council Member Austin been included?
Speaker 7: Yes, they happen.
Speaker 1: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Councilman Price.
Speaker 12: Thank you. Well, when we voted on this before, my position was that data is good, it's always good. And I prefer to make decisions based on all of the data that we have, rather than speculation on many things that that come before us, especially things that happened in my district. So I don't see that this is going to be any different in terms of the process. Unlike one of the previous speakers, I had no illusion whatsoever that this study was going to cost five or $10,000. I mean, it costs more for us to study whether or not we should extend read curbing on a street by feet or two. So there was no to me, the cost of the study isn't shocking by any stretch of the imagination, given the scope of the study. So I'm not concerned about the financial commitment because I think much like many of the major studies that we do that impact policy decisions for the city. It's an important study and I want to make sure that it has a very broad scope so that everyone's interests are accounted for. So I'm going to be supporting this item. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 4: Thank you. And I think my my position is pretty clear on this. It has been from the very beginning. I have some significant and serious reservations, and I voted against the study to begin with. I don't think I can be supportive of it again today. That said, I do have some some questions before I make my comments. And the first one is for the city attorney. Can you discuss how the components that are being conducted through your office, namely the risk assessment of the potential threats to noise ordinance and the plan to mitigate impact in neighborhoods in schools be conducted or incorporated into the feasibility study. How are you guys going to go about conducting this in-house? Do you plan on doing it with outside counsel?
Speaker 5: Councilman Austin Members of the City Council. Our current plan is.
Speaker 6: To.
Speaker 5: Review the draft of the report before it's made public. Work with the outside consultant if we need to do that to.
Speaker 8: Make a determination. As you know, our office is very.
Speaker 3: Familiar with the contents of the ordinance. We've been working with it even before it was adopted in.
Speaker 5: 1995, so we feel very comfortable with it.
Speaker 8: If we feel that we do need.
Speaker 6: Technical expertize from outside counsel, as one of the speakers indicated.
Speaker 5: We have used the law firm a great.
Speaker 3: Skill and balance in.
Speaker 6: The past for issues like this.
Speaker 5: They are also very familiar with the city of Long Beach Airport, the Long Beach Noise Compatibility Ordinance.
Speaker 3: And if necessary.
Speaker 8: We.
Speaker 5: Would probably hire them to provide additional assistance if we need it. But really, we're going to take a hard look at the report itself.
Speaker 3: Before we formulate an opinion.
Speaker 4: So I think Mr. Francis mentioned that the report will come back and he expected it back in July.
Speaker 7: That's correct.
Speaker 4: And so with the additions, I guess, do we plan on getting all this information back at once or will it come back?
Speaker 5: And based.
Speaker 8: On your previous.
Speaker 3: Direction, it's our understanding that we would present, in effect.
Speaker 5: A joint report. There would be a report by staff and the consultant, and our office would contribute to that by way of either a separate paper on the issue and.
Speaker 3: Of course oral presentation.
Speaker 5: As well. So we would do it at the same time.
Speaker 4: Okay. Thank you. That is helpful. Um, and Mr. Francis, in 2015, revenues at the airport were significantly down from the previous year, and I believe it was down more than $2 million from what was budgeted in that year. That is correct. Okay. And so the council's budget performance report last summer, the council was told that the airport fund revenues are directly impacted by the number of employments at the Lombard Airport. So that said, declining employment numbers over the past few years have been negatively impacted. And I think that was the negatively impacted revenues. I think that was one of your quotes. That's correct. I believe these revenue trends are continuing this year for the airport as well. Is that correct?
Speaker 7: Well, actually, our employment levels have stabilized, so but it doesn't really provide for recovery because we're not yet seeing an increase in passenger activity as we have in previous years. So so we will still see, we believe, revenues that are slightly off from what they were last year. There have been some adjustments in rates and charges for this year, and that certainly will compensate for for a good, good portion of what would have otherwise been declining revenues.
Speaker 4: So with the decline in revenues, do you. I think that $350,000 study is prudent. But the story.
Speaker 7: I believe that in terms of giving us the in-depth analysis from many angles that is warranted for a project of this magnitude, I do believe it's prudent. We have continued to report a surplus in terms of our overall budgeting. So we we still have an excess of revenues to expenses. But what we've been seeing is a decline in the overall revenue levels. So we still are reporting surpluses in our revenue stream. And I do believe that this will be a prudent project for us to move forward with in terms of the feasibility study itself.
Speaker 4: Okay. And so so I think we may just just disagree on that. I mean, I think, you know, when you lose your money.
Speaker 5: It's.
Speaker 4: Kind of difficult to to justify spending that type of money. But, um, I would prefer what similar sized cities have international airports.
Speaker 7: So just off the top of my head in California, Fresno is an airport in state that has an FAA. They have several flights to Mexico, various destinations in Mexico. Also Tucson, Arizona, Birmingham, Alabama. So just to name a few cities that are are about the same size of of Long Beach, but also have international facilities.
Speaker 4: And just this is just a question out of curiosity. I know it's a little off topic. I'm sorry, but do what type of commercial aircraft do they are able to use be use it at Long Beach Airport. Given our current current terminal constraints.
Speaker 7: So the the design aircraft, the largest aircraft that we would see on a routine basis would be of the 757 variety or Airbus 321, which is the roughly 180 to 200 passenger aircraft on. Under special circumstances, we could accommodate a very small widebody aircraft. But there really is no provision for that facility to handle large widebody aircraft, such as the Boeing 747 or Airbus three eighties, very large, you know, 4 to 500 passenger aircraft. Those cannot be be handled or accommodated at the existing facility.
Speaker 4: When I think international flight, I think big, big planes just that's just me. So I'll just have some quick remarks. As I said, when this issue came before the council last July, I strongly believe now and continue to believe that the quality of life of our residents is the paramount factor that should be determined as this council takes action. And I'm not prepared to expose our city or our neighborhoods to any significant risk when the economic reward to the city appears to be minimal or nonexistent. Opening the door to international flights creates a whole new potential risk, too, of a challenge to our very, very precious noise ordinance. And and as I read the newspaper, I look at cities across the the particularly in Burbank recently. They are trying to accomplish what we have in our noise ordinance and at least having a curfew. That's something that we also should be very mindful of. The former airport director memorial, Mel Rodriguez, in a memo in 2013 told the city council that future revenues from FISA would only serve to mitigate the cost of the facility and not further enhance the airport's financial position. And so, given the significant cost to even undertake this feasibility study when the airport is facing declining revenues, I believe is not financially responsible to continue down this path. The risk, I believe, outweigh the rewards. And I'll repeat that again. And so with that, I would like to make a substitute motion to receive and file this motion. Of. Thank you.
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 2: That would be me. Thank you, Councilmember Austin. And we have Councilmember Sue. I'm sorry, Councilmember Your Honor.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Vice Mayor. Just a few. Well, just one quick question. For me, it's very simple. Fresno, Birmingham and Tucson, you say, are international have international airports. Correct?
Speaker 7: Yes, sir, that's correct.
Speaker 3: How close in proximity are they to other airports that have a similar size or have or offer international flights? That's another state.
Speaker 7: Those three are probably about 100 miles away. I should have added that. Of course, Santa Ana Orange County Airport has the Federal Inspection Service facility as well.
Speaker 3: Okay. When it comes down to Long Beach. You know, I think that we're looking at. Adding international flights. We're talking about adding flights in proximity to Orange County, Los Angeles. Ontario, I think, has international flight, if I'm not mistaken. And yet, you know, here we are within, I would say, what, 50 miles of those cities, less with Orange County and L.A.. And yet we want to create a an international facility here. It just doesn't make sense to me. But also doesn't make sense is that when we're looking at the spending of $350,000, that can be used towards fixing sidewalks, cutting trees. Using staff for other purposes and security. We have a marijuana issue becoming a pretty soon. We're talking about how are we going to find that? Why? Here's $350. We could be use it for that. I mean, it doesn't make sense to me when we're looking at another study spending money in something that apparently is is is a a fait accompli based on how it's worded and what the expectations are going to be coming back to us. I said this many months ago when I offered. Let me rephrase it when I did not support this item back then, and I don't support it now. We don't need a feasibility study. We have a great airport. If any A-frame broke, don't fix it. If we need if revenue is an issue where we need to make more revenue, then let's talk about a business plan for what we have at the airport to increase revenue. You know, we're talking about the change of a business plan that goes from east to west or west to east , going north and south. But yet, when we talk about those, the business plan that goes east to west, west to east, we're cutting flights. We're not increasing flights. We're cutting flights. And that doesn't make any sense to me. In fact, I haven't seen any reports that would support cutting back flights. You know, I know that I can use more flights to D.C. directly from Long Beach being that, you know, I go there as is at least twice or three times a year sometimes. I know that we can use more flights to Sacramento, which would be fit in with a North-South flight plan. There's only one flight per day. And it's and it's in the middle of the morning. In the middle of the afternoon. Totally inconvenient. Thank you for for making meetings that I might have in Sacramento. So, I mean, it's instead of looking at creating an office, let's look at our airport in terms of creating more flight opportunities. So I'm not going to be supporting this issue, but I will support the receiver file.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember Superdome.
Speaker 7: Thank you. And Councilmember Mongeau referenced the first speaker, and that was Laura Selmer from the fourth District. What I'd like to do, I think you've answered this question, but I'd like to frame it the way Laura did, and that is why not adjust the scope of the study so it's less money. So if you could just address it in those terms, I appreciate it. Yes, sir. We worked very diligently with Jacobs to refine the scope to what you have before you today. As I mentioned, there are six areas, none of which are design. One is market analysis. The second is airport scoping and capability. The third is financial feasibility. The fourth is economic impact. The fifth is assessment of environmental impact, and last is security risk assessment. And as I mentioned, there is also the component that the city attorney's office will be covering. So this is to look at the feasibility, financial and otherwise of this type of project taking place at the airport. The previous study that was done in 2013 was only a financial feasibility study, just one of the six components that are going to be covered by Jacobs with this study. So this is certainly more robust, but it takes a more full look at what the project would look like. All of the components that need to be considered that the council would would, I believe, benefit from having the information to make that future decision. So again, the scope has been refined to the point that it is in today. And we believe that what we brought forward is fitting for the type of project that is before you. Okay. Thank you. And I'm going to confuse two issues here purposely, because I get asked this question almost daily. There is something different on the table than we had last July, and that is the additional flight slots. So if you would just indulge, just please. Approximately how many flights do we have on a daily basis right now? So today, with the 41 air carrier slots and 25 commuter slots, we have roughly 40 departures per day. Presently of of 66 possible today. Okay. So 40 of 66. So if you filled all those slots and added nine plus, what would your total number be? 75. Okay. So that's that's the threat today that that it wasn't in July when this first came before us. It's affirmative. So so there are there separate completely separate items. The one is due to the noise ordinance and the noise analysis that is conducted annually. That is what has resulted in the airport actually having room available in the air carrier budget for the last four years, which is what caused us to take the action that we presented to you in the study session on December 8th to increase the air carrier slots from 41 to 50. The in terms of the the slots, the 41 and 25 slots, the 25 commuter slots, quite frankly, there's not much demand for them. As of today, only three of those 25 slots are allocated. And it really is just a function of the way that airlines operate today and the limitations that are placed on aircraft in that category by weight. So there's just not very much demand for those 25 slots in the present industry the way that airlines operate today. I don't really foresee that we will have many of those slots all of a sudden have interest from carriers for allocation. So really, it's the air carrier category that we're concerned with. The 41 is growing to 50 through the process that we presented last month. Right. And thank you for that clarification. And I understand it. But my constituents impacted by the airport see it as a real threat. They see more flight slots and changing the business model of the airport and that all those slots could potentially be filled. So that that's I just wanted to get that on the record. That's what I'm hearing from my constituents. I'd like to thank my colleagues. Mr. Austin, thank you for asking all the questions that I had on my mind. He obviously knows this topic very well, and I appreciate it. Just one point of clarification for Roberta. Your comment on the money being used for other purposes, those moneys have to stay at the airport. We all understand that. But a waste of money is a waste of money, if that's what the speakers were saying here tonight. So they did it eloquently. I won't add to that. So I'd like to thank my colleagues for their words. I would like to thank the speakers for being here tonight. And I don't want to say I won't be supporting this because there's a substitute motion on the table here. So we'll wait to see what happens. Thank you.
Speaker 5: Mr. Mayor. Council members, I.
Speaker 3: Do want to echo what Councilmember Supernova said earlier. We talked about the dollars.
Speaker 6: Potentially could go.
Speaker 3: To police, fire streets, Rosa. That's absolutely not the case. These are enterprise fund dollars that can only be spent on airport related issues. And I appreciate that.
Speaker 6: Councilmembers who were not.
Speaker 0: Kotsenburg give anything awesome. Look, vice me with them.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I wanted to thank Councilmember Supernova for clarifying how enterprise funds can be spent. So thank you for doing that. And I agree with you. While it is not allowed to spend any enterprise funds on general fund activities, if it were a waste of money, it's something that we should not support. I have always supported. Our ability to have access to knowledge and information and data. And I continue to support that. And I believe this is something that we must do and that we should do. I don't believe it's a fait accompli and not for me personally. And I don't come to this conversation with that in mind. And I appreciate the staff recommending the direction of the study and appreciate Councilmember Price's reminder that a simple study just in our neighborhoods costs tens of thousands of dollars. And so I had no expectations of this to cost anything less than what it does. And I'll be supporting that. And I ask my colleagues to vote no on the substitute motion.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilman Richardson.
Speaker 11: I want to thank staff and particularly I want to thank my colleague to the right, councilman austin. He's done a he and Councilmember U ranga and councilmember super nice have done a really good job at keeping this issue alive. I believe in a process. I believe that I'll make a decision ultimately in the end. But in all those scenarios, I need facts and I need data. So the truth is, I don't want to pick and choose my methodology on how I make decisions, make certain decisions without actually allowing the process to evolve. Hearing out here and everyone to make their case. So this is no different. I'm going to support the the main motion and I'll make an ultimate decision once I see the facts in front of me. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. There is a substitute motion on the floor, which is a received file by Councilman Austin. And then depending on that, will go to the next motion, which was the original motion by Councilman Mongo, depending on the vote of the substitute. So all those in favor of the substitute motion, please cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Motion fails.
Speaker 0: Okay, now we have the main motion, which is to approve the recommendation to move forward as made by Councilman Mongo and Councilwoman Price. Members, please go and cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. I know there might be a few folks outside that are trying to get in, so I'm going to take just a one minute to minute recess. So folks that need to go can go. And if there are folks that are trying to come in, the next item up is the minimum wage item. And so if there are folks in need to come in, let them try to find some seats. So just take a one or two minute recess and let the adjustment happen and let staff prepare for the presentation. So thank you. Okay. We're going to I'm going to call a meeting back to order here so I can just have everyone. Please take a seat. I'm going to go and call this meeting back to back to order. So if I can get Madam Clerk to do the roll call, and if I can, everyone else, please grab a seat. | Contract | Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFQ AP15-203 and award a contract to Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc., of Fort Worth, TX, to provide a comprehensive Feasibility Study for a Federal Inspection Service Facility at the Long Beach Airport, in an amount not to exceed $349,845, for a period of one year; authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to enter into the contract, including any necessary amendments thereto; and
Increase appropriations in the Airport Fund (EF 320) in the Airport Department (AP) by $349,845. (District 5) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01192016_16-0043 | Speaker 1: Councilwoman Gonzalez. Vice Mayor Lowenthal. Councilwoman Price. Councilmember Superman. Councilwoman. Mango. Councilman Andrews. Councilmember Muranga.
Speaker 8: Councilman Austin.
Speaker 1: Councilmember Richardson. Mayor Garcia.
Speaker 0: Thank you. So I need everyone to please, please sit down and quiet down, please, so we can get this started. Thank you very much, madam. Kirk, if you can please read the item, it's up, please.
Speaker 1: Communication from Economic and Property Development and Financial Management. Recommendation to receive and file the recommendations of the Economic Development Commission. And the report from the Los Angeles Economic Development Corporation. Or direct the City Manager to provide additional information relative to the implementation of a minimum wage policy or direct the city attorney to prepare an ordinance for the implementation of a minimum wage policy citywide.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. I'm going to turn this over, obviously, to staff. I know they have an extensive presentation. I also believe as part of that presentation, we're going to have the EDC present, the report that this council commissioned as part of the study. And then we'll go into obviously council comments, public comment, deliberation, that whole part of it. I do want to just one note. Unless there's any objection from the Council just for purposes of making this efficient and because you're going to get a presentation at this hearing. If we don't mind, once EDC does their report, I'm going to I'm going to open it up for the council to ask all their questions of ADC as well as staff. And we get all those questions out of the way before we get into public comment. So unless there's any objection from that, that's a that's a direction we're going. It sounds like everyone's fine with that. Okay. So let me turn this over to the city manager.
Speaker 3: Mr. West Mayor, council members. Back in August, the city council asked us to look into the possibility of putting forth a minimum wage policy. Since that time, we've engaged the L.A. EDC, the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation. You're going to hear that report tonight. So this is going to be primarily from our director of Economic and Property Development, Mike Conway. Bureau Manager Juan Lopez Rios. And then we also have Christine Cooper of the L.A. DC, who will participate as well. So I'll turn this over to Juan Lopez Rios.
Speaker 14: Good evening. Garcia members of the City Council on behalf of the Economic Development Commission, the Department of Economic and Property Development is pleased to bring forth the Commission's recommendations for consideration by the City Council for the implementation of a minimum wage policy for the City of Long Beach. As part of our presentation, Ms.. Christine Cooper, senior vice president with the Los Angeles Economic Development Corporation, will provide an overview of the report commissioned by the Council titled Considering Minimum Wage Policy in the City of Long Beach. On August 11th, 2015, the City Council directed the city manager to request a report from the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation, L.A., EDC, regarding the implementation of a minimum wage policy in the city of Long Beach. On September 15th, 2015, the City Council authorized the execution of an agreement with the L.A. EDC for a report which would review similar studies and other literature regarding a minimum wage policy review. The best practices of other municipalities relative to their minimum wage policies. Review the economic environment and socio economic conditions of Long Beach. Review the potential movement of jobs and workers across municipal boundaries and survey a random sample of 600 businesses to understand business response to a minimum wage policy. The scope of the report also included a public outreach and participation model in the form of six public meetings held throughout the city for the receipt of public comment on the issues and concerns regarding the implementation of a minimum wage policy. Three of the public meetings were held on September 29th, October 5th and October 29th, 2015. Prior to the release of the report and were hosted by the Economic Development Commission, the Office of the Mayor and the Economic Development and Finance Committee. The report was released to the public on November 13th, 2015. Following the release of the report, the remaining three public meetings hosted by the same entities were held on November 17th, 20th and 24th 2015. The EDC was in attendance at all six public meetings. Ms. Cooper will discuss the comments and concerns raised in public testimony as part of her presentation. In addition to its regularly scheduled meetings on September 29th and November 24th, the Economic Development Commission scheduled two additional special meetings for December 14th, 2015 and January 6th, 2016. These special meetings allowed for the continued discussion of the benefits, detriments and unintended unintended consequences of increasing the minimum wage and provided for two additional opportunities for the continued receipt of public testimony. The Economic Development Commission also received two formal presentations the first from the Economic Roundtable regarding their October 2015 report titled Long Beach Raising a City That Works Forever, and the second from the Long Beach Council of Business Associations. Regarding their December 2015 report titled Survey on Organizational Impacts of a Minimum Wage Increase in Long Beach. Supplemental information was also provided to the Economic Development Commission for their consideration, which included a memo providing the business survey results from the L.A. EDC report in a weighted format by size the firm and a memo from the city's Department of Financial Management presenting possible fiscal impacts to the city as a result of the implementation of a minimum wage policy. At this time. It is my pleasure to introduce Ms.. Christine Cooper from the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation.
Speaker 13: Thank you so much. Garcia Council Member Dr. Cooper? Dr. Cooper. Yes, thank you, Christine. It's my pleasure. Here to talk about the study that we performed for the city of Long Beach in its review of consideration of minimum wage policy. There was scope, as you saw, we did review the literature related to minimum wage policy in municipalities at the state level and both theoretical, academic and empirical evidence as to the effects. We did look at other policies that have been implemented in other municipalities and where they were going. We estimated the impact in Long Beach on both employees and employers and we conducted a survey of Long Beach businesses. And as one said, we did attend every open forum meeting to hear the comments that were provided by both the residents, workers and the business owners. So just to start talking about Long Beach residents and the characteristics, just a few data points that the report does have quite a lot of data, but rather than than spend a lot of time on that, I just wanted to share some of them with you. The age distribution is kind of an interesting data point that we like to look at because it gives you an indication of whether the city is growing within or not. If you have a large, younger population, these are going to age into it working adults. And so we see that 70% of the residents here in Long Beach are working age. 15 to 64. Actually, the age distribution in Long Beach is not much different than L.A. County. The reason we compared this to L.A. County is because in many of our meetings, we heard that the characteristics of the City of Long Beach was different than elsewhere. And actually, we found that it's not that much different from the L.A. County average. In fact, you're a little bit younger. Yeah. Household by size. This is another indication potentially of the standard of living. There's 162,000 households in Long Beach. The, you know, a larger number of households, a percentage of households with many residents might indicate a lower the standard of living. Again, here we find that Long Beach, the average household size, is 2.87 residents, which is less than the L.A. County average of three. Households by income. The median household income in Long Beach is $54,511 compared to the Los Angeles County average, our median of 55,746. So it's a little bit lower, but not so significantly lower budget expenditures. We like to look at this because, again, we hear everywhere in the Southland that housing consumes a large portion of people's household budgets . And this is quite true. In Long Beach, the average household expenditures are just less than $70,000 compared to the L.A. larger L.A. Orange County region of about 79,000. Almost 38% is consumed in housing, almost 14% in transportation costs, and 12% in food. Now there are many employed residents. And what do they do? We separate these out into three different categories of occupations white collar, blue collar and services. So white collar is really sales, office management and professional type of work. Blue collar is construction, production and transportation and services is repair and maintenance. Food prep and serving. Community Services. Office and administrative. And architects, actually. So this distribution of occupation, occupational type of employment for the residents of Long Beach is also very similar to the larger Los Angeles County average. We look at poverty levels as well, the individual poverty level here. This is a ratio of income to poverty level. Individuals who live in a household household income determines a poverty rate. So any individual in a household is in poverty. Is is in poverty. The individual poverty rate in Long Beach is 21.1%, which is higher than Los Angeles County. Approximately 17.7% of households in Long Beach live below the poverty level. And I think you will hear that the poverty level is is quite low and very difficult to live on. So that's the residential characteristics. But we also like to see what kind of jobs here are provided by businesses. So this is showing firms and employment by size of of of employer, by size of company. So we have very small firms, 1 to 4 or 5 to 9, 10 to 19. And the blue bars are showing how many firms there are in these business sizes. And the the the beige bars are showing what percentage of jobs are in those companies. So, for example, very small firms, 1 to 4 employees account for 54% of all firms in language, but only 7.6% of employment. And that makes sense if there is a small firm doesn't have as many employees for the aggregate, IT firms with between one and 19 employees account for 84% of firms and 26% of employees. So this is important when you think about considering what a small businesses and how how many employees the policy might impact. The employment by industry. This is also quite typical of a municipality. The largest industry sector is education and health. This is mostly social assistance, mostly health, but most of that is social assistance. Professional and business services includes a wide range of different jobs and businesses. The government sector is fairly large here in Long Beach. Leisure and hospitality is also quite significant. That, of course, is mostly restaurants. Food, food, food prep and serving retail trade typically takes up approximately 10% of employment. So they're not. All jobs in Long Beach are held by Long Beach residents. So this shows us where the workers who work in Long Beach actually live. So of all the people who work in Long Beach, 25.8% live in Long Beach. 11% live in the city of L.A.. Another 31% live in other parts of L.A. County and so on. That the number of of actual workers in Long Beach who live in Long Beach is about 42,700. So this is 165,000 jobs. Approximately 74% are held by outsiders. We can look at the flip side of that, where we see where long people who live in Long Beach, where do they work? And there's about approximately 186,000 people who live in Long Beach and work somewhere and 77% of them commute elsewhere. So these are kind of important considerations as you think about what kind of a policy you're going to implement. We did estimate the potential impact of a minimum wage increase at the time when we did the study. There wasn't a policy that was actually developed or proposed, so we assumed that a policy similar to that recently adopted by L.A. City and L.A. County would be the one that you would be considering. And that one, you know, did go from ten, 1050 in July of this year to $15 in 2020. So, of course, in order to do that, we have to assume a certain number of wage growth over time and job growth over time. And we also assume that when you raise the minimum wage to whatever level it is, $12, say the people who had been earning $12 already, would also receive some increase. As as as you move up the scale so that there was a wage compression effect. So this were these were our estimates for the cumulative impacts of the minimum wage increase that we saw at $12, which would have been implemented in 2017. The number of job holders impacted in Long Beach would be approximately 33,000. That would represent approximately 18.5% of all job holders in the city. An average annual increase in earnings of each individual would be on average, $940 a year. And the aggregate increase in the wage bill for all those workers, including those subject to wage compression, was $30.9 million that we did also estimate for 2020. And those numbers are, of course, higher. So in the best case and I'll talk about that in just a moment. If all existing earners or workers who were minimum wage received this increase in earnings. 33,000 workers would earn an average of $940 more more per year at $12 an hour. And 45,700 workers would earn an average of approximately 5000 per year, which is a significant increase. So well the impact on workers, then we would assume and can expect that some will earn more and will spend more. They may work harder because they're earning more and they will probably be happier. More people may join the local the local labor market because they would be induced to join the market at a higher wage rate. And perhaps it's it would offset additional costs for transportation. But some may be pushed out of the out of work in the formal market or may have to work informally if they have to compete with better workers at those rates. So we also know that an increase in labor costs is going to be an increase in business costs. So the aggregate wage bill for $12 per hour at a minimum would be approximately 30.9 million in Long Beach. That's going to be have to be borne by businesses. And again, more at $15. This does not include other wage related costs, such as workers comp or payroll taxes, which could probably add another 10 to 15%. Well, employers, you adjust.
Speaker 1: If.
Speaker 13: They are faced with an increase in costs. There are just a number of channels they can choose. They can pass cost increases through to their customers through increased prices. They can choose to increase the productivity of their workers. And there's a couple of ways they can do that. They could hire better skilled employees or they could assist their current employees with better machinery, replace them with some machines to some extent. So those are ideas of how businesses might improve the productivity of their labor at a higher cost. They could reduce costs. But as many businesses have probably said, if there were costs that they could reduce, they would have done so already. So when they're thinking about reducing costs from an increase in labor costs, they'll likely try to offset that with a reduction in other labor costs, such as benefits or overtime, and they can absorb costs through reduced profits. If they can't find an adjustment mechanism and their costs are increasing, they're just going to take a hit. So if we think about that, the worst case. 14,000 workers are directly at risk of losing hours or jobs or being substituted if that if the minimum wage was $12. These are directly affected workers. These aren't the ones that are or that would be impacted through wage compression. And 20,700 workers would be at risk of losing hours or jobs or being substituted at $15. And we really don't know how much that would what the balance would be here. So Long Beach businesses did reply to our survey. It was the goal was really to to learn what their perspective reactions would be. It was a telephone survey. 600 completed surveys were received. The survey was segmented by firm size because their responses might have been different for smaller companies and larger companies. We also segmented by geographic region because we did hear that the South Long Beach businesses were different than the North Long Beach businesses. I will say that a lot of the responses were in undecided. They really didn't understand, didn't have an idea for sure of how they would respond. The results were a 95% confidence interval with a sampling error of plus or -4.1%, which is a little bit larger of a sampling error for the subsegments when we when we break it down. So what did the businesses believe that they will do with their workforce, or how many will this one here? How many actually have minimum wage workers? 40% of respondents have minimum wage workers. This is kind of interesting. 60% of respondents did not have minimum wage workers. The current minimum wage, which at that time was $9, but another 27%, did have workers between nine and 1325, which is the next step. So we were asked to provide results. Weighted by firm size. So these I'm showing these results as well. They did not significantly change. We could have weighted it as well by respondents that actually had minimum wage workers, or we could have weighted it by the geographic location of the firms. But we we reported all the results. Most minimum wage workers in Long Beach are full time and most of them are permanent. How would businesses? Would they reduce employment? 67% of respondents said they would not reduce their number of minimum wage workers. 30%, although, were undecided. 76% of respondents said they would not reduce the hours of their minimum wage workers, and the remaining were undecided. And 78% of respondents said they would not invest in automation. And 20% of those were also undecided. How about relocation or closure? We often hear that businesses will move to another location to avoid the minimum wage policy. 80% of respondents said they would not relocate their business. The remainder were undecided. 100% of respondents, reflecting the perennial optimism of business owners, said they will not close their business. There were no undecideds in this category. 89% of respondents do not expect their profits to increase. Would they increase their prices? 70% of respondents said they would increase their prices. 78% believe the minimum wage workers will be happier and more productive, and 49% will add duties to their current workers. So in the aggregate, we know that some workers will be paid more. Some businesses will face higher costs. But there really is no definitive evidence supporting the balance of effects so that we can find out at what level everyone is made better off. So I'd just like to leave you with a couple of thoughts. One is the idea that hiring better skilled workers over the lesser skilled workers is probably going to impact those with the least skills the most. And those are the ones that we'd like to help the best. There has been there will continue to be a long term trend towards automation and efficiency. As we have seen through the 20th century and the 21st century, we're just becoming so much more automated. And additionally, marginal firms facing increased business costs will close and those remaining will be more efficient. And you do have to think about the regional dynamics as there are other constituents, other municipalities in your region that will impact the results in your city. So not all firms can raise their prices if they have competition right across the border. And you will be competing for labor, you will be able to choose more labor, but you will have to compete for the best. So just a few notes about the open forums and I attended every one of them. The first three forums before the release of the study, there were approximately 50 speakers, half in favor of or speaking on behalf of workers and half speaking on behalf of business. There were three more after the release and approximately 80 speakers. There were the ratio of workers interest versus business interests was about 2 to 1. Several individuals spoke at multiple forums, and the general themes were very consistent. The employees and workers, if you have been at them, you will have heard many personal stories of hardship, difficulty of making ends meet, working long hours, how more income would impact their lives and their families. You would have heard many discussion of misclassification and wage theft issues, which are clearly illegal. You would have heard that raising wages would impact local spending. You would have heard students and nonprofit organizations. Speak out against exemptions. And by the the last few meetings, you would have heard consistently about the Long Beach way, which was a coalescing around four major themes $15 wage paid sick days, no exemptions and city led enforcement. Similarly, had you attended them and heard all of the speakers, you would have heard the small businesses feel. Small business owners often feel as if they are at one with their employees. They have very thin profit margins and would find it difficult to absorb higher costs. Nonprofits express a great deal of concern about their reimbursements, which may be fixed so they wouldn't be able to raise their costs and their service levels may be impacted. Price increases and reduced employment. These were common responses that businesses faced and expressed. Restaurant owners spoke out frequently about their tipped employees and not having full compensation considered as a minimum wage and leveling the playing field. Excuse me was also heard quite frequently too. To make this a statewide issue. Rather than a competition between jurisdictions. So I think that's broadly the study.
Speaker 14: Thank you, Christine.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I know we're going to have questions from the council on the study. And as soon as we finish up this part of the city presentation, we're gonna go back to you, doctor. Then we'll go. Will continue. So back to see stuff.
Speaker 3: Go ahead. Yeah. Oh, Christine has it.
Speaker 14: On January six, 2016, the Economic Development Commission met to consider all relevant data and testimony and deliberate over benefits, deficits and unintended consequences of a minimum wage policy by a unanimous vote. The Economic Development Commission moved to forward the following recommendations to the City Council for its consideration of a minimum minimum wage policy in the city of Long Beach beginning January 1st, 2017. The minimum wage shall be 1050 per hour beginning January 1st, 2018. The minimum wage shall be $12 per hour beginning January 1st, 2019. The minimum wage shall be $13 per hour. Small businesses and nonprofit corporations shall receive a one year delay in implementation. And small businesses are defined as 25 or less employees. In addition, the Economic Development Commission requests the City Council's consideration of the following items in its discussion that the City Council will take a leadership role in seeking to change state legislation regarding tipped employees and evaluate whether this can be controlled at the local level. Consideration for sick days and wage theft enforcement. Consider requesting a report to be presented to City Council in 2021, evaluating the impacts of a minimum wage policy following full implementation to consider and explore actions that would help mitigate negative effects on businesses and training programs resulting from a higher minimum wage. The Department of Financial Management analyze the potential risks and fiscal impact to the city of a minimum wage ordinance, as there is no concurrent ordinance. In effect, major assumptions were made due to limitations of available data in order to estimate the fiscal impact. The analysis assumes the adoption of an ordinance mirroring that of the city of Los Angeles for areas where analyzes staff costs, contract costs, enforcement costs and small business incentive costs. At a $15 per hour minimum wage. The structural increase from fiscal year 17 to fiscal year 21 for staff costs is estimated at 1.5 million and all funds 1.4 million of which is in the general fund. These are costs due to increasing city employee salaries to minimum wage. Contract cost impact is potentially between 1.8 and 3.2 million in all funds approximately 339000 to 531000 of which is in the general fund. These are costs from city contractors potentially passing on their increased costs for staffing. Enforcement options fall into three categories. Option one is state enforcement providing minimal fiscal impacts to the city. Option two is a combination of state enforcement, augmented with city efforts and communication, outreach and support. Option to fiscal impacts are estimated between 431,000 and 725,000. Option three contemplates a support and enforcement model based on the county's model. Option three fiscal impacts are estimated at 1.3 million. Incentive programs fall into two categories. Incentives to only new small businesses provide for a fiscal impact estimated at 444,000. Incentives to all small businesses provide for a fiscal impact estimated at 4.1 million. Tonight's recommendation proposes a minimum wage of up to $13 per hour by 2019. By 2012, for small businesses and non-profits, the total structural increases from fiscal year 17 to fiscal year 21 of a 13 per hour minimum wage are as follows. Staff costs are estimated at 850,303. In all funds, 798000 to 54, of which is in the general fund. Contractor costs are estimated between 558,001.2 million. In all funds, approximately 115 to 202000, of which is in the general fund. There is no change to previous estimates for enforcement or incentive programs, depending on the actual provisions of any proposed minimum wage policy. City staff will review and revise the fiscal impacts accordingly. This concludes our report for this evening. I would like to thank Chair Colonna and the members of the Economic Development Commission, the staffs of Long Beach City College, the Expo Art Center, Admiral Kidd Park, the Bay Shore Neighborhood Library, the Department of Technology and Innovation. The Office of the City Clerk and the members of the Long Beach community for their participation in this endeavor. At this time, Christine Cooper from the Landsea, Leah Ericson from the Department of Financial Management and I are available for any questions. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Let me let me just start, obviously, by thanking city staff. I want to thank particularly the L.A. EDC for the incredible work you guys did and a lot of work. And we appreciate that. And of course, everyone that was involved in the process. All of the the the advocates, the workers, the businesses, the students, everyone that came to a hearing, whether it was a roundtable or a larger discussion. I want to thank you all as we as we begin this discussion tonight, what I'd like to do right now is I have a someone that's cued up the vice president who actually introduced the original motion. And vice mayor, if there's no objection, I'd like to see first if the council has questions of the L.A., EDC or staff on the report so we can kind of get through all of those questions first and then before we move on to you and to the public. Are you okay with that? Okay. So let me begin. I'm just going to read as you've queued up here, if there are questions or you can stay in the queue for for the future. But I'll just go through these. So let me start let me start here. Councilman Richardson, you have any questions at this point for L.A. EDC?
Speaker 11: I'm okay with your direction.
Speaker 0: Okay. So, Councilman Mongeau.
Speaker 1: I guess I would need some direction on if this is for L.A. EDC or if it's for our own city attorney. I received several emails to my office and interacted with many members of the community, even at some of the forums, requesting a discussion regarding the concept of total earnings as an exemption. Are there any court cases on the concept for or against total earnings? And could you advise us a little bit about what that means?
Speaker 0: I think that's a question for Mr. City Attorney.
Speaker 10: Mayor and members of the council. The the short answer is no. There are no cases on point that would say that you could do a total earnings exemption. On the other hand, there's no cases on point that say you can't do it. The the the most recent version of the total there was a total earnings exemption and a lot of cases. Not a lot, but several of the cases talk about a tip credit and whether a credit is is legal. And there's various opinions on that one. The Legislative Council opinion, which was asked when City of Sacramento was considering something similar, said that they thought that that would be preempted under the law. They did also say in their opinion, though, that there are no specific cases on point, but that was the opinion of the Legislative Council. The most recent proposal varies a little bit. It talks about a total earnings exemption. Our officers met only once. We just recently received this proposal on January, I believe it was seventh. We had one meeting with the attorney who was suggesting that this is a possible alternative. But even he admits there are no cases that support that. This is his opinion. It does take into account total wages as it's as he was proposing it. The minimum wage standard established under a total earnings exemption would apply to any employee whose total earnings for the pay period, or at least the amount specified in the local minimum wage. And then when you apply that, if it doesn't equal that during the pay period, then the employer would have to make up the difference. And total earnings would include tips and wages if that person that under this scenario would be a waiter or a working at a restaurant that was tipped employee, maybe a different type of tipped employee. It would also include other types and classifications of employees. So for the enforcement, setting aside the enforcement issues, which could be significant if you're looking at this every pay period and then maybe two weeks, they don't meet the minimum wage and they have to be made up in the next two weeks. They do. If you do it during the month, over a month, then you average it. There's some issues there. But but bottom line, no other city has adopted this type of an exemption in California that we could find. And there is no case law that says you absolutely could do it. So it would be subject to a challenge, I believe. And and I don't know what the courts would rule on.
Speaker 1: You mentioned that it would apply to many different types of employees. I imagine things like delivery services, those are very popular in the new economy services such as nails and hair and all of those. I do see it being a broad group of employees, probably a large number that lie in the 1 to 4 employee range. As mentioned in the latest report, I have only heard about this directly from people who came to the forums. I did not meet with any Fed attorney and I would since you did. What would be the qualifications of said attorney and why would they be any different from our own attorneys? Do they have a background in labor law or. I don't really know. I mean, I received a letter from several different attorneys offices.
Speaker 10: That's absolutely correct. The there are many opinions out there on both sides of this issue that have been presented to our office. This attorney presented his opinion. He portrays himself as an expert in the labor and wage law area. I have no reason to doubt that. But it is a different proposal than what other cities have looked at. This is new, as I said. And so it is his concept that we were looking at. We were just asked to look at various proposals.
Speaker 1: So one of the things that I think I've mentioned before, but it's a new year, so a new time to mention it is that I was very active in my employment through the VOA program, formerly known as the We Are program. And there have always been some disadvantages in California in terms of that federal allocation of funding for youth employment programs is based on ours at the federal minimum wage. And so California employers and California youth specifically are disadvantaged because we are not apportioned a greater amount of funding in. Proportion to what the variance in our minimum wage. So I know that I brought that up at Federal Legislative Committee. I hope that we will pursue that in our upcoming federal legislative trip so that entities that choose to make these steps towards pulling people out of poverty are rewarded, not disadvantaged, when getting federal allocations. That being said, until we pass said opportunities or get the federal discretionary funds or distribution of funds related to that changed, what are we able to do in terms of a youth wage in Long Beach, where I know there are some differences in the federal opinion? I know sometimes it goes up to age 24, sometimes it only goes to age 21 based on if there are foster youth and sometimes only 18 if they're not disadvantaged at all. What would be the thoughts on a youth wage in Long Beach? Either studying it at the state minimum wage or at 85% of whatever we do end up passing so that our our youth are not as disadvantaged and our federal funding can stretch as far as possible. I know we've worked so hard to gain the doubling of these internships, paid internships, many of them. And I would be remiss to think that those youth would not be given those opportunities should the wage go up.
Speaker 10: There are other California cities who do have a youth wage exemption or a, as you said, a percentage for a certain number of hours worked. Or there are different options that are a policy decision for the council to adopt, which we believe would be allowed.
Speaker 1: I hope that we can talk about that more as the discussion goes on tonight. I know that specifically when we were doing allocation of funds by nonprofit organization that would help place these youth. One of the challenges we always had was that we would have to disperse that funding in allocation allotments that aligned with a certain number of hours that the Rio aboard the Wheat Board chose to be. Impactful in the youth's lives. You could cut the hours back to 5 hours a week for 11 weeks, but that's not the same experience that these youth could enjoy. Should we be able to give them the 25 hours a week that we felt was a more robust plan in the Summer Youth Employment Program? And I know not only here in Long Beach and our strong Web board, but the L.A. County Web board, the South Bay switchboard, the the Lakewood and cities adjacent to us and the L.A. City Web Board. I know that we've all struggled with this. So I hope that members who have spoken to me about this from each of those boards have a proposal in mind, because I'd really like to find a way where our youth are brought into the workplace and then quickly escalate it up to the minimum wage . But again, one of the important parts of this is those that are supporting families need to make a bit more. But if it's too high, then those entry level jobs aren't really available for people to step into those higher wages. So. Lastly, I think that I hope to hear from people today. I know L.A. EDC made a recommendation related to identifying how businesses can be helped with incentives. I've sat in on many meetings of other bodies who have passed the minimum wage ordinance related to what those incentives could be. And I'm still forming some opinions on that, and I'd love to hear some creative ideas. And we've already offered people who start new businesses or grow their business in Long Beach waiving their business license fee for one year. But I think that we need something even more robust if you're going to continue to grow your business and meet the $15 an hour minimum wage or you currently have no employees at minimum wage, you're already paying above and beyond. What can we do to reward those businesses so those that step out in front of those things and are really moving forward, bravo to them. And I look forward to hearing from my colleagues and the public. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Customer to Productivity Questions for Staff for the L.A. EDC.
Speaker 7: Yes. Right off the bat. I'd just like to say that I've had a lot of questions about, well, why don't we wait to have something happen at the state level so we don't single out? I know we have a Sacramento lobbyist. I know we have intelligence there. Is there anyone on staff who can tell me what is on the horizon for the November ballot, possibly out of Sacramento?
Speaker 0: Mr. City Manager. And if not, I can chime in from.
Speaker 6: So the issue of state minimum wage has been raised for several issues. It constantly comes up to this point. There has not been enough votes in the state legislature to put that on the ballot or to not even the ballot to pass it as a as a state law. There is always the opportunity to put it on a ballot. I don't personally have any knowledge of whether that's being circulated right now, but that's certainly something we can check into.
Speaker 0: Well, just to answer that, not to say anything that isn't already in the press. So feel free to look it up. So there's two two things that are happening in the state legislature right now. There will be a reintroduction of a statewide bill to go to $13 in the assembly. That was actually a bill that was floating around last year. I'm sorry. I started on the Senate side, which is a mark Leno bill to go to $30 statewide that is being reintroduced in this session. And so that, I think is a dollar a dollar a year until you get to $13. I'm pretty sure that's that's the details of it. But it it's it's a mark Leno originated bill that's happening in the legislature on the state referendum ballot side right now. There are two groups that are publicly are planning on filing measures, both of which go to $15. One is a $15 at 2020 and the other is a $15 at 2021. There are some differences when it comes to sick days on those two measures. There are there are currently both competing measures and, of course, are going through the secretary of state requirement on signatures and so forth. But if those qualify and what is most likely but most of the commentators say is that the the two groups are will likely, if they work things out, combine and actually propose one ballot. And so having the two competing measures, but it is highly likely that you'll have one or two measures on the November 2016 ballot, at least that's what's been reported in, you know, in any of the press. And so that's the I think the status of the the assembly, the legislature and the state referendums.
Speaker 4: Mr. Mayor.
Speaker 0: Yes. Mr..
Speaker 4: And as Chair of the State Legislation Committee, I want to just point out that we do support the city of Long Beach is on record of supporting a minimum wage increase statewide.
Speaker 0: And back to Councilmember Super now.
Speaker 7: Okay. Thank you. I have another question that I get asked a lot is what is the impact to our general fund in terms of the city's own employees?
Speaker 8: Calcium Councilman Supernova. The cost to the general fund is 1.4 million for the city's employees, and that would be a result of the employees currently below $15 going to $13. However, the cost is only.
Speaker 1: But 800,000.
Speaker 7: Okay. Thank you. And then just one final point, and I don't want to be nit picking, but it just struck me when Dr. Cooper framed the aggregate issue of the 30.9 million impact borne by employers. Because I'm a private sector business consultant, most people think of me talking about businesses, but this one jumps out at me that , you know, if we're talking about home health care for fixed income seniors, if we're talking about daycare for working parents, if we're talking about home health care for disabled fixed income individuals, we're really talking about a wage increase that is borne by customers, individuals, not necessarily business. So I guess that's more of a comment. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzalez. Any questions for.
Speaker 12: Yes, just a couple of questions. I want to first thank our city staff and L.A. EDC for this great report. I think the devil really is in the details. It's important that we really look at this information. It's very impactful. And so a couple questions for our city staff first. So what types of business incentives would be? Offered if we were to go through with a minimum wage incentive program. But it doesn't state exactly. I mean, is there any thought to what we'd be offering our business?
Speaker 6: Councilmember Gonzales. Some of the one of the things that we asked the EDC was to take a look at what other cities have looked at in the Lacey, L.A., EDC to come up with some recommendations. What they kind of found in their survey is there's a couple of common denominators that cities use in terms of financial incentives . They didn't find that any city really offered any financial incentives, any of the other cities that we looked at through a telephone survey. But what they did look at are things like a shop local campaign or a business to business campaign, getting businesses to buy from other businesses in Long Beach so that we all those those dollars stay here. They also looked at expanding the preference program. Long Beach has a local preference program, but also expanding that to include hiring, educate educational institutions and seeing if they would participate as well. And then also to do some online tools and make it easier for businesses to interact with the city. And that's something that we're actually very interested in and are working with our I-Team and our innovation team on. We've also provided some information for you in the packet to answer the questions about if the city were to provide a fiscal assistance, what would that cost are roughly, our business license is roughly about $400 for the average business, but we get about 11,000 businesses a year. So if we were to do a and a rebate, I believe it's about four and a half. $4.1 million if we were to do if we were do the majority of businesses in Long Beach, ultimately, if we were to do a smaller incentive, for example, one like a one year deferral for businesses, that could be for new businesses that could be around $450,000 a year.
Speaker 12: Okay. Great. And state enforcement. You know who would be our liaison here on the city side as far as which? I mean, with whatever option we were to go with, there would be have to be someone on our side to be able to to work with the state in that.
Speaker 1: So who would that be?
Speaker 6: So we looked at three different models for enforcement. One is very similar to Measure N, where it would essentially be really not much of a city role. The second would be creating a liaison type office. It would be in financial management where we would have roughly two people and some education and outreach staff and materials and assistance . And then a third model would be actually having a full enforcement. So we we're recommending the middle model. Given just the state of the budget and that it's and we would have two employees that would be able to answer calls and help be that ombudsman. If somebody called and said, how do I have a problem? What do I do about it? We would be able to connect them with the Department of Industrial Relations, who would be who would do the enforcement and handle that as part of their workload?
Speaker 12: Okay, great. And then I have just one question for the L.A. EDC. I had been, of course, doing research and looking at the Congressional Budget Office information. They had pretty detailed information. I'm wondering if it's possible to project a lot of great information, but how many low wage employees would be would potentially be pulled out of poverty and go above the threshold if we were to increase the minimum wage? Do we have that number?
Speaker 13: I don't have that number specifically for Long Beach residents.
Speaker 0: Yeah. 1/2. I just want to make sure vast majority of everyone's being great. But please, there's no talking from the audience or.
Speaker 8: We are working people. We don't have to. Okay.
Speaker 0: Ma'am, I understand that. And fortunately, this is the public process. And so but I can't what I can't have is I can't have outburst during the hearing. And so please, ma'am, we just got to go through the hearing.
Speaker 8: Time for the council so that the people can.
Speaker 0: Ma'am, that we.
Speaker 8: Can get up to.
Speaker 0: Though. Ma'am. Ma'am, that's. Well, unfortunately, ma'am, we have to be respectful of the process. Okay?
Speaker 8: We which is the public, the form.
Speaker 0: Okay. We actually need to continue the meeting. And so we cannot continue those outbursts. I'm serious.
Speaker 8: For now.
Speaker 0: That that's the council will take its deliberative time and this public comment coming up. But I want to thank everyone else for being very respectful of the process so.
Speaker 8: Far to the public.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. So Council, ma'am, if you're not going to remain here, if you continue the outburst, we have to be respectful of process. So, Councilman Gonzales.
Speaker 12: Yes, it's my last question. How many low wage employees would potentially be moved and go above the threshold if we have that information here, of course, in Long Beach.
Speaker 13: So we did not estimate that specifically. As we noted, a lot of Long Beach workers who would be impacted are not Long Beach residents. Okay. So it's a little bit of a difficult thing to estimate. Okay. And I would also say that many people in poverty don't work and so would not be impacted by a minimum wage policy.
Speaker 8: Okay.
Speaker 12: Well, thank you for the information.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next up, I have council member Austin.
Speaker 4: Thank you. And I'll be brief. I'll do my best. There were there were a couple of points that jumped out at me. And Dr. Cooper of the you mentioned a survey of 600 businesses, and there was a significant number of undecided. I don't know if you gave us a percentage of undecided.
Speaker 13: Each question actually had five choices. Very likely. Somewhat likely. Undecided or no answer? Not likely or not at all likely. So it was a five point scale. Each answer had a number of different undecided. And so, you know, when you look at the survey results, we not all respondents actually had minimum wage employees. So many of them may not be impacted by the policy. So I think a lot of those answers fell into the undecided column.
Speaker 4: Okay. Thank you. And I think the next question is for for Steph, there was a visual regarding staff costs for implementation of the minimum wage. And I'm curious to know exactly what those costs would be and how you came to that, those figures.
Speaker 8: Councilman Austin. What we did was we estimated the number of employees who are currently below $15 and also $13. And then we looked at what the cost would be if they were placed within the minimum wage each respective year. And so the incremental cost.
Speaker 1: Starts out at just roughly $5,000 for.
Speaker 8: Next year of Y 17. And it grows each year to it gets to the 1.4 million in the general fund by a by 21 for $15 an hour and then.
Speaker 1: 800,000 for the $13 an hour. And that would be.
Speaker 8: By FY 19.
Speaker 4: Okay. And I guess that the the my, my, my final question would be how would the wages of workers who are engaged in collective bargaining be impacted by such a minimum wage policy?
Speaker 13: Well, I don't believe that's part of your policy. So they would be not I mean, they would they would be affected, as is any other employee, as far as I know. I mean, I don't know what you've been. Um.
Speaker 4: So, so.
Speaker 13: Considering.
Speaker 4: If someone belongs to an organization and they are covered under a collective bargaining agreement and those wages are negotiated in agree and such an agreement, does the minimum wage policy here supersede that?
Speaker 13: Unless you exempt them.
Speaker 4: Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 13: And I don't believe that's been suggested.
Speaker 4: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next up, we have Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 12: So just a couple quick questions for staff. Can you go over for us the recommendations that were presented to the Economic Development Commission from COBA?
Speaker 14: Councilwoman Price, we don't have that report with us at this time.
Speaker 12: I have a copy of it. Well, I just wanted to make sure that that the copy that I have includes their full recommendations, because I'm not sure that that was included. I know that the ATC actually considered those recommendations in reaching their own recommendations. Is that right?
Speaker 14: Yes.
Speaker 12: Okay. So I think it's important to kind of talk about it because that formed the basis of some of the discussion. So my understanding is that their recommendation was 1250 an hour over the course of five years. This wage includes medical benefits, paid sick days and paid time off. A one year delay for small businesses with under 25 employees. A two year delay for nonprofits. And then a youth training for 21 year old and younger workers to be paid at the state of California minimum wage rate. Was there anything else that they included that that that I may have missed? If you know or if anyone knows.
Speaker 5: Kels.
Speaker 14: Councilmember Price. Not to my recollection.
Speaker 12: Okay. The other question I had was I know we talked about. Organizations that have a set reimbursement rate, like a federal reimbursement rate. And we those were categorized under kind of a non profit category. Is there any category for businesses that provide a service that gets reimbursed by the federal government at a set rate, for example, health care industry? Did we give any consideration at all to mitigating the impacts of a minimum wage increase on those businesses?
Speaker 13: I think your current policy suggestion is for all nonprofits, so not a separate category for specific in-home services, I think is what you're.
Speaker 12: Yeah. They wouldn't qualify as a nonprofit. They may not. Mm hmm. So in those situations.
Speaker 8: I think that's.
Speaker 0: A question for staff.
Speaker 8: As well.
Speaker 12: Did the EDC consider those businesses at all? Because as we just saw from the report, the largest employment sector in our city is health and education. So a lot of those businesses and service providers rely on federal reimbursements at a set rate.
Speaker 5: Councilmember Price I think a number of comments were made when Coba made their presentation to the EDC and also from a number of the forums that were presented and comments from the audience that indicated that there is concern among some of the state mandated firms that they would not be able to recover some of the cost because they were contracted for a period of time. And that information was communicated to the EDC. And those deliberations occurred over two rather extensive community meetings that occurred. So that was part of the deliberations. But I don't believe that it survived into the recommendations to city council.
Speaker 12: Okay. And then to the city attorney, this discussion that we're having about tipped employees and wage calculations for tipped employees. In light of the research, the legal research that you and your staff have done, could you take us down a realistic path? What would be a foreseeable path for us if, in fact, we were we were to adopt a policy in that regard that no other city has adopted? What what could we as a council and the citizens of the city expect to see in terms of our future, 6 to 12 months?
Speaker 5: Well.
Speaker 10: If the decision of the council would be to include some sort of a tip credit, I believe for the foreseeable future we would be in litigation. The the issue is whether it violates Labor Code 351 and there are opinions on both sides and I will readily admit that there are some legal firms out there that believe that it would be a legal path that the city could take. The more recent opinions that we've seen and it's our opinion that it it raises an issue of preemption with Labor Code 351 that the courts have not ruled on, that we would have to seek and defend it in the courts and probably through appeal in order to get a decision from the courts. The city of Long Beach could do that. The other option, of course, would be some sort of legislation to clarify the field. But there is not there isn't that benefit right now. So it's an unknown. And so a tip credit. I think there's more opinions out there now that believe it would be preempted. Mm hmm. The other issue, and I think some of the more recent opinions are not recognizing that, but but are going in a little bit a different direction, that that kind of moves away from the actual wording of tip credit or applying directly to just, you know, say, restaurant employees. But it's more tipped employees, not just restaurants, but for a total earnings exemption, which wants to look at the taxable earnings of that person and divide those earnings by the hours they worked and compare that to what it is that the minimum wage is in the local jurisdiction. That's also kind of a variation of it, but it is different. And there's also no legislation or case law that that identifies that and says that that's allowed by cities.
Speaker 12: Now, in terms of the research that you've done, have you found that this this argument or this proposal has been made at other cities and rejected? Or is this a situation of first impression for the city of long, which I imagine not. But what could you share with us?
Speaker 10: I think the answer is both. The tipped credit has been discussed specifically in the city of Sacramento. It was presented to the legislative. There was an opinion out of the legislative office that admits that there are no case law on it. But what felt that it would be preempted? I'm not sure exactly why the city of Sacramento decided not to adopt it, but they did not include it in their adoption of a local minimum wage. The total earnings exemption. To my knowledge, has not been considered by other cities. I believe it was presented to the city of Pasadena, but I don't think that they've acted yet, and that's the only information of this particular one of the cities, that of local cities in California that have adopted a local minimum wage. No city has adopted either a tip credit or this total exemption earnings exemption.
Speaker 12: And that includes Santa monica with their recent vote.
Speaker 10: Yes, that is correct. They did not.
Speaker 12: Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Customer. I think I would want to. You don't have any questions at this rate. Okay. Are there any other questions from councilmembers for the EDC or staff at this time? Okay. Perfect. And of course, this will be claim up to four more questions later on if we have if those come up. So let me turn this now over to. Thank you very much. And we'll continue the hearings. Let me now turn this over to the maker of the original motion on the issue, which was Vice Marie Lowenthal.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I wanted to thank everyone for being here today and for your patience, as well as Dr. Cooper for her presentation and our own staff, for their diligence and presentation of the hard work that they've done for these several months since we've made this motion. As the mayor said, I had brought this motion forward a few months ago, and it is something that really is, in my opinion, the next installation or the next chapter of what our city has been doing for quite some time. When I brought this motion forward back in August, we had great deliberation at that time, and the Council took action and instructed, instructed our staff to work with the L.A. EDC to conduct the study that they did. I want to first thank the council members who coauthored this item with me. I want to thank Councilwoman Lina Gonzalez, Councilman de Andrews and Councilman Rex Richardson. It was wonderful to be able to come forward to our council with strong support of authorship, and I know that there were others that would have authored it as well. The original motion set a process and asked the L.A. EDC for Research and Business Survey. This evening we heard Dr. Cooper report back on the highlights of that study and that process, and I'd like to thank the L.A. EDC for their work and study and and truly their deliberation on looking at this from a Long Beach perspective . And while the comparisons are useful and helpful to our surrounding cities, it has been very helpful to be able to see ourselves as ourselves and how we live, how we work, how we spend our money, where the greatest impacts will be when we take one action or another, and where the greatest impacts will be if we take no action. And that's been important to hear. I authored the original item because The Gap. The gap continues to grow between the wealthy and the poor, and we continue to deal with the impacts of a growing class of residents living in poverty. I know that that is not something that's new to any of us. It's something that we've all paid attention to. We recognize it is at times easy to look away. But I do know that we are represented by a council that finds it very difficult to look away when the disparity can be so vulgar. What we did was we encouraged a very methodical and logical approach to the issue that included the impact on small businesses and nonprofits. And I believe that's what's actually exactly transpired in these last five months through our public roundtable discussions, staff reports and commission meetings. And I wanted to really emphasize we've heard this from other speakers, but that the community process truly worked. And the process that the staff engaged in together with the Economic Development Commission truly worked. The Economic Development Commission, I have to say at this point, I want to emphasize how hard they worked and the hundreds of workers as well, the small business owners and stakeholders that spoke in front of the commission over two hearings and two policy meetings. These were all individuals in their own right, have very, very, very busy lives. But they had committed and continue to commit to this public policy debate because they know they know that it will impact the entire city of Long Beach and more than the city of Long Beach. We have workers here that don't live here that sustain families elsewhere. And so that commitment does not. It is not overlooked. It's something that doesn't go unnoticed. While we've all signed up here behind the dias for another full time job, none of you as individuals do. And when you do, when you do stand up and contribute to the public process, it's something that I, I deeply value and I'm very grateful for. So I'd like to thank all of you, especially the Economic Development Commission, for the work and all of the members of the community that participated in it. I want to go back a little bit to the disparity that was highlighted by Dr. Cooper in her report of the study. And as I had said before, it isn't anything that is new to any of us. But sometimes when we hear things just very specifically to Long Beach, I think it strikes us differently. We do feel very personally about where we live and and the city we live in. When Mayor Foster first ran, I think many of us remember he talked about Long Beach being a tale of two cities. And at that time, he asked us to consider, collectively consider. The income and wealth disparity in Long Beach. And that was ten years ago. And I'll submit to you today that it wasn't only Mayor Foster's concern, nor was it just the council's concern. The residents of Long Beach shared that concern, too, and since 2006, we have seen great struggles throughout the world and really our nation. But if I just look at Long Beach, we have we have experienced great struggles as a city and as individuals. We saw the greatest economic recession since the Great Depression, and it struck everyone. It didn't strike us all equally, but it did strike everyone. In Long Beach isn't unique to the disparities that Dr. Cooper highlights from the L.A. Economic Development Study. Global inequality is growing. Should that matter to us for this conversation tonight? Absolutely. It is all relative and it's related. And we learned yesterday with a new study that was out that half of the world's wealth now is in the hands of just 1% of the population. And that's significant. Thankfully, that's not the case in Long Beach. But when we look at our local example and we look at how desperately some of our families live, we have to be concerned whether it is as drastic a figure as the global inequity is or it is not. And the level of income concentration, the disparity has fluctuated throughout history. That, too, is not new. But what's new is we have an opportunity. We have a collective conscience and an opportunity to correct some things that need to be corrected. And so when we look at this opportunity to do this and we think about the Long Beach way, and some of us have come into this conversation only on this issue, but many of you have been in a larger conversation in the city of Long Beach that I say goes back a decade. And what that conversation is, is raising the quality of life in the city of Long Beach. And I'm going to look right at Councilmember Tonya Reyes Turanga, who was here on that council at the time. And she can attest that this is not a new conversation for any of us. We have incrementally brought forward policy changes and supported initiatives and advocated on behalf of raising the quality of life in Long Beach, not just for the residents of Long Beach, but for the good men and women who help us live our lives the way we do, the way we would like to do. And so one major example of that, and there are so many other examples that attest to that is Measure N, which was the living wage ordinance that we passed, that the voters passed. Council put it on the ballot and the voters passed that. And that was to raise the income, the wage for hotel workers in the city of Long Beach. And that was significant. And at that time, we had heard that there were fears by business owners that we may end up shuttering hotel rooms, we may end up seeing great losses to our hotel industry. And that actually was not true. In fact, they actually they ended up posting greater earnings since that time. And so what that tells us is when workers do well, the city does well. And when we ensure that our workers do well and that they are able to support their families and be able to engage in the activities that that kind of liberty affords us, we know that our entire city does well. These minor changes and major changes end up impacting our entire economy. And I'm confident about that. And that's something that gives me great comfort when I look at policy measures that will have a great financial impact on businesses. But as Dr. Cooper had alluded to, and I think Mayor Garcia had alluded to, these businesses are comprised of workers and these businesses operate on the patronage of customers. And we are all the same. We are workers in one place and we are customers in other place. And it is an ecosystem type of an economy that is really dependent on one another. And so. What I'd like to do, Mayor Garcia, is ask. The city attorney will ask you actually and then the city attorney. If I could make two motions and perhaps he would consider allowing it to be two motions.
Speaker 0: Did you. You had mentioned to me that you wanted to go to the public first.
Speaker 2: I did.
Speaker 0: And then want to come back to that.
Speaker 2: After I do.
Speaker 5: Okay.
Speaker 0: So. So let me let me do that and let me open this up for public comment and please line up. Yep.
Speaker 8: Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Speaker 0: That's okay. I know, I know. Everyone's been waiting. That's okay. So just as a just as a a reminder, 3 minutes timer is up and. Absolutely. So what we're going to do is we guys should please couple of things. Number one, some just ground rules here. If you need translation, you'll obviously get double time. Okay? So don't worry about that. And I'm going to also allow the the young woman who's in the front here to go first so we can just let this lady go first. You're in the front and then we'll go from there.
Speaker 15: When I started, McNamara wrote The Ramones before us until joining us again last rather Long Beach Swing Madras Ultra, the cuatro e who also resident there. Colombia's Trabajadores El Pollo Loco.
Speaker 5: Hi. My name is Rosa Ramos.
Speaker 7: I've been living in Long Beach for 28 years and I've been a resident of this country for 28 years.
Speaker 3: I work at a local.
Speaker 15: All yesterday against the thought of that billion dollar, let alone mental salario meaning walk ins a all this purchase or you know, trabajadores trabajo will duro. But I also think that I mean, of course I'll say I am a killer, though, because along the borders of Pakistan, I'll send up Osaka. Maybe I'll go mystic running up and thinking about what I've been doing over the course of my solo musical spectacle Mozart, Miranda Tanto, Problema and La Familia, you know, collective musical story and not so friendly. Miranda Polo on the guitar. Mala This is the only set on the border, so.
Speaker 3: So I've been working in Long Beach for 28 years.
Speaker 0: Would you mind putting that mike up here? Yeah. Thank you.
Speaker 7: I've been working in Long Beach for 28 years, and at.
Speaker 3: At one time I was not working because I was married.
Speaker 7: But because I was a victim of domestic violence. I needed to get a divorce and work on my own. I never realized how hard it was to work for minimum wage. And that's why I'm here today to petition the council to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour, because it's so important for people who work this hard to be able to live and.
Speaker 14: Give their children.
Speaker 7: A space to live in.
Speaker 3: That is hospitable and also.
Speaker 15: YouTube guitar, macabre musical. Your soul is in trouble. No, no, no, stop! Arapaja told the Mirror into Ibarapa local as well as command, operational control, economical. Start the nicotine also under the trouble it is supposed to work at and around the research protocol for current until those gospels get any RSS are the only sequel. No, not. I mean, yes. Capella and Tanto compromise are potatoes. Well, bipolar Lucas. That outlaws mistrust of you.
Speaker 3: I don't work very hard. And when I got my first.
Speaker 7: Minimum wage job, I realized I needed to get a second job and a third job. Thank God that my children did not demand much.
Speaker 3: Just a few.
Speaker 7: Shoes and the occasional expenditure that I couldn't afford but I had to do. And thank God that they were not as demanding as they could have been.
Speaker 15: Outlets like ours and El Pollo Loco Caffé Trabalhando Eva's Melon Quatro. Another month it dollar via veces cuando trabalho cuatro minuto. No, Malagasy not taekwondo. Yeah, my, my. They sent me a lot of it was a econo trabajo say societa ora la mer the ora cameron Allison Madison. Buy a bunch, said Prabhakar, Pakistan. You know the trouble I want to improve ACKERMAN.
Speaker 3: So I work at Oil Local.
Speaker 7: And sometimes when they give me 4 hours, they only give me 4 hours and they don't give me my ten minute break or they tell me to clock out and leave before I need my ten minute break. And then when I get 6 hours, they give me my half an hour break, but they don't.
Speaker 3: Give me my ten, my ten minute break.
Speaker 7: And in addition to that, I also experience wage theft as a result of that because of the 10 minutes that I don't get.
Speaker 15: Is in benefits is pork out it out as a commentary someone on me said on Wednesday Rukia to a gecko little medical burger you're not running on benefits your bananas are calories.
Speaker 3: And once I had medical problems.
Speaker 7: I had to get medical because I have no benefits, even though I've been working.
Speaker 3: There for over 20 years.
Speaker 15: You're not so you're not familiar. Regular common while one of the feathers myriad yoke of stress through horse and a lot of people joining us good thing what give me the name guy is highly local and mythical where you go is it good? Are you planning on cynical musical polka palooza? Glorious Gargano goes on along many more than normal cancer.
Speaker 3: So for 28 years I haven't been.
Speaker 7: Able to live as a normal family.
Speaker 3: Because I've never been able to take my children on a vacation. Like many of you, I'm sure take for granted.
Speaker 7: For 28 years, I haven't been able to have a normal family life.
Speaker 15: Oh that's the end of your salary or month and. BERGMAN And that DENIRO Nelson Mandela. KINSELLA And after trying to dole out a load of almost all of them unless you love the long spaghetti we won't keep bugging Miranda. I keep our bolo huggy comb like a compromise. Camelot told the American I'm not a killer paragliding the Long Beach Pirates impresarios Donald General other wacky.
Speaker 8: I got me.
Speaker 7: So I'm asking you to raise the minimum wage to $15 because I spend all my money here in Long Beach. I pay my rent.
Speaker 3: I eat in Long Beach, I do everything here.
Speaker 7: And $15 isn't enough. But that's all we're asking for now so that I can just survive it.
Speaker 15: I'm being your portal is that simple. Crystal Trabalhando Musical Finance. Tallahassee Tonya Temple follows Paris, the incredible epitome of what makes it don't last through here. Get us a list Gustav alias presto zero here came up with a miracle Amanda cuando savalas quella cuando yaga yogi sirup But I want less I'll spare this I don't know those stories, madame. I'm not going for anything kinesthetic, is there nothing? I don't know. Still Olivia Gomez that gave it to me though.
Speaker 3: It's the only rhythm. So the only reason I'm happy that I had to have this surgery.
Speaker 7: Is because normally I cannot see my kids because of my three jobs. And now I get to see my children in the morning and in the afternoon because I had this surgery.
Speaker 3: And I ask you, which one of.
Speaker 7: You would want a life like this making minimum.
Speaker 5: Wage.
Speaker 8: Do it for a day.
Speaker 15: Of those people get used to this thing on consideration, that is the polka sycamore that trust the music more, just better. So it must be the mental eagle. I know this does not represent the owner. Familia is a Cadillac plan and beside me as a travel. Hello, it is. And I think the more you're in it in them and that is so is it dumb associate mentors on mutual lows that's not a parliamentarian poquito economists when they got those.
Speaker 0: Thank you you can translate that because.
Speaker 7: I ask you to raise the minimum wage because this life is a hard life for me and I need a raise in the minimum wage so that I can live a life that's a little easier and please. And and so that I can actually spend more money in Long Beach. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 9: My God. God.
Speaker 0: Ma'am. Guys, please. We have to be respectful of the speakers that are speaking in front. Please. Yes, sir.
Speaker 5: Mayor, council members. My name is Richard Roberts. I reside in the second district. I'm a program coordinator for Central China. Central China supports the raise the minimum wage in the state of Bellamy. We believe this would allow citizens in our city a living wage and bring economic growth to our city. Since our offers job training programs for youth aged 16 to 24 years old, at the end of the trainings, youth are offered pay, work experience. These pay work experience offer young people valuable skills which make them employable. We are requesting that the City Council would consider providing workforce agencies and limits with an exemption from raising the wage . If our work experience rates were increase, it will it will limit and minimize amount of you will receive pay, work experience opportunities. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 16: Mayor. Council members. Good evening. My name is Ivan Juarez. I reside in the sixth district at 2046 seventh Avenue. I was released from prison on June 13th after serving three and a half years. In August, I enrolled in Central Charge Youth Diversion Program. I have since received certifications and forklift hours. So has proper confined space, CPR, also 30 and Construction, Safety and Health. These certifications have allowed me the opportunity to gain paid work experience. I learned communication skills, how to operate machinery and how to be safe in any type of work environment. Before I went to prison, I never had any. I never had a job or held any responsibilities. At the time I was incarcerated, I had a five month old daughter. Today, I have full custody through the Paid Work Experience program. I learned skills that have helped me gain permanent employment with Central Time. I am a community outreach specialist. I go into the community and provide other young people with information about how centralized programs can help and provide new directions in their lives. Through job training opportunities and paid work experience. Paid work experience allows young people like me the opportunity for employment when most employers are not willing to take that chance on this. The Paid Work Experience program allowed me to demonstrate to the employer my newly developed work ethic how I am a hard worker. I am responsible and a good man. Today I have a new outlook on life. I stand here a new and changed man. I am proud to be employed by Central China. Proud of my achievements, but most importantly, proud at the ability to financially support my four year old daughter. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Good evening, counsel. My name is Mike Pimentel Jr. I'm local president of the United Steelworkers Local 2801 representing health care workers at Lumberton Moore Medical Center. We represent 1600 members, approximately which 300 of them are Eve's workers. And for the nutrition workers that don't make $15 an hour that are starting wages, only 1019 for this company, Sodexo , who Lunch Memorial.
Speaker 7: Subcontracted out the.
Speaker 3: Work with, which is Sodexo, who made $1.9 billion in profits last year. And we can't even get $15 at the table right now. We're in the labor dispute with Tedesco at Long Beach Memorial Medical Center, and we are going back to the table on February 4th and fifth in regards to wages. So we urge matter of fact, our members demand that the council vote yes on the $15 an hour along like L.A. We're no different from Los Angeles, and that's why we're I'm here to represent the working people. I also want to give an experience to my mother, who's also a housekeeper at the hospital where 28 years for this company and doesn't even make $15 an hour. That's why we urge we are demanding the $15 an.
Speaker 11: Hour for all workers in Long Beach and so we.
Speaker 3: Can spend our money here and give it back to the restaurants. Owners that are are not and that are not in support of this so that we can spend our money back in restaurants. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Hello. Good evening. Honorable Mayor Garcia and City Council. My name is Darryl Alvarez. I've been living here in Long Beach for about five years with my wife and my three year old son. I support raising the minimum wage, the Long Beach Way, which is $15 per hour city rule. So city led wage enforcement. More paid sick days and no exception. I support this because I experience working in reporting care and didn't receive an accurate paycheck. I worked at a body care bonding care 7 to 8 years ago. And and time has passed. Basically, I was on the clock 24 hours a day. I should have been paid at least $15 an hour. And a boring care paid at $8 an hour. But I also didn't receive the full amount of the $8 an hour. I had to live with a £200 elder up to his full wheelchair because he had fallen at a late night. Yes, it was difficult and I should have filed a complaint at that time, but I didn't really realize in how much I should have gotten paid because I didn't have a family and have a bigger responsibility. I personally was a victim of a wage theft or a low wage. It's actually embarrassing to share this publicly. I'm sharing this information so that other people will know I will not be experiencing any more wage theft. Raising, raising, raising past the minimum wage up to $15 an hour would definitely be helpful for families, friends and our community. This project would also provide benefits and responsibilities.
Speaker 8: Because inflation's an extra.
Speaker 3: Expenses are rising. Income earners aren't able to save and get out of debt as soon as possible. We all know it is very important to be financially protected because emergency and other sudden expenses is devastating. We are very excited for our community with an increasing income earning and avoiding wage theft in the city of Long Beach, California . Where there's where there should be the land of the free. We respectfully fight this right with our hearts and minds in our focus on city council leaders to act and pass this law. Thank you for listening again. Mayor Garcia and City Council. God bless you all.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 15: Good evening. Council.
Speaker 12: Council and mayor. My name is.
Speaker 15: Cynthia Silver on this.
Speaker 12: I am not a resident of Long Beach, but I consider this my second home. I graduated from Cal State, Long Beach, and I have been a student intern for Central Asia, and I give a lot of my success thus far to this nonprofit organization and to the opportunities that they provide the city of Long Beach. They help the youth. Becomes something when they think they're nothing or they see there's no outcome of their community. They give them the resources. They give them the education. And they give training. I am one of the participants of Central Cha as well, and they helped me accomplish my biggest goal, which was becoming an aunt.
Speaker 8: Yeah. Sorry. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Congratulations. That's wonderful.
Speaker 15: They open.
Speaker 12: The door through this organization so I can in turn be able to get my bachelor's degree.
Speaker 15: When other people, even in my community.
Speaker 13: They were for they weren't.
Speaker 12: Taking in students. And I'm very.
Speaker 15: Grateful to them. That's why I have returned.
Speaker 12: To help them in any way possible. And just to.
Speaker 13: Know that our community starts from the bottom.
Speaker 12: The investment should be in the youth, which is going to ultimately give back to the community. And in order to help other people accomplish their goals and just live day to day, we need this. We need this improvement in the community as well as the whole nation. But, you know, Long Beach is a huge city. And like Dr. Cooper, we're just like L.A.. L.A. is a huge county, huge city. So with the help of you guys and this little step, which is a huge step to many of the communities, we can move forward and help other youth and community members accomplish their goals and become successful. And thank you for your time.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Good evening, everyone. My name is Julio Perez.
Speaker 3: I currently present the ninth district. I a I'm a career high school graduate. Afterwards, I went on to Cal State.
Speaker 0: Fullerton, received my bachelor's.
Speaker 3: Degree in political science and Chicano studies. I currently work.
Speaker 0: For.
Speaker 7: Central Asia and I'm here to support the minimum wage increase. I would also like to echo what my colleagues said and and just.
Speaker 3: Be mindful and conscious for us as a nonprofit organization to hopefully be exempt from. From that wage increase to.
Speaker 7: Pay these youth.
Speaker 3: I myself receive paid work experience after I graduated from Cal State Fullerton. Afterwards, I transitioned.
Speaker 7: And worked as a.
Speaker 3: Paralegal. And I recently came back to work for Central Asia as a case manager.
Speaker 7: And also a.
Speaker 3: Program coordinator for our Immigration Department. I've also seen this firsthand working with youth and seen that the paid work experience is.
Speaker 7: Is truly invaluable. So that's just just a few of my thoughts.
Speaker 5: Briefly. Thank you very much for your attention.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker.
Speaker 3: Please. Good evening, honorable mayor and council members. My name is Chris Marker. I work as a registered nurse at Long Beach Area Hospital. When one becomes ill, they should not have to worry about starting or continuing on a disciplinary track, being fired or being financially unable to provide for their family. It is unconscionable that today, with all we know about preventative health care and how diseases spread, that workers are expected to make a choice when they're sick, potentially going to work sick and spread the disease among their coworkers, potentially contribute to the length of time of that illness for themselves, or potentially face repercussions for having too many absences. As a health care expert is very concerning that a worker with a serious health threat like cancer might go undiagnosed because of their inability to take off work to be seen. It's important to note that each of us has daily contact with each other and with the workers that paid sick sick leave would benefit. These workers are our baristas, our cashiers. They prepare and deliver our food. They care for our children. They clean our offices and buildings. They provide immeasurable every day valuable services. And they need your help now. On the other hand, employers will find that providing sick, paid sick leave will benefit them in the long run. When workers are encouraged to take care of themselves and not report to work ill, negating the spread of germs to coworkers and their families and enhancing productivity. I think the vice mayor pointed out that there was increased productivity and profits among the hotels when they raised the minimum wage for those workers. We need to eliminate the stigma experienced by female workers who are generally the ones earning less than end up staying home with the sick child. Paid sick leave would be an equalizer, allowing for parents to share the responsibility. Low wage earners could benefit from the many changes addressed here this evening. A higher minimum wage, better access to health care, stable schedules, etc. but that at the top of that list is paid sick leave. We ask that you support the $15 minimum wage and paid sick leave. Excuse me. Sick leave. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Mayor. City Council. Council members. My name is James Ford. I'm a resident of the second district. I'm actually.
Speaker 3: Yes, the second district.
Speaker 5: I am. I'm representing the.
Speaker 3: Reverend Metro Ray Ray Raheem, who was called away by a pastoral emergency.
Speaker 17: She's the minister of the.
Speaker 3: Unitarian Universalist Church of Long Beach here.
Speaker 5: And our congregation in.
Speaker 17: Long Beach is a member of the Faith Coalition that has been supporting this.
Speaker 5: $15 an hour minimum wage proposal. We see this as a moral issue.
Speaker 3: You have heard the numbers.
Speaker 5: You've crunched the numbers. You know that there are pluses and minuses involved here. We are enthusiastic supporters of the.
Speaker 3: Businesses of our community. It is time to be equally.
Speaker 5: Enthusiastic for the workers. $15 an hour simply means dignity.
Speaker 3: We've heard so many stories of wage theft. We've heard stories where the legal wage is so low, it might as well be wage theft. What we need at this point is leadership. You are our leaders. We look forward to your leading us into that Long Beach dream. That Long Beach way, dear ones, do it tonight. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 18: Good evening, Mayor and City Council. I appreciate all the hard work you've done on this and it does not go unnoticed by me. My name is Ron Caulkins. I have worked in Long Beach for 52 years. I own and operate West Coast vital services for the last 35 years, and I probably believe I'm in the minority here . But let me tell you, I did not know how this minimum wage issue came before the city council, but I do now. But I ask that the council vote no on this proposal. I understand the need and the passion of those people that support it. But in my opinion. A mandated wage and benefit package can not only be harmful to the businesses, they can create a loss of business in the loss of the jobs of that business. All of my employees received more than minimum wage. But not when I first heard him in. I have nobody comes into my shop. It has applications that qualify for what I do. I bring them in, I train them. I give them $0.25, $0.50 or a dollar an hour or more. All my employees get holidays, they get vacations, they get medical, they get dental care. And I match their Roth IRA. No. Ten years ago. Japan had a loss of value in their currency, which they never recovered from. Now China is having a loss in their currency when their currency loses values. Ours goes up. But they can no longer afford to buy American made products. That could result in layoffs across the nation because we need to create a job market that is competitive worldwide. We need to make the Long Beach market alternative and more attractive to outside manufacturers. We need to create a job market to feed, clothe and house the undereducated. We need to help the small business to be and to grow. In Long Beach after World War Two. Our servicemen came home to pursue the American Dream. They built homes, highways and bridges. But they also started small businesses. They worked in their kitchens, their garages, their barns, in their backyards. Oftentimes, they were self-taught, but they had a love of creation. They made many sacrifices, but they created jobs. Some of them failed, of course, but many thrived. Probably none of us will be a Walter or not. Or Steve Jobs or Bill Gates.
Speaker 0: Hold on a sec. Let me, sir, finish up. Ma'am, we have to let every speaker has a right to their 3 minutes, please. Okay. Go ahead, sir.
Speaker 18: Our responsibility is to help the youth of this city. We have to educate them. We have to give vocational training. We have to create them and give them the skills and build to enter the job market. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, ma'am. You're. You can go next. Jeremy, let the let the lady behind you go next.
Speaker 5: Absolutely.
Speaker 0: Go ahead.
Speaker 8: Good evening. Dr. Lowenthal, I've lived in your district for eight years. I've lived in Long Beach since the shipyard left. Shame on you. Most of the people ahead of me have said what's on my heart? What's in my soul? What pains me? What gives me a headache? I've been a community activist in this community specific. Lee, the East District. For the time that I've lived here and in Bixby Knolls. Shame on you all that look. That are brown. That look like me? Shame on you all. We voted you all into office and you have not done the work that you were hired to do. And don't get it twisted. You work for the citizens of the city of Long Beach, and you work for the citizens of the city of Long Beach.
Speaker 0: Into the mike.
Speaker 8: Please don't man me.
Speaker 0: What do you want me to call you?
Speaker 8: Give me my time and don't speak. We listen to you for an hour and 15 minutes. Let me speak without interruption.
Speaker 0: Go ahead, ma'am.
Speaker 8: Okay. Don't do it again. Thank you. Thank you. And that's exactly what this is, is blatant hypocrisy and disrespect. You are both and fire. And I understand you're leaving and you're not running for reelection. It's time for you to do bigger things because you are a warrior. And all of you. And with all of that had his back and you that we are your cell phone. You know, this whole entire council needs to be fired. You all brought. And I've been here through Beverly's administration and Bob's administration and now Robert's administration. Hypocrisy. Okay. 22 seconds left. You all brought? A slave plantation that makes trillion dollars a conglomerate around the world. Wal-Mart. So this community. I help build in Wal-Mart when it got here. And that. And I've worked for numerous conglomerates, and that is the biggest plantation slave plantation in 2016. That exists in this United States and around the world. Shame on.
Speaker 0: You. Time is up. Thank you.
Speaker 8: You need to be fired. You don't dare tell me time is up. I less than half hour about bullshit.
Speaker 0: All right, that's enough. And actually.
Speaker 8: That's 15 minutes of the same set.
Speaker 0: So we're taking a everyone that's in line right now.
Speaker 8: He's wanting to.
Speaker 0: Stay in line. Can stay in line. We're taking this part as a reset.
Speaker 8: Sack, Robert.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 8: The fact. Me. You know what, Rick? How has that?
Speaker 0: Okay. I want to thank everybody else for for being respectful. Please come forward next speaker. Thank you.
Speaker 5: Good evening, Mayor. City Council Staff. My name's Jeremy Harris, senior vice president, orbital area Chamber of Commerce. And tonight I'm here on behalf of the Chamber leadership. Long Beach businesses. And then also, most importantly, the Long Beach Council Business Associations, also known as COBA. I want to thank you. I want to say special thanks to Councilmember Price for reiterating Cobra's proposal. I'll get into that as well. And then also Mr. Conway for his due diligence and on our proposal as well. But I'll jump into that. So tonight, we welcome the opportunity to give comments on the proposed EDC recommendation. That's before you. But let's talk about Cobra's process and our proposal on the minimum wage policy. This included an extended business outreach done in concert with the Mayor's initiated public outreach program in my city by the City Council Approved Report and study as prepared by EDC. It was critical for COBRA to do its due diligence for its members and nonmembers, the business community that oftentimes is underrepresented in a process such as these. We understand there's a momentum for increasing the minimum wage around the region and in parts of the country. However, momentum alone should not be the reason to enact an ordinance. It should be data driven and testimony from those who bear. The burden of such an ordinance should be accounted for. While no process is perfect, it's important to take into account the process of trying to provide an economical answer to an otherwise very political and at times emotional issue. We understand there are a number of factors to consider after completing our outreach of targeting business owners and nonprofit leadership. We'd like to enter into the record and respectfully recommend the following key points for your consideration. Tonight we have four concise key recommendations as supported by our outreach efforts. These are one a $12.50 hour wage to be implemented over the course of five years, which includes compensation such as medical benefits, paid sick leave and time off to a one year delayed implementation for small businesses defined as 25 and under three. A two year delayed implementation for nonprofits 501c threes. And number four, a youth implemented wage for individuals 21 years and younger to be paid at the state of California's one a minimum wage rate. To get there, COBRA met with businesses and nonprofits, as I'd previously stated through focus groups and study and surveying. In short, our report was based on the data collected at these meetings, along with that survey. After issuing our findings in a report released in late November, COBRA.
Speaker 17: Solidified these recommendations with.
Speaker 5: Our stakeholders. This included the Chamber, Downtown, Long Beach Associates, L.A. Biz Fed and numerous, numerous business improvement district organizations in the corridors here in the city. We believe this is the direction Lombard needs to go if we indeed choose to join other cities with an increased minimum wage policy. We believe this is the Long Beach way, as Long Beach as unique to other cities. We are not the same as those others. I thank you for the time tonight under these comments. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Good evening, Mr. Mayor. City Council, my name is Jimmy, resides with Georgia's Great Cafe. You know, I've been through this process a few times with with the mayor, and I've been to more meetings than I care to talk about. I mean, throw some glasses on here. Yes. I say it is the first thing to go. I just want to start off on a personal to let people know, you know, my background and little understanding of what we business owners go through and then some some fine points of what I think with this should go and should lead. You know, I'm I'm an immigrant here. I came here in 1980 as a 15 year. 15 and a half year old boy. I got my first job in McDonald's as a dishwasher. Never went to college. My family lived under the poverty line until we opened up our restaurants. When I say that, I mean five years into our business, I never felt like I was mistreated or. Badly in any way. My my family struggled through those things. We struggled together. We made it work. And that's just the personal story behind what you know, what my story is for. And I can see this country be the greatest country in the world, because where else could a young man born in Africa come in and do as well as I've done in this business with my family and create the wealth we have for our family? And not just my family, but we've employed over 220 people. We started as a operator who employed two people, and in 16 years, we're proud to say we employ 220 people. I sympathize with the people that are living under the poverty line and not getting the money they think they deserve or the people that are being held hostage under wage theft. That shouldn't happen in this country. We shouldn't have people living under poverty anyway. There were so many points I wanted to get through. But the most important point I want to get to, I'm sure some of the people they will talk about carving, I mean, leveling the playing field, entry level jobs and things like that. But if we're going to do this a long beach way, let's just not say the words. Just do it the Long Beach way. You know, if if Mr. Parkin says that the carving on tipped employees hasn't been done or we don't know, this can be challenged. Not more than likely not. Let's just draw the line between and do it. If you're asking us to risk and to sacrifice. I'm asking you to risk a sacrifice with us. You know, there's been many, many conversations about carving out tipped employees. My my tipped employees make anywhere from 20 to $50 an hour or more above their minimum wage. I don't think minimum wage was designed for people like that. So I urge you to strongly consider doing it the Long Beach way and going after the opportunity to carve out tipped employees or. I guess. Tipton, please. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Jimmy. Next. Nice restaurant. Next speaker, please. I'm Mike. Hungry for some euro or something? Okay. Next speaker. Okay.
Speaker 3: You start. Okay.
Speaker 1: Well, good evening. My name is Sandy Garcia. I'm a junior Renaissance High School for the Arts, and I'm an interim with Californians for Justice. And we're a grassroots organization that works with youth to win campaigns for justice in our schools. And we believe that young people are the leaders we need to create the healthy, just and thriving schools all of our communities need.
Speaker 4: My name is. My name is Jordan. I'm a sophomore of Renaissance High School for the Arts, and I'm also an intern with California for Justice.
Speaker 1: With prices increasing all the time, people are having difficulty making ends meet, especially when earning a minimum wage that keeps them in poverty. Having less income means that families and individuals are struggling to pay the bills and necessities they need. So how can we choose to go against what's best for small businesses and the economy? Raising the minimum wage would benefit the economy as people would have more money to spend. And if we wait? If we raise the minimum wage to $15, people would earn more money and be able to spend their money here in small businesses in Long Beach. Also, many people would have had to resort to stealing and thus the crime rates would decrease.
Speaker 8: Because if more people.
Speaker 1: Are earning more money and they'll be able to afford whatever they need.
Speaker 8: But if not.
Speaker 1: A lot of people that I personally know would resort resorts to stealing.
Speaker 8: And thus.
Speaker 1: Instead like having like a little job, they would earn the money to actually need for.
Speaker 13: Necessities like myself.
Speaker 1: I don't have a well, I do have a job, but I also sell candy bars on the side to, like, pay for my necessities, like food. I'm going into college soon, so I need to pay for that. And, you know, it's a dollar, so.
Speaker 4: Start right here, right now. Okay.
Speaker 18: The question we want to ask is why should age separate us? Why should people under should people under the age of 25 shouldn't? They should also get the new $15 minimum wage. Because the youth are a major.
Speaker 4: Consumer group for local businesses. We we go to the movies. We, you know, we go shopping. We visit trendy restaurants, coffee shops, etc.. We contribute a large part to Long Beach economy.
Speaker 1: $15 for all. Thank you.
Speaker 8: With the help.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker for.
Speaker 1: Good evening. My name is Veronica Rodriguez. Quincy.
Speaker 0: I like your Colombian pen.
Speaker 1: Thank you. And I'm here to represent and read a letter on behalf of the Human Relations Commission. Dear, honorable mayor and members of the City Council, the Human Relations Commission's purpose and function is to promote goodwill in order to maintain civic pride and tranquility and enhance and improve mutual understanding and respect for all citizens in the community . It is in this context that the Human Relations Commission submits to the Long Beach City Council the following recommendation to direct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance for the implementation of a minimum wage policy for the entire city of Long Beach. That includes a pathway to $15 an hour, cost of living, annual increases to be reviewed after the first five years and comprehensive wage enforcement. The Human Relations Commission over the last several months has discussed the impending City Council vote to raise the minimum wage. Members have attended public forums, heard public comments and reviewed findings from the Economic Roundtable and Economic Development Commission's recommendations to Council. There is no denying that poverty is inextricably linked to the health and well-being of residents and the city overall. Poverty does discriminate. While poverty affects people of all race, class and genders, its largest impacts are on people of color. According to the U.S. Census, 24.3% of Latinos and over 20% of African-Americans in Long Beach struggle to make ends meet. All across America, cities are taking bold steps to ensure people can live a life of dignity with the ability to provide food and shelter for their families. In 2012, over 64% of Long Beach voters gave hotel workers a raise to $13 per hour. Paid sick days and tip protection. That same year, San Jose voted for a raise for their entire city. It became clear that there was strong support throughout California and nationwide to close the income gap. As Mayor Garcia asserted at this year's State of the City, no one should have to work two jobs to put food on the table. Long Beach was a leader in 2012. And this movement to to close the income gap. Today, cities across America are increasing their minimum wage. Regionally, the city and county of L.A. and Santa monica have all passed a pathway to a $15 per hour minimum wage. The wage level was not random. Several studies have shown that $15 per hour is the least amount a single family needs to afford the basic necessities to live in L.A. County. Cities such as Seattle have demonstrated that higher wages are better for the entire community, and as a modern city, we must continue to embrace progress, just justice and human dignity, and not shy away from it. The Commission urges City Council to adopt a minimum wage policy that truly affirms human dignity and equity.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Time. Time is all up. Thank you. Thank you so much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Good evening.
Speaker 13: Good evening, everyone. My name is Cody Schiller. I'm a sophomore from McBride High School and a student leader with California for Justice. I'm here to speak on behalf of the youth of Long Beach in support of raising the minimum wage. During these couple of months of public hearings. There's been mounting pressure to exempt specific groups of people from getting the $15 minimum wage by 2020. These are tipped employees, people working nonprofits and everyone, 25. Now, imagine this city.
Speaker 8: The city ordinance gets passed.
Speaker 13: Now you have a youth employee and an employee that's over 25 working in the same facility. Same facility, doing the same thing. Wait. They're doing the same thing and one gets paid more than the other. Don't you think this would create tension in the workplace? The youth would be discouraged to do that. To do the youth will be discouraged. To not do their job and to not work as hard at it because who want to work their job if they aren't getting paid as much as the next person. Let's say this not.
Speaker 8: This scenario of.
Speaker 13: Raising the wage to $15 an hour for people 25 and over can also play out in another way in which companies are actually hiring more people under 25. Under 25. That's great, right? Hiring more, you know. Companies can very easily choose to hire more employees under 25 in order to save money by paying them $10 an hour instead of the $15 an hour that everyone should be getting paid. You know what this sounds like? Legal exploitation. Am I right?
Speaker 8: Look at this. This way.
Speaker 13: I'm just working as hard as the other guy. I'm not getting paid the same. Come on. Let's make this a minimum wage raise for everyone. Why do I think anyone under the age of 25 should get a raise in the minimum wage? It's funny you ask. In my situation, I'm planning to be more of an independent person in a sense that I want to see how it's like to be an adult and paying for my own things and how to manage money. By 2020, I'll be in college. I'll be a college student working a minimum wage job, trying to pay my books and tuition. Working for $10 an hour won't do. Lucky for me, I have supportive parents, but others don't have that and they actually need the raise in the wage. This can help students support their family that have fallen into hard times.
Speaker 15: But they'll having to.
Speaker 13: Take up more than one job because, as we know, two jobs are stressful as it is and then through school and endless hours of homework you have into the mix. This can be too much for a person to take resulting.
Speaker 8: In this drop out of us, drop out of a student.
Speaker 13: Therefore, the minimum wage should be for everyone and shouldn't exempt youth. Let's raise the wage. The line between.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 17: Thank you for having us. Like many here, I've been here about four and a half hours. My cell phone battery has died. I myself don't have family waiting for me, but I know that many people here do. And so I appreciate, just as we listened to you all debate how to vote on a study or even offer an award named after Martin Luther King to an oil company, we're grateful that you are giving us your undivided attention on this important issue. My name is Trevor Griffey. I'm a lecturer in U.S. history at Cal State Long Beach. I live in Belmont Heights. I gave testimony in support of a minimum wage increase last year, which is strange the way it sounds at a neighborhood forum in Belmont Shore at that event and a news coverage and op eds I've read in the city council talk about the city council's deliberations about increasing the minimum wage. I've been disappointed by the role of speculation in the way it seems to be crowding out informed debate. I've heard critics of a minimum wage increase say that it will increase unemployment for low skill or young workers, that it will accelerate automation of low wage jobs, that it will have a negative overall impact on retail and restaurant industries, that it will undermine nonprofit and social service sectors, or even that it will hurt the whole economy. But what I often don't hear in all of this criticism, which I've heard from newspaper columnists, from a few city council members, from business groups, and by wealthy conservatives who live in my neighborhood where the average housing prices over $1,000,000. I haven't heard evidence. I haven't heard the actual studies of actual experience where they've raised the minimum wage, where they said in this place, this terrible thing that I'm telling you would happen in Long Beach happened. I haven't heard it even in the Le D.C. report. If you take a close look, they give a whole host of speculative possibilities about what could go wrong, but they don't go so far as to say that they will go wrong. And that's because, one, the economics is contested. But two, in many ways, we don't actually have a precedent for increasing the minimum wage one third and knowing exactly how it will play out. So as a result, I think the city council is wise to phase in a minimum wage increase. And I think you've been sound and you're thinking in that regard. But at the same time I'm concerned about the choice to not go all the way to 15 and some of the discussions of exemptions, exemptions to minimum wage laws. And I saw this because my hometown is Seattle. I moved here only a year ago. Create confusion about wage rates that make it difficult for the law to be enforced because workers often don't know what exactly the minimum wage is. If they don't know, they don't know when their boss is cheating them and their boss might not actually tell them in what category they fall. The second point is that I'm concerned that failing to get to 15 is a failure of nerve, a capitulation to business community fear mongering without evidence more than rational policymaking to serve the interests of Long Beach residents and workers.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 13: Good evening. My name is Diana Cruz. I'm a 10th grade student, McBride High School. I'm in the ninth district, and I'm a soon leader with Californians for Justice.
Speaker 8: A higher minimum wage is extremely important to everyone. Long Beach. However, when we say everyone, we mean everyone.
Speaker 13: In my opinion, it's kind of ridiculous to not apply this great new policy to workers under 25.
Speaker 8: I strongly believe that if we are to raise the minimum wage that it should be.
Speaker 13: Applied to everyone. I don't understand why people younger than 25 year olds wouldn't get that higher wage, especially because they're college graduates who are forced to get minimum wage when, while they're struggling to combat student loans, this huge portion contains so many different groups of people who have taken up a job for a reason. These are high school students who have to take a job to help support their families or young parents who are just trying to.
Speaker 8: Find a way to make ends meet. To take a livable wage away from them is unfair.
Speaker 13: I understand that this is supposed to decrease the amount of competition youth.
Speaker 8: Face against the adults in getting a job. But there will always be that competition.
Speaker 13: They used to work should not be devalued. Our city can.
Speaker 8: Not be in favor of exploiting youth by paying.
Speaker 13: Them less for the same work that adults do. This has caused much more hardship for students in general. In just two years, I'm going to be headed to college and to pay tuition, textbooks, board and health, housing.
Speaker 8: It's going to be expensive, and I know I'll.
Speaker 13: Probably have to take a job in addition to schooling, but I have to divert energy from studies. I want to be able to support myself with it. The same dilemma is occurring for so many college students and making high schoolers question if college is even worth it at this point? Higher education should be the end goal for all of our students. But why are we making it so unattainable with a higher wage? It becomes something more tangible, a goal that's more realistic. By supporting a 15 wage for all, we are supporting the.
Speaker 8: People most impacted.
Speaker 13: This especially means our students. As college tuition becomes greater and greater, we must consider the students attending them. So no, they shouldn't be exempt because they still have those.
Speaker 8: Pay, even if they are young. A youth work.
Speaker 13: Is worth just as much as adults. Thanks for listening.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 7: Hi. My name is Joseph Dove, and I'm here representing Clergy and Lady United for Economic Justice. I've been working in the food service industry for over a decade. First as a dishwasher, then as a prep cook, and then as a chef. And up until last year, I worked two full time.
Speaker 5: Jobs just to pay the bills. I live in the fifth District in Long Beach.
Speaker 7: It's not the most expensive district in Long Beach, but at just above minimum wage, like I've heard, a lot of employers say that they pay their employees. It still doesn't cut it. So the excuse that the pay more than minimum wage doesn't exempt them from having to acknowledge the fact that their employees still live in poverty. And one thing that hasn't really come up much is paid sick days. In the foodservice industry, it's a very unregulated market, despite what a lot of cities try to do. What that means is that a lot of employees who would prefer to call in sick because they don't want to spread germs everywhere usually don't call in sick one because they can't afford to because they don't get paid sick days. And two, because a lot of employers will legally fire them for not coming to work, even though they shouldn't be there because of health reasons. So paid sick days is another thing that the council should definitely consider when raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour. I've heard a lot of business owners say that they're afraid that businesses are going to close, that jobs are going to be lost, revenues are going to go out of the city and the economy is going to collapse. As the professor who spoke just before me mentioned, none of that is has been substantiated by facts. However, the OECD report by Dr. Cooper showed that most businesses say that they are not going to cut employees, they're not going to cut employee hours, they're not going to move towards automation, and they don't think that they're going to be closing their doors. I believe those 100% of businesses say that they're not going to be closing their doors. So we need to go on the facts, not just stipulations and fear mongering. An independent review by the Department of Labor of over 64 studies showed that there is no real negative impact for raising the minimum wage. Somebody asked. I can't remember. Who was it? Asked. I think it was Councilmember Gonzalez. How many Long Beach residents would be impacted by raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour? And nobody knew the answer. 15,000 Long Beach residents. So this is something that the council needs to consider $15 an hour because 13 is not enough. 1250 is not enough. 1250 and five years certainly is not enough. We need paid sick days. We need citywide enforcement of these changes. And we need no exemptions for anybody. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 12: Hi. Good evening. My name is Alejandro Gonzalez alone. I'm the lead organizer with Californians for Justice. We're here as an organization to support raising the minimum wage to $15. Given that in our city, a lot of working families really depend on their wages and making sure that we change the conditions of poverty to eliminate that. That should be the Long Beach way in reference to the youth working with the high school students. A lot of them, I think even hearing from some folks in the audience or even in previous hearings, there's this an assumption that youth don't work. There's an assumption that youth, you know, like they don't really need to earn that much money. But the reality with the students is that many of them see the struggle in their family. Some of them may be the only person who can legally work in this country, and their parents are actually dependent on their labor. A lot of students that we work with actually share that. They're in the process of looking for work now as they're in high school. So the reality is, is not at an age when at a certain age, when people need to work or an age above 25, it starts at a young age since even their junior high or high school. Another thing, we also work with youth that are foster youth. For a lot of folks that are foster youth.
Speaker 13: And the conditions.
Speaker 12: May not be the best in the families that they get to be in. We have one youth who actually chose to be emancipated just because of the conditions were very unbearable. He's not 25, he's still a high school student. And for those students that have to now depend on themselves and work with this decision of exempting the youth, you're also hurting those students to have a better quality of life and to be able to sustain themselves. So as you make your decision, you need to see the students holistically and the diversity of our youth that they are the folks that could bring the money that they need for their family or for themselves in four years. The youth that I'm working with right now are going to be in college. And the reality is that college students have to work because we don't have the loans or the scholarships or the grants that are needed so that we could just.
Speaker 13: Focus on school.
Speaker 12: And so by you deciding to exempt students or. A youth under 25. You're hurting a very important population and you're limiting their ability to even sustain themselves. So I urge you, no exemptions for nobody.
Speaker 13: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Hello. My name is Creditjason Pharmacist District. I want to apologize on behalf of the woman who was very, very blunt, you know, because some of us African-American women don't act that way. And it's kind of hard for us to get jobs because the statistics say that we are hostile women, that we act certain ways. We can't get a job. Now, I need your support. Thank you. And so with that said, I have a 13 year old daughter, and I would love for her to work for the city of Long Beach after my first job here in Long Beach. I love the city of Long Beach. I been for 32 years. I look up to all of you guys as leaders because we vote each other in and I know for ya to understand that coming from a poor family or a high rich family, you see any growing up, you see, and you have cousins and uncles and family members who couldn't make a living. And so what your cousins do, they go out and sell drugs they've gotten so their body, we don't want our youth doing that to their selves. We want our youth to make is living so they can help their family. You know, I'm saying for part, helping her family, making money, managing Sean, our young youth, they can provide for themself and stop worrying about stressing out mother and father. Oh, I need this. I need that. Or why you can't get this. Why do so-and-so have those type of shoes and I can't get it? We shouldn't stress as parents. So we're about providing for our kids. We should worry about paying our bills, make sure our life insurance are pay. Make sure our kids college tuition is paid. Also, oh, $2,000 on my student loans. I want my daughter growing up paying off to not have the idea to all student loans right now if you are do you should know how it is so why not start our children now profiting from them struggling have the pace too long. When they get a good job, they should be able to worry about, focus on making it better for themselves, for their family and a future. So that's all I got to say is please raise $15 for our children. They need it. They need it.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: When I noticed that months ago, I had a misnomer, this one.
Speaker 0: Okay. So I want to let the gentleman who is at the mic have his 3 minutes like everyone else. So, senor, please go ahead.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 0: Sir.
Speaker 3: Number one, Solano.
Speaker 0: Okay, hold on 1/2. Hold on 1/2. Okay, everyone that's at the mike deserves your 3 minutes uninterrupted, so let's respect everyone at the microphone. Okay, senor. Sir, please continue.
Speaker 3: You know, when? I'm not sure. I mean, none of us want to know that I was going to commit a rapida. Ms.. Bhosale even with a cane, along with things, as they say in Tanya's main container, Tehran. Me, Peralta or Mi Familia? Good evening.
Speaker 7: My name is Juan Solano. My wife and I have lived in I've lived in Long Beach for a long time. I would love to retire.
Speaker 3: And spend time with my family. It was intentional at the end that the procurement and maintenance at the end of the order. They don't allow mental.
Speaker 7: I've been working 20 years in KFC and there's never been a change in the minimum wage compared to how I have to live.
Speaker 3: I will. I will look to see where. You'll be able concise personas in the parliamentary cameras. I do what I can in order to survive.
Speaker 7: I live with six people in a two bedroom apartment.
Speaker 3: Where I know nothing will happen. A compendium of taboos. Every day I go to work. In on the bus. I can't afford to get a car amendment. Let me remain solidly in.
Speaker 18: Sync with the.
Speaker 3: No. For me to ask those.
Speaker 7: In 2015.
Speaker 3: I couldn't afford most of my expenses. You cannot do this. This is the authoritarianism. Kinship. Kinship. Aurora. I would ask.
Speaker 7: That you, as our representatives, demand $15 an hour.
Speaker 3: For workers. Colonial. Colonial level. A similar thing of. I intend to show in person. So the intent of the witness provided the. We make this.
Speaker 18: Area below a third of a silver.
Speaker 7: Every year we do New Year's resolutions.
Speaker 3: And they're usually vain and for individuals. But this year, I would like you to give me a resolution. Iraq policy. That. Same as attractive to Trabajadores Como para la salud de la Ciudad a long beach.
Speaker 7: To do something for the people of Long Beach. To make Long Beach better for the working people in Long Beach.
Speaker 3: Once the Valley of the Kings is always poorer. She was lucky to heat up with in a complimentary salario integrale. There's an fir made up across.
Speaker 7: A salary of $15 an hour for workers and paid sick days.
Speaker 3: In place as common ground. Popular can talk Taco Bell as in millions and millions. But back on the Long Beach.
Speaker 7: These fast food companies get millions of dollars of profits. But we are the ones who bring the money back to Long Beach.
Speaker 3: The animals get up and their assistants are pulling up. But I, we read it. We have to we have to rely.
Speaker 7: On public assistance in.
Speaker 3: Order to just survive. It this animal will look total shedding. So you do not know this is the type of career that any minimum wage worker has to deal with. It's not a solution as compatibly as your personal case and negotiable.
Speaker 0: We're going to stop right there. You cannot do that, man, what you just did. So we're going to take a recess and everyone that's in line. Stay right where you are in line. The rest of us council is going to take aa1 minute recess. Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 3: I just want to speed up. Okay. So I said okay. So.
Speaker 5: Okay. Listen.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you all very much. We're going to pick back up.
Speaker 8: And.
Speaker 0: Go into a roll call here.
Speaker 1: Councilwoman Gonzalez, Vice Mayor Lowenthal and Councilwoman Price. Councilmember Superman.
Speaker 8: Here. Councilwoman Mongo. Councilman Andrews. Councilmember Muranga. Councilman Austin. Councilmember Richardson. Mayor Garcia.
Speaker 0: I'm here. Thank you, sir. I'm gonna let you start from the beginning. Then I wanna make sure you get your full time. So if we can just. Then I'm going to start it, clock over and just right from the top. And I want to thank everybody else for their patience, sir.
Speaker 3: You know, minimal when I think I'm totally in denial. Like Ian for the longest time was lucky. And always, I'll give you the Bahamas. The money that we make here.
Speaker 5: In Long Beach.
Speaker 7: We spend here.
Speaker 3: We live here in Long Beach. Can't afford to go anywhere else. The dynasty was penniless upstairs. Go see that massacre of 1513. And I will do my palaver. It is a boiling. You know, there's. I would ask.
Speaker 7: You gentlemen and ladies to please you guys have the last word and to please. Yes, you can raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Good evening, mayor and council members. My name is Gary Hetrick. I'm professor of sociology at Cal State University Long Beach. And I live in the fourth District and I'm here to register my support for the Long Beach Way policy 15 by two, 20 paid sick days, comprehensive city led enforcement and zero exemptions. And my support is based on extensive research that shows these policies work. Since the first policy of this kind was passed in 1988, dozens of studies have analyzed the effects on employers and on employees. Despite variance in practice, increasing the minimum wage tends to produce similar outcomes. Public Policy Institute of California study shows that increasing wages reduces poverty and generates more full time positions. There's also little evidence that these policies are disincentives for businesses, and research by the Brookings Institution shows that higher minimum wages generate lower employee turnover and higher worker morale. This, in turn, leads to productivity improvements, which helps explain why increased wages only produce modest increases in prices roughly around 5%. So what does that mean for Long Beach? The Los Angeles Economic Roundtable estimates that by 2020, the city raising the city minimum wage to $15 an hour will, among other things, lift thousands of workers out of poverty, create over a thousand new jobs, generate almost $70 million, and increase public revenue by increase sales and employment, reduce public assistance expenditures by $78 million. These potential results strike at the very heart of the challenges created by the structural changes we have faced in Long Beach over the last 20 years. We need to stop the race to the bottom. Therefore, we should act now to implement a $15 minimum wage with comprehensive enforcement and enforcement and no exemptions. Thank you for the opportunity to speak on this important issue.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Good evening, Mayor. Council members. So, everyone, my name is Josephs and I'm a senior at Cal State Long Beach living in the second district. I'm also a member of Unagi and Long Beach and a volunteer with a Filipino youth high school program on the West Side in the seventh District at Cabrillo High School. A lot of times they can't go because they're working and they're not working for spare change or spending money. They're helping their families with rent, food, medical bills. Some of them have started families of their own. The members of CAFTA that spoke a few minutes ago are exactly right. If job discrimination for gender or race and age are legal, why would wage discrimination against age be okay? I also have grandparents that have been working as caregivers and care homes for over ten years. They're almost in their seventies. So when you worry about senior citizens losing out by this and like having not having enough money for for health care, please do not forget about my grandparents, because they're senior citizens, too, who are forced to come here due to no jobs in the Philippines. Please do not further marginalize already marginalized communities by allowing exemptions on the new minimum wage. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker.
Speaker 3: Good evening, mayor garcia, vice mayor lowenthal and members of the council. My name is james stephenson and I'm the managing partner at BOVO at 144 Pine Avenue. We're a member of the Kone family of restaurants, which operates about 26 locations, mostly in Southern.
Speaker 5: California, along with three in Maui. As we continue to expand our company and look for opportunities throughout Southern.
Speaker 7: California, including here in Long Beach, we are certainly concerned with increasing costs of labor.
Speaker 3: Perhaps more importantly, though, we are concerned with the inequities of increasing minimum wage without taking into account total earnings of our team members. Generally, the only team members at our restaurants that we pay the current $10 an hour minimum wage. Our servers, bartenders and other employees who also receive tips. Servers at Bobo Kitchen and bartenders often make upwards of 15 to $18 an hour on top of the $10 an hour that we pay them. As for the cooks and dishwashers in our kitchen, we generally receive little money, if any money in tips due to certain legal restrictions . We pay them above the minimum wage in the range of 11 to $14 per hour. Therefore, when the California state minimum wage recently increased to 9 to $10, the only employees.
Speaker 5: At our restaurants are.
Speaker 7: Required to get a raise where servers, bartenders and other tipped employees who have been.
Speaker 3: Making as much as 25 to $28 per hour. When you include their tips, the cooks and dishwashers were already above the minimum wage and generally.
Speaker 7: Did not receive a raise. The obvious response to this may be we'll give the cooks and dishwashers a raise.
Speaker 3: However, as you may know, the restaurant business is one of very low.
Speaker 7: Margins and very, very high failure rate without raising prices to a point of scaring away our guests who are not able to increase the the hourly wage of our kitchen staff.
Speaker 3: For these reasons, I'm here in support of including the total.
Speaker 7: Earnings as a part of your proposal for an increase.
Speaker 3: In the Long Beach minimum wage. I truly believe this is a fair proposal and one that will allow us to compensate all of our team members in an equitable manner. Thank you for your time.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next week.
Speaker 5: Good evening.
Speaker 6: Mayor Robert Garcia and City Council members. My name is Kevin Garcia. I'm here on behalf of Project Alpha as a member. I'm sorry, as a supporting member of the organization. I was asked to speak on behalf of the wage to $15 an hour. Also, I know a lot of you guys are already bored, so I'm going to keep this light and area like a fart, so I'll get to move in. As a local worker of the city of Long Beach, I believe increasing the minimum wage to $15 an hour opposed to 15 I'm sorry, $13 an hour would be very beneficial not only to those individuals, but also to the city of Long Beach. I used to work for a franchise for which I worked for three years, minimum, which was a fast food restaurant. As a young Hispanic male at the age of 18, like I mentioned, I was there for three years. I strive for success and in the end I did achieve. Unfortunately, it was a fast food restaurant. I could barely make ends meet. It didn't pay much of the bills, but at times I did have some money left over. And when I did have the money left over, I came to our beautiful city of Long Beach, which I'm here 24 six, because the other day I'm in San Pedro and in here I definitely invested my money in our local restaurants or shopping outlets and theaters giving back to the community. Recently, I've been given the opportunity to lead and train a team of 75 individuals who took on the Obama challenge to get those citizens of Long Beach who do not have health insurance, to get them covered on a daily basis. We are reminded how blessed we are to work along with Molina Healthcare and to be getting paid $15 an hour. So my employees are well aware of that and they're looking forward to this new lobbying process, having them for exactly two weeks at them. This campaign, I can truly see that these interviews. The Jazz are extremely gracious of the amount of money that they're getting each day, you see. You can see in their eyes that they're hungry to work. They want to continue to work for that $15 an hour. In fact, they're so hungry that they even asked to work ten, 12, 15 hours. But we're on a budget that we try to keep it below 10 hours. Like like I was mentioning, $15 an hour, I believe will truly motivate the citizens of Long Beach to go out and look for employment and give back to the community . I've seen how this $15 an hour have changed the lives of 75 individuals, and I hope to see it change the lives of half a million people.
Speaker 5: Thank you for your time.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Greening a major Garcia and city council members. My name is Daniel Norris and I'm a truck driver here in Los Angeles and Long Beach Port. I'd, I, I'd been working for Pacific and Transportation for the last eight years. During the whole time I have been misclassified as independent contractor. I have work for days, Keith, sometimes working for 14 hours per day so that I can afford all the expenses that they force show me. Many times these charges are more than what I make during the trips, which means that I take home a negative check. In other words, that means they're out of the company for working for them. I have fought for. Years to change these, but I can do it alone. Fortunately, me and my coworkers Pacific and I had filed claims with the California Department of Labor. After about a year, they have judge that their company has illegally deduct these charges from my wages in the amount of over $180,000. Overall, the company owes $7 million to other drivers like myself that have filed claims. The company has retaliated against us, but not by not giving us work, forcing us more and more into debt, more and more into poverty. Today is an important day for the city of Long Beach and the thousands of workers that work day in and day out. All workers of Long Beach deserve a voice of $15 because that is the right thing to do. Do you have the opportunity to leave thousands of workers out of poverty and help to eliminate waste theft due to do the right thing? Raised the wage the wage to $15 with no exemptions, enforce the wage and provide workers with paid sick days. Only through these we can make sure that working families have the opportunity to truly fight for. Thank you so much.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Good evening, Mayor Garcia. Good evening, council members. My name is Tiny Little Nelson Niue and I am the founder of Project Alpha. Again, we are a Long Beach nonprofit providing reentry services for formerly incarcerated Pacific Islanders, Asians and the LGBTQ community. I'm here tonight to speak on behalf of our Pacific Islanders, as well as our nonprofit. We are in support of raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour. And for all of us, not for some of us, but for all of us. I have been a part of this coalition to be a voice for my communities, especially those formerly incarcerated, that have difficulty attaining employment. In August of 2015, Long Beach City Council approved research and explored raising their wage with the LAPD and its report with its recommendations. And tonight, I ask that you honor what we initially fought for, and that was to improve the quality of life for all Long Beach residents through the raising of the minimum wage. We, as a nonprofit, have committed to paying our staff a livable wage of $15 an hour. And while the L.A. EDC report stated otherwise, there are nonprofits in support of $15 living wage, and we have been one of them. Project The Lopez Board of Directors and Management agree we will ensure that all of our staff is paid a livable wage, even if it means not having a merit increase. I am confident that other leadership from other nonprofit profit sectors excuse me. I'm confident that other leadership from other nonprofit sectors will not allow our services to suffer because of the increase in a livable wage. I am confident that we all have an accountable plan, which means an effective review of disbursement. This month we have been fortunate enough to see and accept the Obama challenge with Covered California and to see 75 employees being paid a livable wage of $15 an hour. And to see the desire, the willingness to show up, to work and to see the transformation that is happening truly is remarkable. Although temporary, $15 an hour has created an impact not only in their lives but in our community. I ask that you take a look not only at $13 an hour. Take a look at the plan that has been presented before you. Let us do it. Long Beach his way. Each and every one of us. We have never been exclusive, but inclusive. No exemptions. $15 an hour. A comprehensive wage enforcement plan and paid sick days. Please raise the wage to 15.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 15: When does notice me? Number two, Snyder Torres saying miembro the rock eat restaurant.
Speaker 3: Hi. Good evening. My name is Senators and I'm a member Iraq and I also work in a restaurant.
Speaker 15: So my dress altera ee Consuelo Gonzalez Aluminum Gonzalo Minimo Nomi complete opera sobre TV entonces piva ula.
Speaker 3: I also am a single mother with a I make the minimum wage when the minimum wage I cannot have ends. Me and I have the need to ask for public assistance.
Speaker 15: With most. When when ill Pensacola kills cancer. Less than an hour on we stand to look at an incumbent that being sick as a boy. They are, said Padilla said sobre todos los personas. The news the negocios copyright Duncan Comércio Gallery. Laura Noyce, mutual lista, mutual castano, Nintendo and Princess Sono Cellulari are this organism poquito masa and nobody will stand prescient others look on. I salute them, but who knows?
Speaker 3: We have a very low wage and with the cooperation of restaurants and small businesses to give us this little break, because literally it's not a it's not a lot what we're asking for. And this will give us a break into living, having a substantial living.
Speaker 15: Yes.
Speaker 3: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please. Well, I don't just mean on breast cancer. You know, your stories represent and the heroes who need us and control their lives.
Speaker 3: Hi, my name is Roselle. And, you know, and I am here to represent the campaign of women united against the abuse.
Speaker 5: Of power, the uproar over unallocated incremental.
Speaker 7: Salary and many more. In Long Beach.
Speaker 5: Your minimal the cancer dollars or.
Speaker 0: Comp protection is the other forum.
Speaker 5: Without exception.
Speaker 3: I am here in favor to prevent increase in the minimum wage and Long Beach minimum wage to $15 with protections paid sick days and no exceptions elementary salary or.
Speaker 0: Minimal salaries for beneficiary AKC this year the million resident this the Long.
Speaker 5: Beach getaway in Las Vegas.
Speaker 0: You that.
Speaker 5: Accommodates a small kid interested in Long Beach saga those will maintain.
Speaker 3: Raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour will affect almost 17,000 residents that work and live in Long Beach. And this will help 6000 and 6500 workers in Long Beach that to come out of poverty by the year 2020.
Speaker 0: Los Ingresos on.
Speaker 5: Autos in Long Beach, Sacramento, running in the cuatro siento cinco me Jonas.
Speaker 0: He Cassie Siento trained on me Jonas one year after avocado toast get I'm being.
Speaker 3: Beaten in Long Beach. The annual income of these workers in Long Beach will increase around $405 million, and almost 130 million are going to go to workers that also live in Long Beach A330.
Speaker 5: Another language for this uses, I use common casino.
Speaker 3: I've been working at the Hilton Hotel in Long Beach for six years as a cook.
Speaker 5: You you know, that was meals.
Speaker 0: That the calories the hotel because I mean if Sharon approves.
Speaker 5: Any and all those meal those incremental.
Speaker 0: Cost a lot of the lobster avocado.
Speaker 3: To the terrace like in Long Beach, I am one of the thousands of workers, hotel workers that benefit from the approval of the proposition. And in 2012, that increased the salary of the work of the hotel workers here in Long Beach.
Speaker 5: Gracias, Alameda Diner, la familia.
Speaker 0: Como la mise en scene, a composer wannabe long before.
Speaker 5: Perino's la familia.
Speaker 3: Thanks for this measure. Worker families like mine have been able to have a dignity and have a better life with their families. See an.
Speaker 0: Embargo. See an embargo? Either muchos problemas Cubans or Fidel. There's l'approbation.
Speaker 5: Dinner for Carlos hotels and lobbies.
Speaker 0: And retailers over the.
Speaker 5: Bazaar lately.
Speaker 3: However, there's been a lot of problems since this proposition came up because hotel owners in Long Beach have been trying to avoid this law on a.
Speaker 5: Number of hotels, hotels and lobbies.
Speaker 3: Also within a number of hotels. Are these mean? Although even though the revenue of hotels and their earnings have been increasing, long beach, the number of worker the hotel workers have been reduced.
Speaker 5: As significa.
Speaker 0: Gan incremental Los Gatos.
Speaker 3: Trabuco hotels and Long Beach this mean that are the over the hotel workers in Long Beach have been open work.
Speaker 5: At Amazon Los Gatos, Trabuco Posadas Las Mujeres extravagant in la induce wrote a letter saying for internal.
Speaker 0: Conditions in seguros the trabajo also.
Speaker 5: Sexual can move boka protection.
Speaker 3: I said of the overwork and the heavy day of work we were in. The work in the hotel industry face very unsafe working conditions, sexual harassment and very few protections.
Speaker 5: Entonces si i commentators highlighted that the Los trabajadores the Long Beach betterthan being okay.
Speaker 0: But not the hero on como your he told those mes companeros get the trabajo cameras and maestro of this Gonzo's.
Speaker 5: He conditional.
Speaker 3: Said the trouble. So then there is a need to us for to return the minimum wage to workers in Long Beach because. But also we need to protect workers like me and all of my coworkers. They deserve meal breaks, respect and safe conditions on the job. Baltimore.
Speaker 0: I'm being the famous operative here. Al Pacino as dispose of.
Speaker 5: No, no. There's your love. L.A., the Mondo.
Speaker 3: And we also have to protect the person that gave us the chance to be in this world. Maria Callas mother is the owner of the Nosotros. And I say and I mean the mother of it's and every one of us. We were lost. We went through a horrendous bereavement.
Speaker 5: Maharis. Gracias.
Speaker 3: We were looking. That's a real it.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: I am the next speaker for the third time. Thank you. My name is Monrovia, Nova, and I am lead organizer with the Restaurant Opportunity Center. The importance of a living wage here in Long Beach will give dignity to the hands that feed you. Those hands have a lot of stories and a lot of faces. A lot of these people that feed you in those restaurants here in Long Beach live below the poverty line. A lot of these workers have to do two jobs in order to have and me and they live in very poor conditions outside of having a very low wage. These workers face wage theft that every now and then every day raises. There's no there won't be no improvement of the increase of the minimum wage if we don't not enforce and stop these employers from stealing from their workers. TIP Credit. Total compensation are tricky ways to keep stealing from the workers. And also it's also illegal. Also young workers are not only as live in stereotype as has been managed have have to work just for fun or having to work just to write comic books. They support families. They they go through college. Exceptions will only bring bring us discrimination and more wage theft. College students under 25, they have to pay these unpayable loans for years. And if you crave them out of this minimum wage proposal, and it's going to be almost impossible for them to have to have to pay these loans and to have to go through high school. These workers need to have a high standard of why their work life is not a low entry job. These these kids are going to learn skills and they have to learn that in any entry that they can have dignity and respect. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next week, Ripley.
Speaker 3: Hello, everyone. My name is for a few minutes and I'm here representing the Brooke, which is the restaurant operating center and.
Speaker 11: I would say.
Speaker 3: Santa monica already raised them.
Speaker 11: The way it's been is a tougher city than Long Beach and they're either planning to do 15 to 18.
Speaker 3: So it's a big difference. I don't think we're so different from the Dr.. Cooper was saying about L.A. County, how is going to change our lives? This $15 an hour is going to at least not going to change the whole thing, but it's going to really going to help. And I was I was hearing her making numbers and statistics.
Speaker 11: And I was going to say, I just finished high school.
Speaker 3: And you just have a brainstorm in my head. And I said, okay, so let's talk about numbers. Okay. So if you make, what, $10 an hour, 40 hours? But that's the thing, though, because I represent restaurants, I'm more know about people that works for the restaurant. So they don't wanna give you 40 hours anymore because they try to keep you below 3 hours because they don't want to give you any benefits. All right. So okay, so say you're going to make $300 a week and then you month you're going to total $100. So what are you going to do with 1200 dollars? The average of rent in Long Beach is, what, four? 1450 hundred? So for in my case, I had a my family, we have four members of the family. So I had to work two jobs.
Speaker 11: You know, I had to find a way.
Speaker 3: So what what what is it that I'm doing? I'm surviving. I'm not living. I hear a lot of stories about saying, when was the last time I went to vacation? I don't remember. And what is all of these people easy to say to come and say, oh, yeah, $12 is, you know, there's enough. $13 enough. What? When was the last time I went shopping for me? You. You know, it's not your business, but I don't remember either. You know, kids are growing. My I have two kids. One four year old, two year old. They don't ask for anything yet. There are growing. Lenders are asking, So what am I gonna do? Babysitting is high price. So what are the little things that you have to put attention to? The average people like us? You know, like so many over here, they already have the money in their pockets. You know, they're, you know, how do we worry about being fired, you know, or.
Speaker 11: Anything like.
Speaker 3: That? But what I'm trying to say that we have to support the $15 an hour because going to be a big help, you know, and let's keep supporting all the like you guys said, if you really care about the citizen loan, which is the time to now to do something for them. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Good evening. Members of the council and Mayor Garcia. My name is Johnny Rodriguez. I'm a resident of the First District. I'm also a youth organizer with an organization called Carmichaels in Action. We use we work with young Cambodian youth in Cambodia town, central, Long Beach, the Eastside. And so one of the reasons I'm really passionate about this work is that I believe that our youth have the capacity to be the leaders we need them to be. And I often believe that someday I'll return to this room and some of my students will be sitting in your seats. That's what I hope for. But under the current wave, things are going now. Families are able to support their families here in Long Beach. And over the last couple of years, excuse me, I've noticed a change of families having to leave. Not just Long Beach, California. So I've had students leave to Georgia, leave to Texas. And those are like our future city council persons, our future mayors, our future our future leaders of Long Beach. And so I really, really passionate about raising the wage to $15 an hour so that I'm not losing the leaders that I'm investing in . And I want to also say, I'm very proud I am of the youth leaders that we heard tonight that were able to speak and share how they feel about the minimum wage being the possibility of a minimum wage increase. So again, I just really want you to take that into consideration. Long Beach has a thriving Cambodian community. We have designation of Cambodia town in the long, rich history of Cambodian folks here in the city. And if we don't do something soon, that might change the the you know, we talk a lot about gentrification and that's actually what's happening. Our folks are are living in Long Beach and going to other states, leaving California. So please support a $15 minimum wage. Wage protections and no exemptions. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Good evening, everybody. Honorable Mayor Garcia City Council. My name is Alex Montana. Says I live in the First District and I work for the Filipino Migrants Center. I support raising the minimum wage, the Long Beach Way, which is $15 an hour. City led wage enforcement, more paid sick days and no exemptions. I support this not just for me, but for the hundreds of Westside Long Beach residents that my organization and our volunteers have talked to in the last six months. We've been asking community residents what they think about raising and enforcing the minimum wage, and an overwhelming majority are saying the same thing. We need $15 an hour now and we need city led wage enforcement now. In November, the Filipino migrant center surveyed 110 West Side Long Beach residents in the seventh District about this. Many of them were Filipino, Latino and other folks of color. 98% of the folks who answered the survey said they support raising the wage to $15 an hour. 62% said they have experienced wage theft personally. 41% say that they know somebody who has experienced wage theft. And 100% of them said they want a Long Beach law that really protects workers from wage theft. And the truth is, wage theft is rampant here in Long Beach. It's not just with these big corporations. We're seeing it a lot also even in small businesses. We have at the Filipino Migrant Center, we've received dozens of Filipino workers and a lot of them work in Long Beach. A lot of them have experienced wage theft at small resident care, small caregiving industries and also small restaurants. So it's not just big companies, but small companies as well. And when it comes to wage theft, we don't need just one one person in the city Long Beach office. We need a real office that is really enforcing wage enforcement here in Long Beach. We need strong wage enforcement here. And of course, we can't have these exemptions. That just leaves room that just makes it harder to enforce and also leaves loopholes. And so that's why we really need to stay strong on $15 an hour. We need to stay strong on city led wage enforcement. We need to stay strong on more paid sick days. And we need to stay strong.
Speaker 8: In saying that we will.
Speaker 3: Not exempt. We need $15 now. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker.
Speaker 5: Good evening, mayor. City council members. All of you know me. My name was Mike Murchison. And for the record, I'm born and raised in the third district and I happily say that I live in the third district. I'm here on behalf of 18 restaurants that I represent. A long time ago, we discussed this issue and I think we all agreed that it was important to increase the minimum wage. We didn't know what that would be, but we saw through all the discussions and all the conversations. We reached kind of a level that we would support $13 an hour by 2019 with the caveat of two things We want a youth wage in there, and we wanted the concept of total earnings. You heard that discussed tonight. It's not a tip. Credit has nothing to do with tip credit. It's total earnings is the amount of money that any employee, not just restaurants employees but any employee makes in a pay period. So what I'm asking for you tonight to consider as a friendly amendment to any motion that's made tonight.
Speaker 0: Is a youth.
Speaker 5: Wage up to 21. And for you to ask the city attorney to come back prior to the first reading and whenever that's in mid-February or late February, to have him come back and say, here is my legal opinion on total earnings. Give him time to come back with that, because I think you're going to find that the Long Beach Way includes restaurants that were built and raised here in Long Beach. I'm not talking national chains like KFC or El Pollo Loco or Subway or McDonald's. I'm talking on the backs of people who started their restaurants here in Long Beach. They raise their kids in Long Beach.
Speaker 3: They helped out the.
Speaker 5: Nonprofits in Long Beach by supporting them. I'm talking about restaurants like Georges and Trainee's in the eighth. I'm talking like La Luna and the Six. I'm talking like E.J. Malloy's in the fourth and other parts in other council districts. I'm talking boathouse. I'm talking talent. Sooner or later st on second. I'm talking about people that you all know and love and spend a lot of time with. When you have the ability to go out there and have dinner on the weekends, you frequent their restaurants. They're asking for you to support them with a concept of total earnings and a youth wage. It's not for those that work at KFC and make a minimum wage of $10 an hour and no other earnings. We all get that. We all understand that. But we're asking for you do is to consider the full service restaurants that start here in Long Beach and continue to thrive here. Thank you very much for your time.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Good evening. My name is Dan Fleming. I'm president of the Economic Roundtable. We prepared this report. Long Beach Rising, a city that works for everyone. To analyze the effects of a $15 an hour minimum wage. Our bottom line assessment is that. That the minimum wage will not harm employment in Long Beach and that it will meet urgent needs of workers who are employed here. Most employers would like to do right by their workers so that they can afford to pay for basic necessities, a higher minimum wage. Enables all employers to solve this problem together, rather than leaving it to individual employers to risks to take the risks of solving it alone. Long Beach's economy is resilient and the sectors that have high concentrations of low wage workers, including restaurants and retail. And the port of the Port of Long Beach is an important source of economic strength and depth for the city's economy. The wage increase will create a stimulus that will offset any effects as service industries adjust to putting more money into payroll and paying higher wages. In response to your question, Councilwoman Gonzalez, our report analyzes the flow of workers at different wage levels across the city line. And we estimate that 16,769 residents of Long Beach will benefit from a $15 an hour minimum wage. One third of the wage and total wage increase will go to residents of Long Beach. Businesses will grow and new businesses will start up in underinvested neighborhoods of the city that need these services. We estimate that the stimulus effect will create over 3000 jobs with a thousand of them in Long Beach. And probably most importantly, we estimate that. Nearly 15,000 people, including nearly 6000 children, will be lifted out of poverty by a $15 an hour minimum wage and that the poverty rate among workers will be cut close to in half. So in summary, we believe that the evidence enables the city to go into a wage increase with its eyes open and with tools for watching effects over the five years that an increase in falls to the benefit of folks who work here in Long Beach. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Next speaker.
Speaker 5: Good evening, Mayor. Councilman. My name is Craig Hoffman. And I own five restaurants in four districts in the city of Long Beach. My family's been in the restaurant business in Long Beach for over 60 years. As Mike Burchett said presented earlier, I think that having some sort of earnings exemption would be very important to full service restaurants if we don't do something like that. I'm very concerned about the over 500 people I employ in the city that could be affected. Unfortunately, Long Beach is not just an island. We have cities surrounding us like Signal Hill and Cerritos and Lakewood and Los Alamitos, which are going to have these same provisions of minimum wage, and we're going to have higher prices on our menus. And and I see I see customers going to the neighboring cities. And I think it's going to affect our sales and it's going to affect our employment. And I think we need to to start slowly. $13 with the earnings exemption is something reasonable and not something that's really going to hurt the restaurant so badly. I mean, I have one restaurant that's closed because of a fire and I'm working diligently to rebuild it. But there's some question in my mind whether I should reopen it. And it's going to depend a lot on what the council does. We have to have reasonable wages and we have to have an ability to have full service restaurants in Long Beach and not just focus the minimum wage on the fast food industry. So that's my comments. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much, sir. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Good evening. My name is Renata Yanna, and I'm a lead researcher at the UCLA Labor Center Study, where we surveyed over 550 young workers in the retail and restaurant industries in Los Angeles County, including young people from here in Long Beach. We know that many of these young workers. There's. Let me start over. Sorry. There's a myth that young people work for pocket change and have used that as an excuse to provide low wages. Yet our study finds that 48% of the young workers actually gave to their families. In fact, less than 1% spend their earnings solely on recreation or leisure activities. Thus, we know that young workers need it. In fact, almost three quarters said that they would like to work more hours. Almost half of those that work within the retail and restaurant industries are young people. These industries already pay low wages. However, they also provide young workers with much needed income that supports families and educational careers. Policymakers and elected officials muster away from initiatives that would create a distinct wage status for younger workers. Research in history shows that such wage divisions are economically foolish, political unsound, legally unquestionable and socially unjust. Therefore, our research suggests that the City of Long Beach should not pass an exemption for workers under 21. No worker, younger or older, should be exempt for a minimum wage increase. Thanks.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Good evening, Mr. Garcia. And Councilman, my name is Hillary Habib and I'm a Labor and employment attorney with the law firm of Sheppard and Bowen. And tonight I'm here on behalf of the Coalition of Full Service Restaurants located in Long Beach. And I'd like to discuss the total earnings exemption approach, which many people have discussed this evening. If the city is inclined to adopt a local minimum wage, it should also adopt the total earnings exemption. Under this approach, the new minimum wage would apply to all people who are not exempt. Now it's common for labor laws to have these sort of exemptions, including state overtime, meal period, rest period and paid sick leave laws. And it makes sense for exempt employees who already receive taxable earnings at or above a minimum level to for this to apply to in fact, the IRS and Franchise Tax Board treat these sums as taxable earnings from a job and insist that they be recognized as part of the gross income. Also, the common sense supports this approach. For example, if an employee earns 1250 an hour from his or her work, it does not matter where those taxable earnings are derived from. I'll be at peace rate, earnings, tip salary or other taxable amounts, the earnings of the employees to save or spend as the employee chooses. Now we've heard a lot about the potential limitations on this exemption, but as the city attorney said, there is no binding or persuasive authority on point saying that this exemption is impermissible for a city councilman impossible to enact. And now critics of the exemption mistakenly rely on inapplicable case law. Regarding tip credits. As Mike Richardson said, this is not a tip credit, this is an exemption. It's completely different. And and so that is completely debunked. Further, the city attorney mentioned the Legislative Council Bureau's opinion letter, and again, that is completely inapplicable because that only applies to tip credits. It did not address a proposal for a specific carve out or exemption for any employee of any employer, not just tipped employees employed by restaurants whose taxable earnings exceed a specified amount. And the letter, in fact, conceded that there is an uncertainty and an absence of directly controlling law on this issue. And finally, the attorney who proposed this total earnings exemption is a partner of my law firm, and he's written one of the most widely used wage and hour books in the country. His book has been used by officials in the labor commission in the U.S. Department of Labor, and he was appointed by the Industrial Welfare Committee as a member of several minimum wage boards. And so he's obviously qualified to give an opinion on this exemption. And so we urge you to insert a total innings exemption, earnings exemption as part of any minimum wage ordinance. It's the single most important issue, as you've heard tonight, for the restaurants of Long Beach. And we further asked the city attorney to to review the legality of this prior to a first reading. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Good evening.
Speaker 1: My name is Saba Waheed, and I am the research director at the UCLA Labor Center. I have conducted extensive research or extensive research on young people in the county. Our research shows that young people are a core part of the economy, making up one quarter of the workforce. But the soaring cost of living affects young people just as much as they do other workers. Young people face higher education costs than any generation before them, and they're also earning a lot less. With almost one in three young workers as a head of household and 18% to our parents. We want to caution against framing a person's early job as some kind of hobby or rite of passage. Young people should not be seen as cheap and temporary labor. In fact, scholars have found that these early jobs have life have lasting effects on their lifetime earnings and social well-being. We cannot afford to fall into the clichéd trap that young workers should work for less to gain experience. Let's show the young workers of Long Beach that their work matters, that their work is real work, and that they will be fairly compensated. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, Pete.
Speaker 3: Good evening, Mr. Mayor and council members. My name is John Kabateck, and I am here tonight representing the California Restaurant Association and an industry comprised of more than 1000 restaurants and food service operators here in Long Beach. Kyra has proudly worked with the Coalition of Business Associations on this local minimum wage issue these past several months. We appreciate the hard work of the commission these past year and also your efforts on the council to determine a reasonable minimum wage policy. That will be a sterling example, we think, for cities across the Golden State, but also across the nation. As the commission's study itself shows, a higher minimum wage in Long Beach on its own would absolutely result in negative impacts on our small businesses and jobs. However, by including the right mitigating provisions, along with a higher minimum wage, you have a golden opportunity here to ensure that such an increase is targeted to those who will benefit from it the most, while allowing small businesses an opportunity to stay in business and keep creating jobs. To that end, Kerry is willing to consider a minimum wage increase in Long Beach to $12.50 an hour, phased in gradually over five years, provided it is coupled with the following provisions to support and protect our local businesses and jobs . An additional one year extension for businesses with 25 or fewer employees, which will allow the smallest of small businesses to adequately adjust and prepare a youth wage of $10 an hour for employees under 21 years old. Giving more small businesses the opportunity to hire more young people and give them the promise of a rewarding career right here in Long Beach, and allow these people to continue to live and work and enjoy being here in Long Beach. And finally, as you've heard before, the inclusion of total earnings, the ability for employers to consider exempting from the increase those employees earning more than the new minimum wage in wages, tips, commissions. This makes sure that employees in the heart of the house, which we've talked a little bit about, prep cooks and others, will actually get a fair increase and get one sooner on their job horizon. We do support and we appreciate the work the city attorney has been doing. We do support the city attorney continuing to review total earnings prior to your return for the first hearing. We're very proud of this proposal and we strongly encourage your support. It is sound. It's a fair, reasonable policy that will make sure employees and small business owners here in Long Beach can continue to grow and thrive and that this world class city can continue to be competitive for generations to come. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker.
Speaker 8: Hi. My name is.
Speaker 13: Taylor Monteiro, and I work at Carl's Junior.
Speaker 1: Where I make minimum wage.
Speaker 13: Thank you for letting me speak here today.
Speaker 1: Even though I'm only 18, I am not a typical teenager who makes money to buy personal needs. Few of the teenagers who do work in fast food do it just for just extra cash. Like most people I know, I took out Carls Junior because.
Speaker 13: I needed to support myself. My mom and I both work and we are still.
Speaker 1: Falling behind on our mortgage payments. This is my childhood home that my mom inherited from her grandmother, and this is her pride. We've been living over here for over 20 years.
Speaker 13: My mom has asked me to contribute more than 300.
Speaker 1: A month for to help her for the payments. It may not seem like that much, but this is over half my pay. We have to run out.
Speaker 8: To two rooms for extra income. I'm going to school next semester.
Speaker 1: Which I'm going to be starting in a couple of weeks, and I'm very excited, shall I say. But this will be not enough for me to just pay half rent and for me to be paying for my textbooks and for my personal hobbies and for my personal needs. You know, I just turned 18 and I'm barely finding out how much responsibility it is to really be here in the real world and having to actually take care of yourself. And I personally believe $10 is not enough. I heard a lot of people in suits.
Speaker 8: Talk about how 50 would be bad for business, but I did not hear one.
Speaker 1: Businessmen talk about how they're going to make sure their employees don't have to struggle like this.
Speaker 13: I did not hear one of them talk about what it is like to.
Speaker 1: Make nine or $10 an hour.
Speaker 13: $15 an hour is not that much money.
Speaker 8: If the minimum, it is the minimum you need to live decently in this country. I hope the council listens.
Speaker 1: To what the people in the city need, not what the corporations need, and raise the minimum wage to.
Speaker 13: $15 an hour. I am Taylor.
Speaker 1: Montero and thank you for letting me speak.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please. I was like, Wait, no.
Speaker 3: Good evening. Good morning. Good evening, everyone. Mayor and City Council. My name is James Watson. I'm a third district resident, but I'm also a nonprofit employee. So usually we're here advocating for a policy for the community members. But it's nice to be here for a change to represent and speak on behalf of the nonprofit community. So there you go. So on behalf of our nonprofit organization that I work for, Building of the Community's Long Beach, located here in District one, we are speaking tonight and strong support for raising the wage to 15 an hour soon as possible. And as we take a stand and pass a policy, the Long Beach Way where we asked for 15 and our strong enforcement, no exemptions and we're not leaving our hardworking employees of both small businesses and nonprofits or young workers. Let's create an equitable policy that fits lifts all of Long Beach up building healthy communities. Long Beach, as you may have heard, conducted a survey of nonprofit leaders and community members asking the specific question Do you support an increase of the minimum wage? And a supermajority? Of those, 80 respondents were in favor of raising the minimum wage without exceptions, with no exceptions. And that included 75% of respondents who are on building of the community's Long Beach organizational partners. Several nonprofit leaders have also participated in the mayor's roundtable discussions and spoken out about the importance of their work that their employees perform, as well as the impact the increase will have on those that we serve in the nonprofit community, often in our low income and underserved communities. In Long Beach, these findings of the survey and the supportive comments are also in line with a survey that was conducted by the California Association of Nonprofits, where the results show that 60% of nonprofits statewide in California would be unaffected by an increase, and 77% of the nonprofits are supportive of increasing the minimum wage. So please, this is my plea to all of you as tonight as we look at creating equitable policy that benefits all of Long Beach, please do not use us in the nonprofit community as a barrier to a fair and just minimum wage for our friends and neighbors who work tirelessly for nonprofit organizations. We urge you to pass a policy for 15 an hour with no exemptions, paid sick days and strong enforcement. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And Speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Good evening, Mayor. City Council, Lady Gonzales, all the others. I come to speak to you on this issue because I do support the $15 with no exemptions. And I think there should be health care time for so people can get off and stay well and come back and not infect other people. And I was really struck tonight by the fact that you had these are awards around Martin Luther King, because when I was 21 years old, I did personal security for him when he came to our campus and he was under death threats. And that does that this issue because eight years later, he was killed in Memphis when he was there fighting for workers to try and get decent wages and have dignity in their lives and have a way to live. And that's what your job is now, is to do that to the people of Long Beach. And $15 an hour is not an unfair high amount of money. It's not even as much as Social Security payments are from four workers who worked most of their life. So we're not talking about people getting rich, you know, offer largess provided by their employers. No, we're talking about they create that wealth that the employer has through their work. The employer doesn't do it. The employees create the wealth and they deserve to have enough to live with dignity. And that's why I'm here to speak for this as an as a person from the first District. So thank you very much. Just do the right thing tonight. Move forward and ahead. Look, it is as Martin Luther King would do. Let's have some justice here and let's have some dignity for the working people of Long Beach. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: All right. Well, I didn't know how difficult it was to be in your positions that I was as being a commissioner of economic development. But I'm not here as that. I'm here as a entrepreneur, as a business person, and as a resident of Long Beach. And I try to figure out what I was going to say. So I was at the end of line because of trying to figure out what can I say if you haven't heard already a thousand times? I think I can actually can come up with something. So a little bit about myself. I'm an entrepreneur. I've been an entrepreneur.
Speaker 3: Since.
Speaker 5: 1993 when I quit my perfectly good job at Johnson and Johnson. And I remember being so poor after two and a half years that I had a three day notice and quit on my door. And then, of course, I asked my father for money, which is the lowest common denominator. I know what you say in the first place. And he told me, Son, get a real job. So that's what entrepreneurship really is. To many people, it's a risk. To entrepreneurs is something that you strive to do, is something you think about maybe all your life and oftentimes you find out the challenges of being an entrepreneur are so you're so naive going into the process. 85% of businesses and entrepreneurs fail in the first year, and these are probably statistics you already heard, but they don't believe that they're going to fail. They believe that they can succeed. They sign their first lease, oftentimes putting them in $150,000 in debt. They've maxed out every single credit card that they possibly could have. And usually the average entrepreneur, a business owner, is making about $67,000 a year. That's what they make. Plus they don't get vacations. I had frankly, I haven't had a vacation in four years. And I've been in business for almost 20 years. I myself haven't had a vacation. I don't have, you know, worker's comp. I don't qualify for that. I don't have disability. I don't get paid time off. And I work probably 80 hours a week, which my wife oftentimes complains about because she she I actually work for her. So I'm here really to talk about someone who's not here. And those individuals are unemployed. I my company has probably hired over the last eight years over 100 individuals who are unemployed, using programs and money available from the Workforce Investment Board, now known as we owe it. It's subsidized employment. These are individuals who are unemployed, who had absolutely no skills. Homeless, vets, welfare to work. Individuals that have been employed. Some unemployed for sometimes four years. And what I'm here to ask you to do is consider not an exemption, but a business incentive for businesses that are willing to hire the demographics that we owe covers. And it's a pretty wide reach. So if that's something that the council would be interested in doing, I think that would be an incentive for businesses to bring the most challenged, hire individuals into our workforce. And I hope that's something that you will look at and consider reasonably. Thank you very much for your time.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next week, Ripley.
Speaker 3: Hey. Good evening, Mr. Mayor. Council members. My name's due to walk Joe into. I'm a.
Speaker 7: Resident of.
Speaker 3: Long Beach. I come tonight on behalf of the L.A. County Democratic Party to share the message that this past November, we.
Speaker 11: Passed a resolution endorsing.
Speaker 3: Raising the minimum wage indexed to the cost of living, including earned paid sick days. Comprehensive wage enforcement with no exemptions. Long Beach is a majority Democratic city. The party stands with you and making the move toward 15. Briefly, each of you should have already received a copy of the resolution in your offices, but to read it into the record. Whereas a large percentage of Long Beach workers are in poverty level wages, living in overcrowded housing, pay over half of their income for rent and qualify for food stamps. These conditions exist because employers do not comply with labor and tax laws and pay workers under the table. Workers in these kinds of informal economy positions are highly.
Speaker 7: Vulnerable to wage.
Speaker 3: Theft and lack any earned paid sick leave. And. Whereas, research shows that a single wage earner in Long Beach needs more than $15 per hour to meet basic needs. This wage would improve the.
Speaker 7: Lives of workers and their families.
Speaker 3: And the increasing spending would stimulate the city's economy and provide employer employers with more stable and productive workforce. And. WHEREAS, in the 2014 platform, the California Democratic Party supports increasing the minimum wage indexed to inflation, and including a living wage in areas with high cost of living. And it advocates for earned paid sick days for all workers therefore be resolved. Los Angeles County Democratic Party supports raising the minimum wage in Long Beach to at least $15 an hour, indexed to the cost of living, including guaranteed, earned, paid sick days and comprehensive enforcement mechanism to end wage theft while protecting workers from retaliation.
Speaker 7: I know personally I have worked more of my life and a minimum wage job than I have.
Speaker 3: In my profession. And many of those.
Speaker 7: Years I spent in retail and working in the.
Speaker 11: Hospitality industry here in.
Speaker 3: Downtown Long Beach. I'm a former.
Speaker 7: Worker at BBC Five Steak House, the fish house. And I can tell you I did not ever have $100,000 a year or a $50.
Speaker 11: An hour night.
Speaker 7: With tips. And many times, the only time my pay went up was because minimum wage went up. I think at that time it was 525 an hour. And so.
Speaker 3: When we talk about.
Speaker 11: Policies that are impact the majority of Long Beach residents.
Speaker 7: A policy that's going to lift people out of poverty.
Speaker 3: A policy that's going to help our 70% of our children in public schools live in poverty. This is that type of policy. This is the time to take action. I know that members of the Democratic.
Speaker 7: Party of the residents lobby.
Speaker 3: Stand with you and we'll stand.
Speaker 7: Beside you as you take this vote to move forward towards $15 an hour. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Hello. My name is Alfredo Carlos. I'm a faculty member at Cal State Long Beach and also the founder of the founder and executive director of the Foundation for Economic Democracy, a new nonprofit that's going to be based in Long Beach, that is going to be working on building worker owned businesses to show that we can do the Long Beach way. And specifically, what I want to kind of talk about a little bit today is I hope Suzy Price is doing okay. She's my council member. Earlier, she said that data is always good. The COBR representative from the COBR representative also said that we should do a policy that's data driven. And I think it's important as a researcher to understand the difference between good data and bad data. And that report that influenced the recommendation by the Economic Development Commission is actually built on really bad data in the sense that there was a response rate. There's 10,000 businesses in Long Beach, a response rate of 3.5%, and also with self-selection data in the sense that it was basically people self-selecting, wanting to like respond to that. That's essentially cherry picking data. So I urge you, if you have questions actually look at the Economic Roundtable report, which is actually based on census data. And as we know, the census data is very thorough and it answers a lot of the questions that you all might have in a actually systematized methodological research way. I also want to note a couple of other things specifically. I think one of the things that happens when we have these conversations that we think really short term what are going to be the business costs up front, but we don't think about the long term economic effects. And specifically what I'm talking about is the stimulus that the economic roundtable person, Dan, he was referring to in the sense that the way the economy functions is that the the jobs while businesses provide the jobs, they're not the ones that create the jobs or create the jobs as demand. And if people have money in their pockets, if people are getting paid a living wage, if people are getting paid $15, that means that they're going to be spending their money in Long Beach. That means that they're going to be able to go out to the movie theater more often. That means that they're going to be able to go to restaurants more often, and that is what creates jobs. And so I urge the council to adopt the $15 minimum wage with no exemptions. I think it's. Really problematic that in an age when we're talking about pay equity for women, that we're talking about equal pay for equal work for women, that we're also at the same time talking about not equal pay for equal work for young people. I think that's really problematic. And I think, Councilmember Lowenthal, for bringing this issue up around this time. And for the gentleman who was talking about Dr. King, if we want to honor Dr. King's legacy, he was in Memphis organizing workers at his as he said, he was fighting for economic justice. And if we really care about that issue, I think we will adopt a policy that actually is working out for workers and not a back door policy that basically basically makes exemptions that benefit businesses only. And so that's why I support the Long Beach Way, because I support economic democracy the way that the Dr. King would have . Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next next speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Hi there. My name is Lisa Camillo. I'm a 46 year resident of Long Beach and I've had a business for 20 years. Thank you, Councilwoman Mongo, for bringing up the total earnings possibility. I think the gentleman representing Bobo said it best that it forces us to raise our front of house employees that are already doing quite well and it makes it very difficult to raise up the kitchen staff instead of seeing what might happen or not happen. For sure I'm raising prices. I already did it on Sunday for sure. I am cutting ships for sure. I'm cutting hours for sure. I have to cut out a lot of my young people and it pains me when I hear people say that we're discriminating against them. It's the young people. Part of my business is my favorite part is mentoring them and watching them grow up. I also have to say I resent this, the Long Beach way I've been here 46 years. My first job was at what is goodies? I sold cocoa butter and hamburgers for dollars 65 an hour and I worked for Mr. Hoffman. And to me, the Long Beach Way, as you start off young and build skills and then hopefully the Long Beach promised you go to school and then you start a business and raise your children in Long Beach just like I did. So I hope you'll consider the total earnings package to help out the small business owners, because I know we really care about our people have 24 employees. Only one does not live in Long Beach. And I care greatly about their well-being. They're really important to me. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Oh, good evening. My name is Grace Lorenson and I'm a member of the seventh District and also a member of the Unitarian Universalist Church. My minister had to leave early because of congregational issue, and I have well read a little bit of her statement. In June this year, my congregation reached the $15 an hour minimum wage for all of our employees. We used incremental steps to get there, and we did it because we believe it as a comment on who we are as a church community. And we will. I believe that raising the minimum wage in Long Beach is a comment on who we are as the community of Long Beach, which is a loving and caring community. Just like any small business, the church is constantly negotiating the bottom line. We too have financial concerns, budget shortfalls and worries. And yet we know that the healthiest organization is one that invests in its people. And so it is true for our city. And so I ask you that you not waver from raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour.
Speaker 1: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 7: Good evening, Mr. Mayor. Members of the City Council. My name is Craig Cogen with the downtown Long Beach Associates.
Speaker 5: And I first first of all, want to.
Speaker 7: Thank the mayor and the city council for this inclusive process that led to an open dialog.
Speaker 3: I also want to extend our appreciation to the Economic Development Commission.
Speaker 5: For the extraordinary work that.
Speaker 7: They have conducted and presented for your consideration. Debate does support the COBR proposal as presented, and I want to thank those members of COBR for its diligence to prioritize this matter.
Speaker 3: And and conduct the outreach to interface with many of the small businesses throughout all parts of this city.
Speaker 5: As reluctant as some of those businesses were that.
Speaker 7: Their voices were not going to be heard or apprehensive, that there would be retribution if they spoke publicly opposing any increase, saying no was an easy avenue to take. As as they've taken this avenue in the past, they decided this time to be part of an open process and have a.
Speaker 3: Dialog that was very.
Speaker 7: Consensus building.
Speaker 3: And it drove.
Speaker 7: The results in the COBRA report. The business community worked together in an unprecedented fashion to build that consensus that COBRA has presented for consideration. I want to thank all those businesses who participated, took time from their establishments and gave the process a chance and therefore.
Speaker 5: Support the COBRA proposal and look forward to.
Speaker 7: Remain a true civic partner in this community. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next question. Next person.
Speaker 7: Hi, I'm Mike Rhodes. I own Dominica's Restaurant and Belmont Shore, where the oldest restaurant in Long Beach. And I think I'm kind of a. Quintessential small business in Long Beach. It's independently owned.
Speaker 5: Yet for some reason I'm not.
Speaker 7: Defined as a small business because I have more than 25 employees. I'm not sure how that works, but I've been to many of these meetings, been at the two mayors roundtables. A lot of people came up and gave some heartfelt speeches, which is great, but I haven't heard anybody that was a tipped employee come up to the microphone and raise the $15 minimum wage issue. And the reason for that is full service restaurants are a different animal than other restaurant and than other businesses. All of my employees make much more than minimum wage. Now, a lot of them I pay minimum wage, but they're making much more in tips than they are in their actual wages. And so I think it's really important. Common sense would dictate that we really have to consider that. I know as an employer I pay taxes on those earnings and the employee pays taxes on them. So they really are earnings. And I think the total earnings model that's been talked about tonight is really a key component to make this a common sense. Vote tonight. We all talk about the Long Beach way. I think this would really be true Long Beach leadership to take that total earnings concept into effect as restaurants like myself and businesses like myself that really are institutions in town. We want to survive. I want to stay too long. The oldest restaurant in Long Beach. But, you know, minimum wage has gone up $2 in the last 18 months and every dollar represents $1,000 a week and added overhead to my restaurant. I can't raise prices that fast. I wish I could. I would have done it a long time ago. But you you can't I mean, I a lot of my employees are older senior citizens.
Speaker 3: We've been in business for 62 years.
Speaker 7: I made the joke in one of the meetings that we have two different types of customers to come in and Domenico so we have old people and their parents and that's true. They have fixed incomes they want. I did a.
Speaker 3: Survey in the restaurant. I asked I said.
Speaker 7: If we have to raise prices.
Speaker 5: 20%, which is where I think I'll need to be, will you still come in?
Speaker 7: And all of them said, absolutely, we'll still come in. And then they follow with not as often. So there has to be other ways to raise revenues and they total earnings concept works. I think if you don't, you're going to have restaurants like mine that will end up doing service charges instead of tips, which is happening all over the country now because we have to survive. And I think that's something that really needs to be discussed. And I hope you will do that. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Guys. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, councilman. My name is Anthony Weiner, CEO. I'm an actual worker at Cal Cartage. I've been there for about two years now. As you can tell, it's a personal issue. I know you guys have a big decision in front of you guys. Not only that, I support the 15 five for 15, but as well, no exemptions, pilot strong policy against, you know, wage theft but as well as not only that. We can we can move for a better, you know, better life for everybody. You know, it's a struggle with this. And it's like always an obstacle. Everybody's like, he just said, we can fight, we can struggle, but we're going to we're going to get through it. We can go and get through it. Not only that, the exemptions is the strong thing in my company and my and my employer's situation because a lot of them are straight out of high school supporting their families. They have kids already. I understand there's a couple there's people that are coming out of college, you know, going to school and working full time. And it's a struggle for everybody, not only for just me, but everybody. And like you guys said, you guys want to live in poverty. I think this is one way to live. Poverty is living the minimum wage to 15. Not only 13 at 12, but 15. It's not right now. It's going to go gradually. But like like he said or like I say, we'll we'll get through it. You know, it's it's not to me, it's not that complicated. I understand it. And like I said, it's obstacle, obstacle where we just got to work around it and try to better our lives. Like I said, not only that, I'm I'm kind of upset and frustrated of seeing how how everybody is struggling right now, especially in this time. I know a lot of people are saying and you hear from everybody story it's it's time for a change. It's time to make something better. Like you say, if you want a better Long Beach, I think this is the right way to do it. This is the only way to do it, is lifting their wages and helping them to increase and grow. So I mean, I hopefully you guys make the right decision and open your hearts to everybody. I understand it's a it's a struggle. It's a it's a personal and it's a it's a big decision that you guys have in front of you guys. But I hope you guys make the right decision. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I'm also I see there's four people left on the speakers list. If there's if there's anyone else. And I'd be a good time to ask them. And I probably cut it off pretty soon here. So. Mr.. Good to you.
Speaker 5: Very good to clear as the address. Before I give you my view of what needs to be done, let me tell you, let me run down my work history, my life's experiences, and those that I've run into that helped shape the opinion that I will in about 2 minutes, in part. I started selling Wallace Brown gift cards, Christmas cards and greeting cards door to door when I was in middle school. Then went and migrated into selling and cutting lawns. Then I got a paper out working for the paper that was part of the chain that was originally the owner of the Press Telegram. Then I started caddying and I did that on, on weekends and in summers, and that's what I got introduced into politics. I used to caddie for Ray Place, who was chair of the Republican National Committee for 20 years. In during summer college times, I worked in resort hotels up in New England. That's where I met William Casey and was kind of the areas for him for a couple of years. During or during the summer. While in college. I work I think I references a couple of weeks ago for School for Food Corporation, one of their restaurants. I'd get up at 5:00 in the morning, take the elevator down out of the dorm, often writing at the same time that he that's for four years there and ten years in Boston to find the six man defense . When I got out of college, Stover's made me a job or a job offer, which I took because Roy Ash and Tex Thornton and purchased them and I knew I could migrate into other areas. And one of the things that I've learned, first of all, I have a very high respect for anybody that works in a restaurant , and that's not because I work there. All right. Is a given job pays only X amount of dollars, period. If you're not making enough money in the vocation you're in. Go out and get retrained. Don't wait for somebody else to come around and get a movement going because that movement will not sustain you. Just like in this case, I don't think people have mentioned the fact that within the next year, these people up here are going to be hitting the owners and everybody here with ballot measures for tax increases, period, to build a new to try to build and a new city hall period. So what you've got to do is go out and figure what you want to do and improve your skill levels. Sufficient enough to make the type of purchases you want to do. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Okay. Okay. So hello. My name is Rochat and I am a resident of the seventh district. Although I'm right across the street from the first district. Is that really interesting cusp? So what brings us here today is a very important and momentous day. I think so myself and I wasn't going to say anything. I think you've heard plenty, but I think that it begs a few minutes to hear a couple of insights that I got as an organizer, as an immigrant, as a resident of this city, and then also just as a human being. So this a missed opportunity on January 19th, right? A day after we celebrate the life, the legacy, the work of Dr. Martin Luther King. We are gathered here today for actually exactly the same thing that he died for in Memphis with sanitation workers asking to raise the minimum wage. And so what you saw earlier here today was, I would say about 100 workers being able to tell their stories to come to you and let you know why it is precisely that they need to raise this wage. So as an organizer, I was extremely, extremely happy, proud and quite humbly honored to hear every single one of their stories of struggle, of toil. For them to be here today, they're not here right now because they're probably going home to sleep. As a resident. I'm also extremely happy because hundreds of workers have continued this fight and have continued to come out day in and day out on all the different hearings that we have had to let, you know their very impressive perspective of what it means to be a day to day worker and why it is important for them to get a raise. Now as an immigrant. As an immigrant to this great nation, I would say. Into the city. I have also seen how cities have been able to contribute and help workers and help students and help people really become better. But I don't believe in the bootstrap mentality. Because I have heard a couple of different immigrant stories. I want to tell you a little bit about how that doesn't work for a lot of the folks who have actually been here. Many of the folks who have been here don't have the same opportunities or access to the same opportunities that some of the folks here have had in the past. So that immigrant that one dynamic immigrant experience doesn't happen because it didn't happen to me. That didn't happen to me. And so as an immigrant to this country and to this city, we see that every individual has a different perspective. So do the workers. So today you heard countless stories about why it's imperative to raise the wage to 15, because that is what they deserve. And they deserve wage enforcement because they live through wage theft every single day. So they need that to survive and they need those sick pay days also to survive. So thank you and make the right choice. You know what to do.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next week.
Speaker 3: Good evening. My name is Vince BASTIANICH. My family's been operating businesses on the west side for nearly 70 years. With all due respect, Councilwoman Lowenthal, I think your cause is noble, but I think it's misguided and misinformed. The minimum. The minimum wage is never eliminated. Poverty. It won't close the wage gap and never has. It would be really a terrible thing for the city. You know, the one of the first minimum wage laws was the 1939 Bacon Davis Act. And the purpose of that law was to. Protect. The jobs of white union workers in New York from black Southern workers.
Speaker 0: Continue, sir.
Speaker 3: These these wage increases will will do nothing for these workers, because what will happen is prices will go up. Across the board and these same workers who are making minimum now, they just will not get ahead. They'll be in the same position they are now. Five years from now. Ten years from now. I've been in this business a long time and I've seen it. You know, my minimum wage workers and I do have some they can never get ahead unless they increase their skills. Unless they. You know, try to find another job that's better suited to them. They can't get ahead. Parts of Long Beach now, I've been told, have unemployment rate as high as 19%. And I believe it's only going to get worse if we try raising the minimum wage. I think the better route is to help businesses create more jobs with more jobs, more businesses competing for labor. Wages will go up organically and those those workers will get ahead that way. I think that's a better option. Thank you for listening.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next, me complete.
Speaker 1: Hi. My name's Murray de Soto. I've stood in front of you many times before representing the union and are what we do. I'm a hotel worker, and I actually wasn't going to speak today, but I heard one of the gentleman here that is a business owner of Long Beach said that he hasn't heard a tipped worker speak . So I will speak on behalf of all of the tipped workers in Long Beach and all of my friends and family members that are tipped employees in Long Beach. I happen to work for a union hotel and I happened to make $15 an hour and I happened to be tipped. My hotel doesn't seem to be going down any time soon. It has taken me out of poverty. The gentleman before me said $15 an hour will not take anybody out of poverty. Yes, it will. Well, I'm 23 years old and I am a homeowner in the ninth District and I am proud. 23. Being 23, if I was working minimum wage, that means I wouldn't be making what my husband is making because he's 28. How is that fair? How is it fair that because I am not 25, I'm not making that. What if I was a mother? What if I was a single mother? I am standing behalf of all those tipped workers, including my tip into my pay is wage theft. That is wage theft. The tip that I get from doing a service is that it's from the guest that was happy with my service. Sometimes you could give the best service possible and people won't tip you. Do you get stiffed all the time and we still have to pay taxes on that? I've seen my coworkers have negative checks because people don't tip them or because of the taxes that they get on top of their pay. It's not fair. And again, I stand for all of the tipped workers here in Long Beach, $15 an hour, no exemptions, $15 an hour, no exemptions for the youth, because that is age discrimination. If we don't discriminate for the old, we don't discriminate for the youth. Why are we discriminating? It's just like racial discrimination. It is another form of discrimination. It is not okay. And I am a tipped employee and I stand for all of the tipped employees again. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please. Thank you, sir. Okay. Hey, hold on a second, guys. But we know we serve 1/2 word. Well, I'm asking everyone to have it get the same amount of respect when they speak. So please. Thank you, sir.
Speaker 6: Somebody liked my short. I'm a small business owner in Long Beach. My name is George Subang. I have a restaurant, have 18 employees.
Speaker 3: And I'm wondering how many of you.
Speaker 6: People think that a 60% wage increase will enable any business in Long Beach or anywhere in the world to survive? This is what you're talking about, a few dollars an hour. This is a 60% wage increase over what it was when it was $9 an hour.
Speaker 3: If the minimum wage goes up a dollar in my restaurant, it costs me $500 a week in payroll. The minimum wage has gone up $2. So it's cost me now $1,000 a week in payroll. If it.
Speaker 5: Goes to $15.
Speaker 3: An hour, my current payroll is $250,000 a year.
Speaker 6: If it goes to $15 an hour, my payroll will be $400,000 a year.
Speaker 3: That's $150,000 increase. I don't make that kind of money in the restaurant. We're lucky to make 10%. Yet all of you people think it's really easy.
Speaker 6: To do a 60% wage increase. It's ludicrous. So what am I doing?
Speaker 5: Well, I've got a $500 wage increase last year.
Speaker 3: I raised my prices to get $500 more at a $500 wage increase this year. I raised my prices again. I will raise my prices every time the minimum wage goes up. And by the time it gets to $15, you people that still have jobs will be paying $16 for a hamburger. You need to realize this is pure inflation. Nobody is going to gain from this minimum wage increase.
Speaker 6: It's ludicrous to think that any small.
Speaker 3: Business can sustain.
Speaker 6: A 60% wage increase when we fight to make 10% gross margin. It's ludicrous.
Speaker 3: I don't I don't know what else to say. I'm I just can't believe that.
Speaker 6: Anybody in this room thinks that any business can sustain that kind of a wage increase. And if you guys vote for this $15 an hour wage increase.
Speaker 5: You will, in fact, be hurting the people that you think you're helping because of the people that are still have.
Speaker 3: Jobs will be paying $16 for a hamburger. They will not have gained a nickel. Let me give you one more fact.
Speaker 6: In 1950, the minimum wage was $0.75 an hour.
Speaker 3: In today's dollars, that was $7.01 in buying power. The federal minimum wage today is seven and a quarter an hour.
Speaker 8: That means in 65.
Speaker 6: Years, the buying power of the minimum wage has increased. Workers pay by $0.24. You guys need to.
Speaker 3: Realize that the minimum wage.
Speaker 5: Is pure inflation. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you very much. That that closes down our our speakers list. So a few things and we're going to take this back to the council for for deliberation. I want to obviously just start by thanking everyone that came in and spoke tonight. A an amendment from this over to Vice Mayor Lowenthal, who's the author of the original motion. But I wanted to. Without obviously repeating a lot of what I've been saying over the last few weeks, I want to just say a few. Thank you. I want to start off by obviously thanking all of the workers that have come out and advocated for their families and themselves, the business owners. And I want to also just say that there's been sometimes you hear things about business owners, and I know a lot of these guys out here, whether it's Lisa or Jimmy or Mike and you guys are good guys. I get that. Thank you for for having great businesses in the city and for your investments. And so I know that most of you guys aren't coming to this thing because you don't care about your employees, because I know you guys care about them very much. And I want to I want to thank the the the the Fed and the Raise the Wage Coalition, who have been very active in leading this effort on on the worker side as well as the Council of Business Association groups. And the deal Bay, the Basement Sales Improvement Association, the Anaheim Business Group, all the different groups and business groups that were a part of that, including the chamber. Thank you, guys, for for your advocacy. I want to thank mostly one of the staff because I know that for a lot of us, a lot of us have been to these hearings. I've been to many some people up here, including Councilman Mango and Councilmember Turanga or members of the Council Committee. So they've been to a few and additional to everybody else up here. But the staff has been, I think, a complete kind of all star team since day one on the city side. And I know you guys don't see a lot of their work, but they've been working very hard to answer questions from the council, to answer questions from the community, from business owners, from from workers. And so I just want to thank the staff for all your hard work in this process. It's been it's been tough. I also want to particularly thank the Economic Development Commission and their their work. Again, I was counting I think they did. They hosted two hearings and two separate meetings just on this issue. And so if you guys thought tonight was a lot, which it was, I think they had four of those. And so that was that's a lot of work and a lot of input. And obviously they they forwarded on some recommendations tonight. And so I just want to thank them. And so I think all that's important to to be said as we move forward in this in this conversation, I'm going to on to this over to to Vice Mayor Lowenthal. I know I have a long speakers list, folks with different ideas, I'm sure, and input, which is great. So let's be respectful to the process, please, and let's hear what people what people have to say. Everyone's had a chance to weigh in at this point, with the exception of the nine members of the council. So let's let's give them their shot now. So let's turn this over to Vice Mayor Lowenthal.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Actually, if you can just give me a minute. I'm just pulling up something. Perhaps if someone has a question, I would appreciate that.
Speaker 0: Yeah. What I'm going to do is turn this over to Councilman Mongo, just to do an announcement from Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 1: Councilman Price had to leave suddenly when notified that fire personnel were with her children as her husband was rushed to the hospital. Mark is currently in stable condition in the E.R., and she does not know if she'll be able to return. But she's 5 minutes away. Should he get to a point where she can return so she apologizes. He is in our thoughts.
Speaker 0: Yeah, absolutely. I think our whole family's is.
Speaker 7: In our thoughts. So.
Speaker 0: Great advice for a long time.
Speaker 2: I'm glad you made that announcement. I know several of you were concerned. And if you can just keep her and her family in our thoughts. I would appreciate it. So I want to thank everyone for the robust conversation. And I lost count how many speakers came forward. But certainly everyone that came forward has a valid and and very important. Message to share with us. And it's they're more than just opinions. And this council has listened and does listen and is very grateful for all of your input and and you're very passionate about it. And we heard different levels of passion. I do want to take us back to the first speaker, not because she was the most impactful or powerful, but something about her testimony. It reminded me quite a bit of the early work I did in domestic violence and how economic independence can be so liberating. And we often think of liberty as sometimes just an option to have something more. Greater wealth, perhaps. But I worked in a field and industry where liberty meant really liberty from. From tyranny in your own household. Liberty from the oppressiveness that that being trapped because of economic reasons can provide. And so she she reminds me that liberty, dignity and opportunity, that a living wage or raising the minimum wage can provide is something that cannot be overlooked there. And it isn't just my personal, philosophical orientation to the issue. It is backed by numerous studies. And so I think when when we hear those of us who talk about the fundamental human reasons why we should do something, there's there's sometimes an assumption that it's not backed by data. And if there's ever a doubt that anything that I have worked on on this council in the last decade has not been backed by data. I implore you to reconsider that thought and do your research, because that has never been the case. I may come to the dias and speak in a very impassioned way and perhaps leave out some of the very academic research that our staff has done or that I have done. But let there never be a doubt that these thoughts and proposals are not well researched. We talk about how much work and workers do, and we know that worker productivity has gone up much more than wages. That, too, is backed by data. I think our last speaker, who is a highly reputable restaurant owner in our community and has done quite a bit in employing people in our city, addressed that minimum wage was just mere inflation and and. It's an opinion and it's a point of view, and I respect that. But I will share with you, backed by research and data, that worker productivity has gone up much faster than wages. Workers are already much more productive. And what we have is the Center for Economic Policy and Research in a 2012 issue brief that reported, if you use the 1968 minimum wage as a benchmark federal. Minimum wage as a benchmark. And I'm only citing this because it's sort of that primacy and recency theory. You remember the first thing you heard and you remember the last thing you heard in the last. The last speaker was quite compelling in his point of view that minimum wage was just an inflation. So I'll point to a study that states that if you look at the 1968 federal minimum wage as a benchmark, if minimum wage grew at the same rate as worker productivity, it would have reached $21.72 per hour by 2012. So I think it's a little bit more than a gift. It's a lot more than a gift. It's it is paying someone the worth of the work that they do. And also when everything else goes up in price, but the minimum wage does not. And we know that everything else has gone up in price when the minimum wage has not. Then we have to ask ourselves the question what type of city and what type of living environment do we expect our residents and our workers to live in? So when we take it back to what the L.A. EDC report showed us, we know that in Long Beach, 46.4% of our households have $50,000 or less in household income. And that's not to speak to the number of individuals that live in that household. But just if we look at that, we know that 21.1% of individuals live below the federal poverty level. And I'm not sure if we're all familiar with the federal what the federal poverty level is. Our presenter mentioned that it was low and she said it was very low and emphasized it a couple of times. It is very low. The 2015 poverty level for a household of one person is $11,770. Tuition to a good school costs more than that. And we talk about a society of opportunities for two people. It's $15,930. For three, it's $20,090. And you add about 4 to $5000 per person that you add to our household. It is extremely low. So when we say that someone is 150% above poverty level or 200% above poverty level, those are not huge amounts. So you add in Long Beach, those of us who are up to 150% poverty level and those of us who are up to 200% still very low. That brings us to 42.9% of our city. Almost 50% of our city live in conditions on incomes that I don't think a lot of us think about. It is quite an out of sight, out of mind situation. It's an incredible figure. But people make do and they figure it out at such low income levels. Most of the earnings we know we also saw this in the study. It goes to housing, it goes to food, it goes to transportation. There are very basic things. There are no luxuries involved at such low levels. And by luxuries, I'm they're not luxuries. I just mean just any form of recreation which we all know contributes to well-being. We heard people talk about not knowing when the last time they took a holiday. I don't think they mean a holiday overseas. I just think they mean a day off from work. That's a holiday. And that's that's important for us to keep in mind. It's not my frame of reference necessarily, but it is someone else's experience and what it means to be in that person's shoes. And we know that that's not one person. That's nearly half of our city. That's a lot of people. We heard from our teenagers in the audience and young adults about the opportunity to study. And to improve their opportunities to study. That is what this nation was built on. It was built on opportunities. And we have seen our society lose touch with with the with really what this country was founded on. And that really is an opportunity to improve ourselves. How does a child do that when she has to help support her household, when she is contributing to supporting a household? We've always talked about kids only job being a student. Be a student, do your studies. That is what a child's profession is. We've heard from many children tonight that and I, I know you're young adults, but you are children. We have heard from many children that they contribute to their household income. So how do you study and improve yourself when that is part of what your obligation is? And I know you do it willingly and gladly because that's what we do. We support our families. But even as parents, that must be crushing for your parents to know that they need your help to support the family. So raising wages, when combined with the opportunity to save, can comprise a family's total opportunity. That's what this conversations about. It's not about a dollar more an hour or $2 more an hour. It is. What does that mean to a family? A family's total opportunity. And there is some significance to that when we consider that to secure a standard of living that is dignified. And we heard a lot about living with dignity. But what do we mean by that when you're not able to secure a standard of living that's dignified? We don't have our entire population participating in what we all call as a quality of life. That is what all of us here are elected to do is to improve our residents quality of life. So doing. So raising wages combined with the opportunity to save. It contributes to both short and long term financial security. And I take us back to our first speaker. It is because of the inability to have financial security that she and others, many, many others find themselves in very dangerous situations. When we do so, when we raise wages combined with the opportunity to save, we can contribute to the overall well-being that affords people a feeling of agency. And by agency I mean the ability to act. We don't have the ability to act or act or on our own will or volition when we don't have that many choices , when we don't have that many economic choices. And so it does afford people that feeling of agency. And it's more than a feeling. It is a reality that is the society we live in. You talked about Mayor Foster talking about a tale of two cities that contributes to that divide. Those of us who can act and those of us who cannot act really is is that division is created by that income and wealth inequity. And the accumulation of wealth while we're talking about income right now. But over time, if we are able to have people on the path where they can participate in that, it grants us more options and it really eliminates the restrictions on how one can live one's life. So the notion that raising the minimum wage would not lift people out of poverty. It is not my opinion that it is not true. It is a fact that that is not true. In fact, one way to look at it, if you don't act, if we as a council don't act on some reasonable policy. One way to look at it is that low minimum wage laws are a form of government subsidies to low wage businesses. That's exactly what it is. Someone is subsidizing it. And so by not acting, that's what we're doing. What do working people do if they don't have enough to eat or if they need to go to hospital or if they need housing, that's better than where they are. What do they do? They turn to the government for public benefits. That is that cycle that we contribute to when we don't act and do the right thing. And so that subsidy is something that we need to actually reverse and turn into an empowerment. Subsidies don't feel like an empowerment. How does one gain an agency to act when you are on subsidy? But if you are earning your wage and you are earning a living wage and an improved minimum wage, that's that's an opportunity that subsidies can never provide psychologically. You can never provide physically in our households stability. And so those are some of the fundamental reasons that bring me here. After ten years of having worked on public policy in this city and after having incrementally with our council, laid down policies that lead us down this path. This is not something that is completely new for this city or the city council. It is really a next step in what we have been working toward all along to improve the quality of life for people in Long Beach.
Speaker 8: So when we.
Speaker 2: Take the testimony that we've heard today and we have heard many times about the Long Beach way. And I know there are different opinions about what the Long Beach way is, but something that I will always hold very near and dear to me through my experience here is when Long Beach does do something. We would say Mayor Garcia and I would say as goes Long Beach, so does the state of California. We have seen many, many ways that the state has followed Long Beach's path because it has been the right path not only for our city but for the entire state. And I don't doubt that this will be another example of that, because we it is well thought out. It has been well researched, and we have done our academic literature review as well as our practical data review and. But when you pair that up with a compelling calling to do the right thing, then it is the right thing. It isn't just a point of view. So what I'd like to do at this time, Mr. Mayor. Is I would like to make possibly two, three motions. And I would. Seek the city attorney's counsel on if they are if they merit splitting them up.
Speaker 0: Two or three motions.
Speaker 2: Two. Sorry, I meant to.
Speaker 0: What you think those are two or three relevant. You met.
Speaker 2: Two? I meant to.
Speaker 0: Pick.
Speaker 2: One or two. If the city attorney says it should be combined, then it would be one.
Speaker 0: Okay.
Speaker 10: May remember city council. It is possible to divide the question here. If the if the motion is. There's three different items here on the council, and I'm not sure where the council vice mayor is going. But if there's direction to prepare an ordinance and you have certain items that you would like to be voted on second or , you know, separately to add to that ordinance, you could divide the question the motion of divide. The question requires a second. It is not debatable if there is no objection to dividing the question. Then you could move forward with two separate motions or multiple motions to divide the question. If there is objection, then there would be a vote on dividing the question.
Speaker 0: Basically it sounds like you can you can divide the question due to motions. If one of the motions is in the spirit of one of the three that's been put forward within the agenda, and with that, if there is no objection to that, then you can move forward. If there is objection without actually voting divided the question. Is that right?
Speaker 10: That's correct. The the first motion would be the subject of motion. And then the additional if there's additional motions on dividing the question, then they would need to stand alone. So if you had a motion, for example, that would propose a minimum wage and then that would pass, the second motion of the question that's divided would be with the council like to add a particular something to that, an exemption or something else that would be substantive that they could you could move forward with that or not.
Speaker 2: Okay. I believe. I understand. So do your colleagues. I would like to make a motion. To approve the recommendations of the Economic Development Commission with a wage schedule of. January 1st, 2017. The wage to $10.50. On January 1st, 2018, an increase to $12. On January 1st, 2019, an increase to $13. That's exactly as the commission has recommended. Small businesses and nonprofits with 25 or fewer employees have an additional year to implement the schedule, and first increase for them would be in January one, 2018 to $10.50 an hour. This new policy would also include city departments on the same schedule. A strong wage enforcement that is managed by the city and includes private right of action for workers. Mandatory posting. Anti retaliation clause. Revocation power for the city and a fine program for the city. In early 2019, launch a second study with the L.A. Economic Development. Corporation to study the minimum wage impacts on employment, sales tax and overall impact on economy that will be presented to the Long Beach City Council at a special hearing. And colleagues, I'd like to note that this comes from all of the testimony we have heard about the concerns about what the impact would be. I think this would be a reasonable way for us to study what the impacts are. Learn what the impacts are and take further action at that time. That is the substantive portion of my motion. The secondary portion is a pathway to $15 per hour. If after the study, the said study, we see no major negative impacts to jobs and the local economy. We continue on a pathway to $15 an hour whereby one on January one, 2020, we would increase the wage to $15 an hour and to on January one, 2021, we would increase the wage to $15 an hour. Small businesses and nonprofits with 25 or fewer employees would get an additional year to implement this schedule. And in 2023, the minimum wage will be set. We'll set the consumer price index for the L.A. metropolitan area.
Speaker 0: That's the that's the motion on the floor. Councilman Richardson, you're the second on that. Okay. So let me let me go to a thank you, Vice. See, and I've got a Councilman Richardson and then I have a long speakers.
Speaker 11: Thank you, Mayor Garcia. And I've taken my time to listen to all the testimony tonight and my council colleagues. And I got to tell you, what I prepared tonight has has dramatically changed from all the different comments and hearing sort of the different issues that want to be discussed. I want to thank all the people who it's past 11:00 and my wife is still struggling to get the baby down, but she's watching at home. And just you know, it's amazing that this issue is so so many people are passionate about this issue. I want to acknowledge the commission, the Economic Development Commission, the Human Relations Commission, city staff, everyone who's done work on this. You all have gone through this. And this is the first time the city council gets to evaluate what that commission has been evaluating for a while. So that should be noted. This is not a new issue. It's been studied and studied. We have to two studies here in Long Beach. There have been studies over the ages about this. And there are great points and there are not so great points and there are positive and negative points out there. So so for me, it's it's it comes down to what is the intent and what are your what are your values as an organization in terms of what you hope to achieve as a minimum with a minimum wage? If I think about a minimum wage, I'm thinking, what does this. What what is the purpose? And in my opinion, it's to make sure people aren't taken advantage of. And if you work a day's wage, you should get a fair, fair day's work. So the question is, what is fair? If you believe in a minimum wage, you should believe that folks should be should get a fair wage. So let's tackle that question. Well, the study presents a number of different findings. I noticed that there was a a survey of businesses so, so quickly in this survey, how city manager how many of the what was the percentage of businesses that said they would close should we move forward with an action tonight?
Speaker 6: As I recall, it was 0% and.
Speaker 11: I wanted to make sure we highlight that because I've gotten a lot of veiled threats about, hey, this is going to make force all these businesses to close. But an unbiased survey of how many? 600. 600 businesses? 0% indicated that. And during the process of this survey that we survey, the working poor low wage workers or receive their input through a process of a survey as well about how they would spend any additional revenue should that be created.
Speaker 6: So the survey instrument actually was specific to businesses. We did hear a lot of that through the public comment, but the actual survey instrument was four 600 randomly sampled businesses.
Speaker 11: So it would be tough to. So I saw a a a slide and I heard a lot of comment about how people would spend this wage. How did we come to that, come to those assumptions if we didn't provide a survey to impacted low wage workers?
Speaker 6: I think we'd have to ask the ADC to talk about that, their methodology, if you'd like an answer to that question.
Speaker 11: Okay. Vice Mayor Lowenthal brought up the issue of what what the poverty line is in Long Beach. And I want in. And so I understand that everyone across the nation uses the same federal poverty poverty line. But is there some sort of a local poverty line that for, say, a family of four?
Speaker 6: So while the poverty line is the 24000 to 54 family for the federal level that the vice mayor mentioned, we do look at a number of other indicators, including something called area median income and area median income, which what the state is kind of considering moderate to and meets the definition of moderate for an affordable housing perspective is about $75,000 within the city of Long Beach.
Speaker 11: So for so, a more reasonable poverty line would be $75,000 annually for a family of four, and that's with two workers in the household. Have we calculated what the annual wage would be should someone receive a $13 an hour or $15 an hour minimum wage? And how that compares to the income poverty line for a family for.
Speaker 6: I think part of that was part of the lead study, if we can ask Christine to answer that question.
Speaker 11: Okay. So I want to applaud the Economic Development Commission for the framework. I want to applaud COBR and everyone else who provided the recommendation. Did any other commission provide a recommendation on the minimum wage?
Speaker 6: Yes. We for city commissions, we had the Human Relations Commission did provide support letter and you have that in your packet today. They made that action on Thursday and that was provided today to the city council.
Speaker 11: And what was the recommendation to support?
Speaker 6: I believe up to a $15, $15 an hour wage.
Speaker 11: Is there a reason why that wasn't set next to the IDC's recommendation or the COBR recommendation?
Speaker 6: Because that came that recommendation was done on Thursday, and the staff report's been out for a much longer than that.
Speaker 11: That makes sense. Was the COBR, the council request, the COBR recommendation, or did we request the Economic Development Commission recommendation?
Speaker 6: Now, the only study that was actually commissioned by the study was the L.A. EDC study and then the Economic Development Commission, which is the city commission. COBR and the Economic Roundtable were separate efforts that were not related to the city, but we definitely heard their input at the Economic Development Commission, and that helped to inform the Economic Development Commission's recommendations.
Speaker 11: Okay. I just want to make sure that what's presented to the public, because I did. You're right. I did receive the recommendation from the other commission and I wouldn't want to discount any commissioners service on this on this critical issue.
Speaker 0: Councilman, just to clarify, I think the probably the difference is that both commissioners did a recommendation, but one, there was only one commission that was asked to make a recommendation from the council. And so I think that's what staff did. I think the HRC weighed in on their own, but that's I think, probably the difference.
Speaker 11: And I get that, Mr. Mayor, and I appreciate that. I was just concerned because I saw the COBR recommendation in the official presentation when I know that we didn't commission that. And it's great that COBR stepped up to provide that. But I want to make sure all the perspectives were represented in this discussion. A few more a few more questions. So if the if we said so, if we said that it's $75,000 is the poverty line for a family of four. By my calculations, if you raise the wage at $13 an hour, that's roughly $27,000 a year or $15 an hour. That's roughly $31,000 a year. So that doesn't quite get you to, you know, out of poverty. But while it doesn't get you there, if you have two, two workers in one household, if they work hard and never miss a day of work, but if they work, never miss a day of work beyond what's mandated by the state for sick days, they would make $62,000 a year at $15 an hour. So that's still that's still below $75,000 a year. So if someone works at 15, $15 an hour. It's it doesn't get you out of poverty. This is by no means a living wage, but it does help put you on the path to get out of poverty. So that makes me think of. So when when I was when I was a kid. So I was raised by a single mom who worked as a nurse's aide and worked part time at Jack in the Box. And when myself and my sister were in high school and we have a little brother, we both worked part time, we both worked part time jobs . I worked at Jack in the Box and my sister worked a part time job in town and we didn't make very much money, but we did pick up a bill. I had the light bill. She had, I think the phone bill. We didn't have cell phones at the time. They weren't really big. They were really expensive at the time. So so certainly I do, you know, support the concept of youth jobs. They teach valuable lessons. But wouldn't it be great if if Mom just made a few dollars more so that that, you know, high school Kid X maybe has to make a choice about whether he wants to work and doesn't have to pick up that extra bill might have been a hundred bucks a month, but that was my commitment. There's an interesting slide. The one that stood out to me most here was that average household expenditures in Long Beach, $69,484, I believe it. You know, I mentioned I have a I have a one year old and we just got a quote for childcare. And I'm looking at what childcare costs annually. And it is more than, you know, childcare annually is actually could potentially be higher than the poverty level for an individual in our federal poverty level. So it's. It seems like sort of it seems pretty blatant to me that we have to make something, make something happen here. So I think that the main motion, the motion here that takes us to 13 and puts us on a path to 15 with the studies and all that, but puts us on a path. I think that that takes the pressure off this concept of working poor. I think that's important. I think the other element, Vice Mayor Lowenthal, that you mentioned on strong local wage and for enforcement, I think that's important. So I'm certainly in support of that. And so I would say that the only I heard a lot of comment about sort of youth workers. So I would say my thought there is that as I think back to my time as a as a youth worker, you know, I you know, I started off I think I was I was, you know, I worked for a nickel sort of a nickel arcade and were a little wore a little funny vest. I was a guy who stood on the corner with a desk man holding up a sign. And I had a you know, it was kind of embarrassing, but I did it because, you know, I needed I needed a job. So my my circumstance was is I would think, uniquely different because I was a student, I was a high school student working on a permit.
Speaker 0: Councilman Holt. I would think. Okay. Ma'am. You did.
Speaker 11: I hope it's not impacting.
Speaker 0: No, it actually is impacting the audience. And so you cannot do that. So one more time and you just did something that you did last time, which we had to stop the meeting for. Do not do that again, please, ma'am. We're trying to be respectful, okay? Okay. So if you do that again, I'm going to take another recess. I go to the prosecutor ask you, don't do it again.
Speaker 7: Councilman. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Speaker 8: So entire.
Speaker 11: I just want to get through again. Through this. Go ahead. Can I can I can press through. So so the point I'm making is I think there's you know, I, I certainly see the value in giving a shot in the arm to the working poor addressing this issue of poverty. I think when I've heard a lot of recommendations about youth workers and I was a youth worker, I certainly understand I would want to sort of ask that. I remember when I was work, youth work, I had to have a work permit that ensured that, you know, I met academic requirements. You know, I didn't drop below a certain GPA. All of that was managed through most through the school district. And I want to make sure that if we if we do anything around youth today, that we understand the distinct difference between a person that's working at Jack in the Box like myself and going to school, or the person who's head of Household under 18 emancipated serve, you know, working just like an adult. I think those are two distinctly different circumstances. I would hate to say if something happens, if there's any exception here, that it would impact unfairly someone who's essentially no different than a 19 year old who's working or a 22 who's working in one of these low wage jobs. So I'm going to pose that as a question to to the city manager. Are you familiar with this, with the whole work permit process?
Speaker 6: So, Mr. Mayor, members of the council, we are by no means experts in that type of situation. But from what we understand, there is a requirement under state law to get a work permit if you are under 18 and that is normally issued by the school district. And then there are certain exemptions for certain classifications of of of minors. For example, some minors that have a GED can be less than 18 and not have to get a permit. But if you're under 18, you need a permit. So that's certainly something that we can research more and find out from our school district what those different exceptions are. Also, I do want to make a quick clarification. We talked about the $75,000 number. You know, poverty level really is the 24000 to 50. That is a definition in federal law of poverty level. The 75,000 is trying to give an example of in Long Beach and in L.A. County, more of what the area median income is and what the state considers more of a, you know, needing assistance for housing, for moderate income.
Speaker 11: Certainly. And I get it. Thank you so much. So I would just ask that, you know, whatever happens tonight, we make sure that we. Is it true that that whole work permit process is handled by the school district? We have no.
Speaker 6: Correct. It's not a city function, but handled through the school district, under the under the direction of the Department of Industrial Relations.
Speaker 11: So I think we should certainly engage them in a discussion about, you know, how do the I mean, I want a better understanding of how they handle emancipated workers disconnected, disconnected students who are people who are no longer in school and have no connection to the school district. Like, I would be curious about how we handle that because the last thing I would do want to do is create an exception system, exemption system that is easy to game and somehow does the opposite of what we would like to do, which is help to assist people out of poverty through through this, this action. So that said, I'm supportive of the motion both elements. And and thank you for the motion, vice mayor.
Speaker 0: Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 1: I want to thank everyone for coming out tonight. I think that this was a very good discussion. I know that many of you have come out three and four times as we've held the E.D. and F committee meetings all over the city. And I appreciate the dedication it takes to come each and every time and hear from others. So. With that in mind, I do also want to thank Lady Coba and the others who worked really hard to provide us with options. I think that in kind of pairing on what Lisa Ranallo said. I grew up in a family that had a deadbeat dad who didn't pay child support and a mom who didn't go to college because she got married and wanted to help run a family business. And when you get divorced, you then can't work for that family business anymore. And you not only have two kids to support, but you have no income. And so I started working at age 15 and a half. I got my youth permit, my work permit, and I worked starting at 15 and a half. And I believe in building those skills because at 15 and a half and sometimes 16, and some kids that I've had as interns, even 17 and 18, the the change in in them during that time is remarkable. And it's so much easier to hire a 20 year old or a 21 year old or a 23 year old , quite honestly. I would like to also build on the comments of what I will call Commissioner Larkin today, but as I knew him originally, he was a white board member working really hard for the untrained, long term employed workers to help them out of poverty before this discussion ever started. So, I mean, honoring that, I'd like to propose a friendly amendment. I'd like to let's see. I've prepared a few notes. So bear with me as we walk through this in consideration of the many federally funded youth employment programs which I've talked about since well before this dialog started, since the day I was elected, I've really championed what Commissioner Larkin and I talked about, oh, so long ago. But these federal youth employment programs and to support the mayor in his continued efforts to expand on the paid internships available in Long Beach, let's incentivize businesses to hire interns and through the VOA program. So to do that and to hire our long term unemployed, our foster youth, our reentry, our CalWORKs and our homeless vets so that they can get the job experience that they need to build their skills. I proposed a business incentive to utilize the state wage for youth through age 21, and the dole defined youth including but not limited to homeless vets in reentry as defined by we a title one B title we owe we owe a title one B title we owe a title two we owe a title three and we owe a Title four as defined in the state plan to pull our most vulnerable and unemployable out of poverty. And I think that their research is just as admirable as the research that we've done here today on a statewide level. This is the commitment that all workforce investments have united behind, and I think it's really imperative that we do that here. So I hope that you'll consider that friendly amendment both very.
Speaker 10: Mayor. Members of the council. I'm sorry. I'm sorry to interrupt, but I'm trying to make sure I understand the amendment as you've proposed, Councilwoman. Is it a youth exemption? And you mentioned veterans also reserves.
Speaker 1: So in the VOA language, it specifically outlines who qualifies to be paid by the federal government for these job programs. So I'm saying youth up to age 21 and those defined in the program.
Speaker 10: And and what were you proposing? That they be paid?
Speaker 1: The state wage.
Speaker 10: State minimum.
Speaker 8: Wage. Correct.
Speaker 2: So may I ask for clarification as well? When you say youth up to the age of 21. Do you mean youth that qualify for those programs and are also being incentivized through those programs or all youth.
Speaker 1: So to ensure that so so our internship program doesn't only target we awa our internship program targets all youth in Long Beach. And when we when we stepped forward as a city to say we have some of the lowest rates of internship for the number of jobs in the city, we wanted to double and triple that and we don't specifically target we also I feel that it's kind of a two parter. One is youth up to age 21 and then any we owe a definition because within the VOA program, there are certain youth categories specifically in reentry and foster emancipation and our veterans that go up to age 22 or some specific definitions. So the WIA draft was provided to our offices in a correspondence. So I tried to call out we had Title one B and I don't know if legally I have to say we owe a title in front of all of them, but we owe a title one, B, two, three and four. And I think that that really aligns with the state's goal of hiring the long term unemployed. And the long term unemployed in Long Beach actually are concentrated in our sixth district. And the mayor kind of highlighted that in the state of the city over a year ago. And for us to really get those individuals back to work, if we do not consider this business incentive, then there would be less potential hours available for them to build those skills. And the federal government kind of came up with what that model looks like in a number of hours. And so we we can't really change the hours as much as we can. The only option if we don't put in this business incentive would be to reduce the number of individuals who have access to the programs. So that would be my hope is that this council would be able to afford those long term unemployed, those opportunities
Speaker 2: . I think going down a path to support business incentives is one that I certainly would support. And it. What you propose is is intriguing and interesting. And if you'll let me just digest it while others are talking so I can take a little bit of time and sit with it for a minute, I'd appreciate that. But it is interesting and I do think we're on the right path.
Speaker 1: Wonderful. And then just for a point of clarification, that's not against your first motion. That's when you have to motions. So I don't know if I have to speak on one motion or the other or.
Speaker 2: So I have actually right now just one motion that no one has called to separate. Oh. So got it. Is that correct? Mr..
Speaker 10: I believe that you had identified you wanted two separate motions. Were you identified? Yes. You've laid out kind of the entire range.
Speaker 2: I'm sorry. I do want two separate motions, I. I said both components at once. Yes. Okay, great. Yes, you're right.
Speaker 1: I hope it would carry on to the second, but I think it's important against the first. Okay. And then I have one other friendly amendment. In consideration of our desire to focus our efforts on bringing people out of poverty. I would like to ask that we request the City Attorney's Office to follow the state movement on the total compensation model and provide written correspondence to the Council, including a legal opinion onto total earnings at his earliest convenience. But I recognize that that might take. A bit because it's still developing, but I'd hope it would be back in 45 days or I know we have this coming back, so I don't know the timeline, but as soon as reasonable.
Speaker 2: So we're asking just for information when you ask for that friendly. Yes. And this is information that the city attorney would gather on total compensation.
Speaker 1: And I tried to use it. I think we would all call it a two from four, but I think the public would recognize it as a written correspondence.
Speaker 2: I think as long as we're just asking the city attorney to research and provide information, that would be. I can accept that at this time. Thank you. You're welcome.
Speaker 0: Kate thinks Councilmember Supernova.
Speaker 5: You know.
Speaker 7: I think my comments have to come at a later point to where we are in this. So I'd like to. Sure thing. Hold on for just a second.
Speaker 0: No problem. We have plenty more people. So many chance to come back. Councilmember Austin.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I want to thank everybody for hanging with us this evening. And I know this is a very important issue to a lot of people. I think this is a historic day for our city. And I feel for, one, very fortunate to be here in service at this time in our city's history. I want to especially thank those who helped us get here to this point, especially our Economic Development Commission, who I applaud because I had an opportunity to sit and I wasn't here. But I streamed the meeting last week. It was much like this one this evening, and I know there were many others leading up to that point. And so these commissioners have certainly risen to the level of service of the city, to the city. And I wanted to express my appreciation to them. They fought for a commission that was just created a few months ago. You know, we may think about compensating them in the future because there was a lot of hard work. So thank you very much to the commissioners who served on that commission. I think that commission was was diverse and I come in it as well, that I was actually pleasantly surprised that they reached the conclusion that they did reach because their recommendations actually move the ball forward. It's it's it's progress. And I know it was a lot of tough wrangling for for those those on that commission to to get to where they did in the decision before us today. So I also want to thank the many activists from the Raise the Wage campaign, L.A. County Fed for continuing to push the organizing the community . The many contacts that I've had via email, Twitter, one on one conversations have been very fruitful, and I appreciate it. And our business leaders who have come forward and given us perspectives to think about as a as a council, as policymakers, you know, please understand, you're not victims here. You know, I think we all will win at the end of the day. And Long Beach will be a better city for the decision that we make this evening. I have no doubt that we are going to raise the wage this evening. And I want to thank the the the the the LED, EDC and COBRA, the chamber. I mean, this was a full it was this was an open, transparent process. Everybody had a seat at the table. Everybody had an opportunity to to to share their viewpoints. And this was this was the Long Beach way. If anything, I think it was open. And and and and the decision we make this evening, I think we'll feel good about it from the standpoint that we know that we had full input from everybody. From my perspective, I think things are really looking up for Long Beach. I want to be very clear. I came out and I endorsed a statewide minimum wage. Months ago. I think that's the way for the state to go in. And we are going to to set, set, set a standard and we're going to lead the way helped lead the way to getting the state of California there. And the decision before us is a major decision that will change our city and change lives in our city for the better. I think we have an opportunity. We heard a lot about addressing poverty this evening and quality of life for those who are willing to work and make an honest living. And in the spirit of Dr. Martin Luther King, we celebrated his his birthday just yesterday. All labor has dignity, but it's especially has dignity. If you can, you know, have a quality of living. And you can you can you can live on what you earn. I, too, got a work permit at 15 and a half. I took opinions and surveys in the mall, got the opportunity to deal with difficult personalities and learn how to how to deal with rejection. Help me with my dating game many years later. But. That that valuable experience helped shape my my career. It helped shape my who I am today because I had an opportunity to work as a young person. I'm passionate about getting people out of poverty, but I'm also passionate about young people and getting our young people prepared and building our workforce for the future. And so, you know, I'm interested in in doing more. I don't think we we necessarily have to get it all right this evening, you know, because the last time I checked, this will be an audience on any given Tuesday. We can change an audience. We can we can tweak an ordinance. We can fix an ordinance. We can we can improve our policies. And so I think this is a great first step for the city of Long Beach to to to to move and show commitment to the workers throughout our city. I think raising the wage here will act dignity and increase economic opportunity for thousands of workers in our city. We have an opportunity to do that this evening. And those workers have many faces and backgrounds. They are youth, they're seniors, they're students. They're our neighbors. And they are every ethnicity they are. The people who provide service and work in our retail and fast food establishments. And so the minimum wage will work well. We will, I think, make a great first step this evening and an understanding, listening to to some of our businesses. I think there are there's some sticker shock here because, you know, the rally cry is for 15 and we are going to create a pathway to 15. But this is going to be a phased in approach. And when I look at the the history of the minimum wage in California, it has gone up incrementally. It's gone up year by. When it has gone up, it has gone up 8%. 10%, and I think we are being consistent with that in this regard and understanding that there were many years where the minimum wage did not move. And this is why we have this great movement to try to raise wages. I've said from the very beginning, a rising tide will lift all boats. And so there's not this comparison issue. If the minimum wage is is $15 in 2021, whatever, if you're making $20 today, I think you'll be making more. Quite, quite frankly, in 2021, when when the minimum wage is $15. The rising tide will lift all boats. And I think doing nothing will change nothing. And so we have a unique opportunity in front of us to make change. I did want to offer a friendly amendment as well, because with that commitment and passion to getting interns involved in our city and getting our young people important training and opportunities in the workforce, I think it's important that we build in that an understanding that we want to incentivize our businesses to hire young people as well. So given how important it is to provide training and learning opportunities, especially for members of underrepresented in high poverty communities, I think it's and since it's essential to create incentives for employers to hire and train interns and first time workers. Therefore, I'd like to propose the following friendly amendment to the current motion, and I'm not sure if this is the first or second, but we'll just get it in there. Hopefully you'll accept it. Vice Mayor Create a new working intern amendment that would allow employers to pay 85% of the minimum wage for 480 hours or six months , whichever is sooner for employees in any job or activity in which they have no previous or similar rate related experience. And I think that'll go a long way toward getting young people the opportunity to to work. And I express my concern when this first came before us that, you know, I thought our young workers would have a hard time competing to have a first job. And I think this might address some of the concerns raised by by Commissioner Larkin, as well as my colleague, Councilmember Mungo. So that's my friendly voice.
Speaker 0: Mary Ford Just real quick, just to clarify one thing before Vice-Chair. So I know that I think the city of Santa monica, I think passed something similar, similar to that recently and just that I feel that I understand as well. I think the intention of that is to allow first time workers that are going into a job that's for a set period of time. So an internship or a seasonal job or their first time job. So it's something that certainly either lasts. I think your numbers were there six months or 480 hours, whichever comes first of those two. And so I know that was what the Santa monica, something similar had passed in Santa monica.
Speaker 4: And I think the state labor code is very clear on what an intern is and what would a learn worker is. I mean, I think, you know, they don't necessarily this is not a way to to undercut labor costs necessarily. These are these are workers who will be trained and have training opportunities with an employer in a paid internship. And I can tell you, I have offered opportunities, and I know there are a lot of internships out there that are unpaid. Right. And so this this would actually create a pathway for paid interns throughout our city. And I know that's been a big, big priority of yours, Mr. Mayor.
Speaker 0: Absolutely. And I and I do like what obviously what Santa monica did in that direction. So. Vice Mayor.
Speaker 2: Thank you. And. I think that captures the spirit of what we had heard about people's interest in incentivizing. Trainees and and new workers to an industry. I just have one question. So in that 85% calculation. Is that would that ever take it lower than the state minimum wage? So if the state minimum wage is $10 an hour. So for instance, the first step of our minimum wage is $10.50. So that would not be applicable at that time. Correct.
Speaker 4: I believe it would.
Speaker 0: I think so. I think this might be a step.
Speaker 8: Yeah.
Speaker 0: Mr. Modica might know.
Speaker 6: Yes. So it's our understanding that there currently is a provision in state law for learners that is 85% of workers. So in that case, they wouldn't be any different any any different than what state law already allows. We'd have to verify that. But that language that Santa monica uses sounds very similar to what is currently in state law, but will verify.
Speaker 2: So as long as we're aligning to what is allowable under state law, I think that's your intent. Councilmember Austin Then I would accept that friendly amendment.
Speaker 0: And just to be clear, though, it is the Santa monica law that passed is not the same thing as a state law. And so I think the Santa monica law applies especially to this idea of it's not so much focus on on youth as it is this idea of like interns and seasonal employees or.
Speaker 2: And what Councilmember Austin's proposing is interns.
Speaker 0: Seasonal.
Speaker 2: And seasonal employees, not just.
Speaker 1: Youth.
Speaker 0: Yeah, it's less about age and more about that.
Speaker 2: Right. And I think we would struggle with that age distinction. But it's the trainee concept, correct?
Speaker 4: It's a training concept. And I think it it meets the spirit of what the what Councilmember Mango was actually trying to put forth in her friendly as well.
Speaker 8: Doing it.
Speaker 0: Okay. Vice Mayor.
Speaker 2: I. And I heard what Councilmember Mungo had asked for. And I think in in hearing your request, your proposal and Councilmember Austin's proposal, I, I, I do lean toward what I'm hearing from his proposal because a couple of reasons. One, it is it's a little bit more clear from from an understanding. For our to prioritize the trainee piece, which I think was key for you as well. The new worker piece. I like the cap of 460 Hours, is that correct? 80 hours. This addresses the issue that Councilman Richardson raised and others raised about not taking advantage of people, keeping them locked into certain wage categories. And so it really does. It's credible as a trainee incentive, the new employee incentive. So I will accept that.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Let me go to Councilmember Andrews.
Speaker 5: Yes, thank you.
Speaker 6: Vice Mayor. I don't think I'm going to sit here and wait. All you guys have to listen to all of this because the fact I have a pretty good idea of my opinions and how I feel.
Speaker 5: About a lot of this.
Speaker 6: Because first and foremost, I want to thank the, you know, the City Economic Commission for their recommendation and the students who came here tonight. I know it's been a long, you know, time, but when this item first came to the city council, you know, I was coauthor, you know, with our vice mayor, Lowenthal, and there were more people earning minimum wage in my district and any other district in the city of Long Beach. Which came.
Speaker 5: Out early.
Speaker 3: To create a pathway to.
Speaker 5: Support the $15 an hour.
Speaker 6: A pathway to the $15 an hour. And I don't like it, so I don't see where any of this will bring anybody out of poverty.
Speaker 5: But there is a pathway. You know, like I said, we talked it back in days. You know, we talked about.
Speaker 6: The minimum wage in the other wages. Like I said, when we talk about minimum wage, you know, it doesn't fit the criteria where we you because we talk about today in the economy the way it is, it would never, ever come to, you know, to equal each other. So I've heard that the pros and cons of, you know, why we should it should not increase the wages. But I really think that we. Speaking of that, Dr. King, you know, we really need to move forward in that. You know, I think we need to move forward tonight. And I've been waiting, you know, you know, in hopes for a long time. And I think it's really time for us to act, you know, really seriously. I heard the rising tide, but I think the rising tide with this will be with the votes. And I think it's time for us to move on with this.
Speaker 5: Instead of taking all these people's time. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember your income. Sorry. I mean, I'm sorry about that, Councilwoman Gonzales.
Speaker 12: Okay. Thank you. So a great discussion tonight. I want to thank everybody for being here again. The business community, our nonprofits, our L.A. County Fed, our workforce here in and all over the city. I want to thank everybody for their hard work. And I know it was a lot to come to this night and to really talk about all of the possibilities and possible solutions. So I'm happy that we've now been able to discuss this in a way that looks like we're moving towards a minimum wage here. And so what I will say, you know, just to give us a larger context, and I think we do have a larger context in this. We've talked about poverty levels, unemployment rates. You know, I happen to represent an area I know I sound like a broken record, but at one point was 19%. It's actually lowered. You know how I'm happy about that to 16 point about 5% homelessness. We have about 2300 adults that are homeless here in the city of Long Beach. And over 75% percent of them are of working age. 255 are children and 20%. We know our city citywide are living in poverty. Median income, 15,000, $50,000 in in the downtown area, which is great. And the reason I say that is because I have to care about these statistics, because, of course, I represent them, but also because particularly in the downtown area, you know, when major retailers come to us and they've come to the Dolby or they've come to the city to look at it areas, you know, we've often struggled with our income rates. We've often struggled with retailers telling us that we don't have the income. And so I think now looking at this minimum wage and seeing what this could possibly have the opportunity for us to do is to potentially raise our income levels in a way that would also hopefully raise education levels as well. For instance, I know Trader Joe's particularly one has talked about not coming to Long Beach because we don't have the education. And so there's other retailers, of course, like I said, that won't come to Long Beach maybe because we don't have the particular income levels. And so we see a benefit in that sense that will help other businesses as well. In addition to that, I think a second point, as I mentioned, is just the the the varying levels that we have of various poverty levels. Even median home values are about $400,000. Average studio one bedroom is about $1,000, upwards of 2600 if you're needing a three or four bedroom. So it's pretty significant. Another point, I think that a lot of the business community brought forward, but many others have brought forward many times is wage theft. And I think I want to thank Vice Mayor Lowenthal for including that in talking about retaliation, talking about wage stuff like it needs to be talked about because I think that there is a really important fact here. It is very similar to what we're discussing, but also very distinct. And I think having that discussion in a study when we do see it back in a way that's comprehensive but really tackles the issue as best, especially with specific industries, which is very important. But overall, an increase in the minimum wage is more than fair, in my opinion. It acknowledges our city's demographic demographic make up of individuals who, yes, they cook our food, entertain our tourists, take care of our children. Ten tables we meet at, they fix our sandwiches, you know, everything. And we've often supported many businesses with various business license fees, maybe waiving those. We have grants for for businesses. We have workforce development opportunities for businesses. And I think at this point, it's really an opportunity for us as a city to really look at individuals more than just a dollar amount, but really value them for the work that they do. So I think looking at the vice mayor's plan so far in the Economic Development Commission's plan and again, I want to thank our business community, I want to thank everyone that was involved. I think it is unprecedented that we've come to this point and that everyone has been involved. And I want to also commend our council for having a great discussion and really looking at a pathway to 15. And so I will be on board with support on the vice mayor's motions. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next step is actually Mr. City attorney. Did you want to jump.
Speaker 5: Just.
Speaker 10: Real quick? Excuse me, Councilman, your clarification on the vice mayor's motion. I was looking at my notes here. On the second part, you said nonprofits and those companies of 25, unless the nonprofit is not, is there a employee number for the nonprofits? Is it all nonprofits and small companies of 25?
Speaker 2: They're they're both 25 or fewer employees.
Speaker 10: So nonprofits that have 25 or fewer employees.
Speaker 2: For small businesses and nonprofits with 25 or fewer employees.
Speaker 10: There would be no distinction or necessary to say if you're just seeing companies with 25 or less.
Speaker 2: We can say that. I think I raised the distinction because there was a distinction made in public comment. But if you felt that it would be captured just by saying businesses. I want to be sure that we're not providing that exemption.
Speaker 10: I just want to be clear that the way I read the CDC report, it appeared to say all nonprofits and small companies of 25 or less. And what I now understand, it's only nonprofits of 25 or less or small.
Speaker 8: Companies, correct?
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 0: Contrary, Ringo.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Now, I'm not going to belabor this point. I think that we are on the right path. I think that we have basically discussed this item to its dénouement, as far as I can tell. We're going we're going in the direction that's going to take us to a path for $15 an hour. And I really appreciate all of councilmember for bringing that that opportunity here. It's it's serves the best of all worlds in respect to the commission's recommendations. And I want to thank everybody, everybody who was involved in this and those of you who are out there right now. Good morning. Because you've been here a long time. It's been a long day. And I'm sure that you're very tired and you want to see a vote being taken. So I'm not going to take a lot more of that. But I think that when it comes down to the opportunity, what we're looking here at the table, the motions that are on the table, there's something that they are. They are motions that I can agree with, because it does take us to that path where we need to. I could talk about my my early work experience selling maps to the stars and how much I made. And I was doing that. I know how many of you have gone to Hollywood and bought a map? You know, when I was doing that, it was great by center with $0.50 on the dollar and didn't make much. I didn't need a permit because in those days they were looking at that, you know, more like childcare laws didn't fit in. And I could also talk about me being a portfolio transfer engineer back when they had those, you know, fulfilling filling your car with with gas washing, which you average and kicking the wheels to put air . So, I mean, I could talk about all of that, but I'm not going to think I just did. But bottom line is that we definitely need an increase in and a low in wages. It's long, very long overdue. And I think that, you know, when we did the comments that were made earlier about measure in, you know, the sky did not fall. In fact, we rebounded and we're doing even better now than we did in the past. So I'm ready to vote on this and I support it. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Going back to Vice Mayor Lowenthal.
Speaker 2: Yes, actually, Charlie, just the city attorney just reminded me, you know, in looking through the commission's recommendation, you're absolutely right. And my intent was to stay with the commission's recommendation. It is very late. I don't know how many of you think clearly at 12:15 a.m., but so thank you for that reminder. My intent is to stay with the commission recommendation, which is small businesses and all nonprofits. As for both for both pieces. The piece about the one year. DeLay.
Speaker 10: Thank you.
Speaker 2: And the second piece. Right. That's it for both pieces. I mean.
Speaker 0: Councilwoman Mongo.
Speaker 1: Thank you. I appreciate Councilmember Austin's. Friendly with the state recommended training program. It doesn't fulfill my complete intent because where I think the disadvantage will come is that there's, again, a serious maturity variance between a 16 year old and an 18 year old. And I'll I'll be supportive of that as a part of this motion, even though I'm very disappointed that the full. Acknowledgment of individuals up to age 21 at the state wage is only still pending at this time, but I hope it will be considered. I do want to speak one more time on the. We owe it, though, because I think that that we owe a component is critical to our ability to lobby this in DC. I think it's critical to our ability to lobby this in Sacramento, and I think it's critical in the future of the way we our was written in that from here forth we are going to be allocated funds based on performance. And so our ability to have the number of youth go through the program will be less because of this and therefore could long term reduce the num the total amount of allocation of funds. So this is like a compounded issue. If we don't accept, we owe it. I'm open to modifying the language to just say that any business. Implementing the willow. A program must. Utilize the state minimum wage for participants while in the program, which again has some of the restrictions, as Councilmember Alston said, with the 480 hours of certain groups, but within certain groups, for instance. Veterans. Unemployable veterans. There are certain changes in the timeline of when you can place them. And specifically within L.A. County, we set aside $1,000,000 a few years ago to put these in the number of individuals that were requested by the federal government into work. And with the big push that we're doing to reduce veteran homelessness, we did not meet those goals. And part of that was not being able to meet those goals within the state minimum wage. Within this under that under that time when we asked for that $1 million to be set aside, and we were very grateful for it . We did not meet those goals. We went back to the federal government and asked for an extension to meet those goals in an additional 12 month period. And we eventually met it in a longer timeline through matching grants of nonprofits. But it it definitely put us in a very tough position because once you lose that funding, regaining it is very difficult because then you're taking it from another WIA that received it. So while I appreciate Councilmember Austin's expertize on the state definition of A in turn, I hope that the background and experience of Commissioner Larkin's and myself actually many know that I have spoken at we have conferences at the state level and this is critical to our state's ability to maintain this funding long term. So I hope that the VOA amendment, a friendly amendment, will be accepted. It's, I think, critical. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Richardson.
Speaker 11: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And quickly, I wanted to make sure that I know that we had time to actually look at the the EDC recommendation. I know that there were there are two additional steps that the vice mayor's motion suggests. What was the final date of the to arrive at $15?
Speaker 2: Vice Mayor The final date to arrive at 15. It goes into effect January one, 2021.
Speaker 11: And I want to just quickly before we take a vote, just take a moment to talk about regionalism and talk about enforcement. I think at some point we're going to have to if we do, you know, if the sky doesn't fall and we go through the process you've outlined, we should if we arrive at 15, be at the same state, same places, the region for synergy in terms of enforcement and ensuring that, you know, our residents aren't sort of sort of behind. So I would like to see and I want to see if you're open to this if that final date, we can move it up six months to, say, July of 2020 so that we you know, should the study go well and everything is is cruisin when we arrive there, we arrive there with the region. What do you think?
Speaker 2: I see the value in. In staying aligned with the region. But here's here's where our challenges we started six months later from everybody else. And. I don't think we need to be shy about this. Our effort here is different from other communities. I work in Santa monica, so I follow that closely as what's different from Santa monica. It's different from Los Angeles. And I think because we started later, it is reasonable to. To have our timeline comport. Give folks enough time. So. If I may. I'd like to stay with our timeline.
Speaker 11: I don't I don't have a challenge with that. Like I said, you know, any given Tuesday, these things can these things can change is our first crack at this. Not everybody's going to get everything they want. But I do feel that we should make sure that we're at you know, we're playing our part in the region. But I'm okay with the motion as it is.
Speaker 2: Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Sorry about that. Actually, I'm next on the list. Just just to two quick things really quick. Some of this was discussed earlier. I just want to reiterate something before we just passed over the during earlier earlier today, the L.A. EDC, when they presented they made a series of recommendations as business incentives, I guess. And so I just want to make sure that we and I don't know if this needs to be part of the motion or not, but I just want to ask staff to at least those I think need to come back to the council, or there needs to be some kind of discussion about those incentives. And they included everything from expanding the local preference program to our enterprise funds. I actually really like that. I know we don't do that now, but I think a lot of the recommendations that they made, I think the idea of expanding local preference to, you know, to the port and to the water department and to all the enterprise funds, I think would actually be a big benefit to local workers and so and small businesses. So I just want to make sure that that's something that is looked at encouraging that for the community college district in Cal State, Long Beach was mentioned. I want to make sure that we're doing that as well. And the other two items and vice mayor, if you would consider also they're not exactly germane to to the motion schedule that you set, but I think they still they still have an impact. One thing that was discussed, I've heard it at some of the hearings is this idea of creating some kind of business incentive to either whether it's a a a, a business license fee, tax holiday or whether it's a business license fee opportunity so that businesses that are going to be you know, obviously there will be impact, but there's also some kind of incentive on the city side. And so I don't know, vice mayor, if we could add, if staff could bring back some type of license fee tax holiday, I know that. I think Councilwoman Mango and Councilwoman Price and Councilmember Brenda, I think it was had have proposed initiated a small business rebate program and which I think is great. I think we all supported great program. But I think that this could be something that whether it's a part of it or on top of that to create some kind of some kind of license fee benefit for businesses as an incentive, I'd like to look at that so that something we could bring back and I think you mentioned, Mr. Mauka in your presentation that there was you already had a kind of cost to what that could look like. And so I'd like to actually have that come back to the Council for discussion. Can we could we do that?
Speaker 6: Yes. So we can certainly take a look at the recommendations in the L.A. EDC. And one thing I did want to add is one of the recommendations was to ask our local educational institutions to also do a local preference program. Would that be part of the motion as well? It would. And then we can we've got some of the costs already for the business license holiday, if you will, that's in the in your motion to air in the materials today. We can also cost out expanding our current small business rebate program and bringing that up to potentially 20 employees or 25 employees. It's currently set at ten employees. So we can bring back some additional information on that program.
Speaker 0: We were just discussing that actually with and actually that would be great. And if I think you could, particularly if we're classifying businesses as 25 small businesses as 25 and under, I think to take that program and expand that for not just those that are under ten, but those that are at the 25 level, I think provides more, you know, tax incentives and, you know, reduction of fees for businesses at that level. And so if we could get those get kind of a listing of business incentives and what the kind of responses from city and vice mayor, if you would be willing just to as a side add, that I would.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Okay, great. Councilmember Supernova.
Speaker 7: Thank you. I first like to get a point of clarification from the city attorney on the total earnings piece coming back. If you could just kind of recap what you're doing. And I'd also like to ask that that piece come back prior to the final reading, if it's going to be in an analysis that that you are providing. I think council needs some time to analyze what you're analyzing.
Speaker 5: Yes.
Speaker 10: Councilmember Supernova. Yes. It's my intention to take a look at this and put an opinion together for the review by the Council prior to the first reading of what does come back on is should this motion be successful and we're directed to prepare an ordinance. So yes, I mean, we would take a look at that total earnings. We'll give you our best analysis. I think the people that spoke about it, you know, it's going to be there's no definitive answer out there that they can someone can point to. But we will take a look at it and give you our best estimate on on that particular model.
Speaker 7: Okay. Thank you. And I assume that's okay with the maker of the motion that it comes back prior to the first reading?
Speaker 8: Yes.
Speaker 7: Okay. I guess what we have here is my fear is is just basically unintended consequences. And with all the speakers here tonight, no one gave me an answer as to what do I tell my fixed income constituents who have home health care? They're going to lose hours, which is unacceptable. And I guess in hearing several folks say talk about the high price, I need more money because of the high price of child care. Where do they think the price of childcare is going to go? It's just that vicious cycle is what I have the biggest problem with. The other item that I'm kind of confused by and in the hours late. So I'm kind of ready for confusion here. But the whole wage theft issue, to me, this is a state issue. It's the California Department of Industrial Relations. We had a new bill there in 2011. I think the governor just signed a new measure in October 2015. I'm confused as to what we're going to do on a city level other than refer people to to get relief at the state area. I don't know if anyone has an explanation for that tonight, but I'm just saying that that's something I don't understand. I think the state put $1,000,000,000 into enforcement plan in October. So, again, I'm unclear there with that. All that being said, I'd just like to thank everyone for your time tonight, the business owners. Thank you. And to Mr. Hoffman, I hope you do reinvest in Long Beach. And I think it's incumbent on us as we move forward is to create some of those business incentives. We need to do everything we can do to help the business community. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Okay. So now we go back to the motion and just I want to just try to repeat the motions or both. The vice Mayor There's two separate motions, so I'm going to let her repeat her two motions and make sure that we're on the same page before we go to the final vote. So. Vice-Chair Lowenthal.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 3: Mr. Mayor. I just want to know if I could make a comment.
Speaker 0: Actually, sir, I can't. I there's a hearing process I have to follow. As far as, bear.
Speaker 5: In mind, 60%.
Speaker 3: Of the labor in Long Beach.
Speaker 0: So I can't outside along the. I understand that, sir. I can't. He doesn't. So he doesn't. I can't to follow. Thank you. By Summer, Lowenthal.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So the first motion.
Speaker 8: Yeah. Keep laughing.
Speaker 0: So, guys, listen. The Vice-Chair Now has the floor, so. Vice-Chair Lowenthal. Thank you.
Speaker 2: I have a very, very low voice, so. Okay. So I'm. It's my turn.
Speaker 0: Hey, guys. Ma'am. Please. We have to continue. Vice Mayor has the floor. Thank you. Okay. I thank you. I told the gentleman he couldn't continue, so we're fine. Thank you, Vice Mayor.
Speaker 8: What they're saying behind me. Right.
Speaker 2: So motion one is to approve recommendations of the Economic Development Commission with a wage schedule of $10.50 effective January one, 2017. On January one, 2018, it moves to $12 January one, 2019 to $13 an hour. Small businesses with 25 or fewer employees and nonprofits have an additional year to implement the schedule. And the first increase would be would go into effect January one, 2018 to $10.50. This new policy would also include city departments on the same schedule. It would require strong wage enforcement that is managed by the city and includes the private right of action for workers. Mandatory posting anti retaliation claims clause I'm sorry, revocation power for the city and a fine program for the city. The second motion in early 2019 I'm sorry, part of the first motion in early 2019 launch a second study with the L.A. EDC to study minimum wage impacts on employment, sales tax and overall impact on economy that will be presented to the Lombard City Council at a special hearing. The second motion is the pathway to $15 per hour proposal. If after the study we see no major negative impacts to jobs and the local economy, we continue on a pathway to $15 an hour. One. On January one, 2020, the wage moves to $14 an hour. Secondly, on January one, 2021 to $15 an hour. Small businesses with 25 or fewer employees get an additional year to implement the schedule, as well as nonprofit small businesses with 25 or fewer employees and all nonprofits get an additional year to implement the schedule. In 2023, the minimum wage will set the Consumer Price Index for the L.A. metropolitan area.
Speaker 10: Vice mayor. And also there would be the amendment as proposed by CD eight on the intern program for 404 up to 480 hours or six months.
Speaker 2: And that would be to create a working and intern. Amendment correct that would allow employers to pay 85%.
Speaker 8: Yes.
Speaker 2: Of the minimum wage for 480 hours. For six months.
Speaker 10: And.
Speaker 2: Or six months, whichever comes first.
Speaker 10: That is correct. And then also the direct city attorney to prepare the opinion to come back prior to first reading.
Speaker 0: Correct. And then also, I think, ask the city attorney to bring back the business incentives for approval or review of the council.
Speaker 2: And also council member. Mungo's first second request for the city attorney to come.
Speaker 0: Back with information on following what's going on with total compensation.
Speaker 2: Got it. That's it. I believe those are all the friendlies that were accepted, including the mayor's business.
Speaker 0: Okay.
Speaker 2: So program.
Speaker 0: Before we vote on the issue and just real quick to clarify how the vote I'm assuming, Mr. Attorney, we vote on motion one and motion two, right? Is that.
Speaker 10: That is correct. If motion one fails in the motion to vote on location.
Speaker 0: Got it. So I have another speaker, Councilman Mongo, that will go to the vote.
Speaker 1: I just wanted to be sure that the motion for protecting our federal funds by providing a business incentive to businesses who employ under the VOA standards was not accepted.
Speaker 2: Correct. It was not.
Speaker 1: Okay, I'd like to make a substitute motion of exactly everything that Mayor Vice Mayor Lowenthal, said with the addition of the exemption, not the exemption, I'm sorry, the business incentive for Whyalla.
Speaker 10: And if I could clarify on the, on the exemption, those are people that are in the program not exceeding 480 hours, not qualified for the program, but they have to be in the program and only for 408 up to.
Speaker 1: The state it's usually 480. There's I think one exception for reentry I think is the exception. But I know that the Rio DOL guidelines are very.
Speaker 10: Clear and it's a limited.
Speaker 8: Correct exemption.
Speaker 0: Okay. Just to be I'm on the way the subsidy works so that the subsidy goes on top of the two split questions, right? So you vote on the substitute and then if that fails, then you go to the split questions. Correct.
Speaker 10: The substitute would need a second if it has. No, it.
Speaker 0: Has a second.
Speaker 10: Question that would be voted on first. And then you would go back to the vice mayor's original one.
Speaker 0: I just want to make sure we're doing the process correct. So okay, perfect. So we have a substitute motion, which is essentially everything that was from the motion, but adding Councilman Mungo's additional part of the motion right now. Second, about Councilmember Supernormal. Let's go to Vice Mayor Lowenthal.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and I appreciate Councilwoman Mungo's passion for the issue. I do think given all of the discussion and the movement on the original motion, I'm going to ask my colleagues to vote no on the substitute motion and let us return back to the original motion.
Speaker 0: And Councilor Richard Brown.
Speaker 7: Oh, well, I had a substitute. Substitute?
Speaker 8: Oh, my.
Speaker 7: Okay. And that would be. I have to add, when this comes back for review, let's take that study out a bit. Not necessarily go with L.A. EDC.
Speaker 0: Okay. Do you want to see if that will be accepted by the maker of the original motion?
Speaker 7: You know what? I don't know exactly how this works.
Speaker 0: Okay.
Speaker 8: Well.
Speaker 0: I think that might be something that the original maker of the motion might might accept.
Speaker 2: Can you repeat that, please?
Speaker 0: His his substitute substitute was when we do the second study to take that step just automatically going to Lady C, putting that study out out to bid and then. Okay.
Speaker 2: Of course.
Speaker 0: Okay.
Speaker 2: Absolutely. That's very reasonable.
Speaker 0: Okay, great. So we have a substitute motion by councilman mongo first. So please, members, cast your vote on that motion.
Speaker 2: The motion fails.
Speaker 0: Okay, now we have motion one of two. Motion one of two is essentially the recommendations by the Economic Development Commission, as read by Vice Marie Lowenthal.
Speaker 4: So, Mr. Mayor, a point of order should should that be a friendly now? Well, Councilmember, super nice recommendations. Yeah.
Speaker 0: I think she accepted.
Speaker 3: Okay. Yes, but it was okay.
Speaker 0: So I think she's accepting them right now. Yeah, you're right. Okay. So now is the Economic Development Commission's recommendations, which is on the floor, including Councilman Supernovas. Last addition he just made. Members, please go ahead and cast your votes on part one of the motion.
Speaker 2: Ocean carries.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. And now we're moving on to the second motion, which is the sorry. The first motion was the Economic Diplomate commission's recommendations. The second motion is.
Speaker 5: The.
Speaker 0: The pathway to 15, as recommended by Vice Chair Lowenthal. That is the second motion of the item members. Please go ahead and cast your votes.
Speaker 2: Motion carries. What's the vote?
Speaker 0: Thank you. Okay, so big swing vote. I think that was the same boat as the first. As the first one. Okay. Thank you. Okay. That was a long process. But I want to thank you all for for getting through it. I'm going to take we still have, believe it or not, more of an agenda. So, I mean, I'm I'm going to take a one minute recess and then we'll we'll get started back on.
Speaker 8: Oh. I'm going to talk to.
Speaker 0: Okay. I'm going to go ahead and call the meeting back to order. Instead of an agenda here. So if I can have everyone, please, that's going to stay around, take their seats. We can take a roll call, please.
Speaker 1: Councilwoman Gonzalez, Vice Mayor Lowenthal. Councilwoman Price. Councilmember. Super Now. Councilwoman Mongo. Councilman Andrews. Councilmember Muranga.
Speaker 8: Councilman Austin. Councilmember Richardson. Mayor Garcia. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to receive and file the recommendations of the Economic Development Commission and the report from the Los Angeles Economic Development Corporation titled "Considering Minimum Wage Policy in the City of long Beach: Theory, Practice and Potential Implications;" or
Direct City Manager to provide additional information relative to the implementation of a minimum wage policy in the City of Long Beach; or
Direct City Attorney to prepare an ordinance for the implementation of a minimum wage policy in the City of Long Beach to be returned to the City Council for its first reading. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01192016_16-0044 | Speaker 8: Councilman Austin. Councilmember Richardson. Mayor Garcia.
Speaker 0: I'm here as well. Thank you. Next item, please.
Speaker 8: Report from.
Speaker 1: Parks, Recreation and Marine recommendation to revoke water aerobics fees for seniors that were included as part of the fiscal year 2016 master fee and charges scheduled for Belmont Plaza Pool District three.
Speaker 0: Thank you, guys. Guys, I need to obviously keep going on the meeting so if I can have everyone that if you guys want to chat outside would be great please. Including our own staff. So. Mr.. Mr.. Mr.. West.
Speaker 3: Steve Scott, Honorable Mayor and members of the City Council. The item before you tonight is to revoke the water aerobics fee for seniors at the Belmont Plaza Pool. Recall back in October of last year, the City Council directed staff to take the necessary steps to revoke the senior aquatic aerobics fee at Silverado, MLK and Belmont Plaza pool . So the action tonight is to revoke that senior fee at the Belmont Plaza pool. That concludes my staff report.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Any public comment on this item? Seeing none are actually. Councilman Gonzales, you made a motion. Do you want to speak to this? No. Councilman Richardson? Nope. Kevin Andrews.
Speaker 5: You know, I'm very happy to see this on the agenda. And thanks to our great city council support and we were able to waive the senior fees.
Speaker 3: For all our pools except Belmont. Tonight, I hope that this will pass and so that no water aerobics free.
Speaker 7: From all.
Speaker 3: Seniors.
Speaker 5: At City of Long Beach. Thank you very much for bringing this item to the diocese.
Speaker 0: Thank you. That's a public comment on the item. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 8: Lowenthal.
Speaker 1: Motion carries. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to authorize City Manager to revoke Water Aerobics Fees for seniors that were included as part of the Fiscal Year 2016 Master Fee and Charges Schedule for Belmont Plaza Pool. (District 3) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01192016_16-0068 | Speaker 0: Thank you. And exciting, please.
Speaker 1: Communication from Councilwoman Gonzalez. Councilmember Muranga, Councilman Austin. Councilmember Richardson. Recommendation to request the city attorney to draft a resolution in support of President Barack Obama's executive actions to reduce gun violence and make our community safer.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilman Gonzales.
Speaker 12: Yes. I just want to thank my council colleagues for joining me in this release. Symbolic resolution. I think we had addressed this very briefly during our federal legislative committee. And understanding the lay of the land in our nation at this time. I personally thought it was timely for us to do this. And I also want to thank our police department for joining on board, taking a look at the item and helping us out with the language on that. So I think all involved. Appreciate it.
Speaker 0: Councilmember Ringo.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Mary. Now, I also want to thank the police department for their cooperation in reviewing this and making it strong and and palatable to them. And I also, of course, thank Councilwoman Dallas for bringing this forward. And more importantly, I want to thank the president for having the courage to put this on the table. It's long overdue. And we do need some very strong background checks when it comes to the purchasing of weapons. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 1: I think it's important to note that all of the suggestions posed and the executive actions are already in place here in California, yet they fail to stop incidents such as those that occurred in San Bernardino. We cannot continue to pass more and more gun laws and more and more restrictions on law abiding individuals civil rights. Yet they all. All that it stops is the same law abiding citizens from being able to protect themselves. You are currently not able to buy a gun on the internet and have it shipped to your house without a background check. And therefore, because this item is already exactly what we have, I will not be supporting it this evening.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 4: Well, I'm going to rise in support of this item because I think it's very necessary to raise the consciousness of our residents here in Long Beach, but throughout the country about the the need to reduce gun violence. I think we've been pretty progressive in the city. And in the spirit of that. I think this council getting behind this resolution is the right thing to do. I will remind you that two years ago we had our very first gun buyback program funded by the city council, and it was an item that my arm, Steve Neal and myself brought forward. We also funded a task force to deal with prohibited possessors, using one time funds from our budget to get guns up out of the hands of those who should not have them legally and by court order. And I think we need to do more of that as a council to to deal with the issues we have right here in our city. And so I'm happy to support this. I think this is the right thing to do. And, yes, I'll be in support.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you, Councilman Richardson.
Speaker 11: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, Councilmember Gonzales and all the cosigners for signing on to this. I think what the president is trying to do with certainly the toxic environment in Washington, D.C., to take an executive action. I think he's expressed this time and time again the interest in Congress taking action and seeing that that hasn't happened . He's moved forward on this. So we completely support it. We are. This isn't new. We have support for these reforms in our federal legislative agenda that we voted on today for a number of those. A number of those. And we also have a support for a number of those elements in the state legislative agenda. So this is not new. This goes on to highlight our support for this. So we can say say that, you know, we've explored doing all that we can to help prevent these these ridiculous things from happening in our community.
Speaker 0: Thank you. That any public comment? I'm sorry on the resolution item. See no public comment. There is a motion and a second please. Members Kastor votes.
Speaker 2: Motion carries. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Attorney to draft a resolution in support of President Barack Obama's executive actions to reduce gun violence and make our communities safer. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01052016_16-0001 | Speaker 0: Okay. Just keep going through the agenda here. We have two hearings tonight, hearing item number one, oath as required. So the city clerk will introduce the item.
Speaker 1: Report from Development Services recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing and adopt a resolution amending the local coastal program. Per the California Coastal Commission for Consistency with the adopted mobility element of the General Plan and accept the categorical exemption of 15165 districts. Two and three.
Speaker 0: Steph.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The staff report will be given by Amy Burdick, our director of development services.
Speaker 1: Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council, as you know, the city adopted its award winning mobility element a couple of years ago because it is a citywide policy document, it is required to go to the Coastal Commission for certification for those aspects of the mobility element that are within the coastal zone. Coastal Commission staff has asked that the city make some minor revisions to the mobility element to ensure that it is consistent with our adopted local coastal plan. We have presented to you the information in the back on where we would strike out language in the LCP and then add language as well to ensure consistency. The biggest issue I think that I want to bring to your attention is that the Coastal Commission has asked us to exempt out a map in the mobility element.
Speaker 6: As it relates to preferential.
Speaker 1: Parking districts, because we do have two preferential parking districts in the coastal zone that the Coastal Commission says have not been certified by the Coastal Commission. So we would like to proceed with the changes that have been requested by the Coastal Commission, exempt out the map, showing the preferential parking districts and then submit the revised mobility element and the LCP to the Coastal Commission for their eventual certification. I'm happy to answer any specific questions you may have. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Let me close the hearing and take any public comment on this, if there is any. Yes, sir.
Speaker 3: Very good. You clear? Because the address, just for the record. Where are these specific areas located? Where are the parking districts located?
Speaker 0: Mr. Rudd, as you know the process is your comment. It's not questions it's.
Speaker 3: Wasn't that you haven't indicated where you indicate you're asking for preferential parking spaces. I think the public has a right to know where those are located. That's I don't see that in the plan unless I overlooked it.
Speaker 0: There's also council questions that will be coming up as well. And do you have any other comments?
Speaker 3: I would hope that you would not pass this unless you put forward so the public knows where the preferential parking districts are. Period. Maybe there's some people that want to be included in that. Maybe there's some people that object to having press residential parking districts and so forth. Let's see what the impacts are in the neighborhood. You haven't list. There's nothing in. Unless I miss something, I don't see it in the file as to what block it is. Who's going to be blocked out? Who's going to get preferential treatment? Start earning your salaries. Start asking questions. Start putting the details out in the record. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Mr. Goodhue. Councilwoman Price, we've got a motion and then it has comments as well.
Speaker 6: Thank you. I have a couple of questions for Miss Bodak. So the. Preferential parking district. That is in district three. That's in Naples. Is that right?
Speaker 1: Yes, ma'am. It was established in 1988, I believe.
Speaker 6: One of the questions we often get and I'm sure a lot of coastal communities deal with this, is we have a lot of residents asking for preferential parking districts in parking impacted areas along the coast. And we're often told or we often advise them that Coastal Commission won't approve such restricted parking along the coast. But sometimes people will rebut that with by saying, well, what about SEAL Beach or other neighboring cities in the region that have it? Can you speak to that at all in terms of what? When do they allow it? When do they not allow it? How is it that this particular district in Naples was established after Coastal Commission had already been in existence?
Speaker 1: It appears.
Speaker 6: That this district.
Speaker 1: Was established and did not seek Coastal Commission authorization. Okay. So I and I can't speak to other coastal cities on how they've gotten their preferential parking districts approved. But we as city staff recognize the two parking districts in the coastal zone as being in existence. The Coastal Commission does not recognize those two districts as being in existence. If there were an attempt to establish a new preferential parking district, it would have to go to the Coastal Commission. I do suspect, based on their discussions with us related to this issue, that they would not be supportive of new preferential parking districts.
Speaker 6: And that has to do largely with access.
Speaker 1: It does have to do with access. They have a a requirement to encourage access to the coast that does not necessarily take into consideration an individual residential need to have parking in their neighborhood. So they really are two different policy issues that are at odds with each other.
Speaker 6: Thank you for answering those questions. And I will be making a motion at this time to approve the recommendation.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. There's emotion. Any second. Vice Mayor Lowenthal. Dave, any comments? Nope. See no other council questions or comments. Then we will go ahead and take a vote on hearing one.
Speaker 1: Councilman Austin. Councilmember Richardson, a motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next item, we have a second hearing. Hearing item number two, please. | Resolution | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing, and adopt resolution amending the Local Coastal Program per the California Coastal Commission for consistency with the adopted Mobility Element of the General Plan; and accept the Categorical Exemption CE-15-165.
(Districts 2,3) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01052016_16-0002 | Speaker 1: A report from Economic and Property Development and Financial Management recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record. Conclude the public hearing regarding an economic subsidy associated with the First Amendment to sales tax incentive agreement with Kay Brothers pursuant to California Government Code Section 53083 and authorize the City Manager to execute all documents necessary to implement the First Amendment to sales tax incentive agreement with Kay Brothers for the expanded Toyota dealership located at 2895 Long Beach Boulevard, District six. This hearing requires no case.
Speaker 0: Let's first do the oath. Anyone going to be? If you ever speak on this hearing, please stand.
Speaker 1: 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. I'm going to turn this over to our staff.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The staff report be given by Mike Conway, our director of Economic and property development. Mayor Garcia, members of the City Council. This hearing is for an amendment to a sales tax sharing.
Speaker 2: Agreement with K Brothers Toyota, who are located at 2895 Long.
Speaker 4: Beach Boulevard. In 2009 came Cabe began a significant expansion project to their dealership, investing over.
Speaker 2: $6.3 million in both public and private improvements.
Speaker 4: The project improvements.
Speaker 2: Were LEED certified and included an 80 panel solar.
Speaker 3: Photovoltaic voltaic.
Speaker 2: Renewable energy system.
Speaker 4: CABE And the city entered a sales tax sharing agreement in 2011, providing a cap of $1 million.
Speaker 2: In shared sales tax over a 15 year period.
Speaker 4: The analysis of the economic gap between the $6.3 million cost of the expansion and the financial.
Speaker 2: Payback revealed a need to increase the cap.
Speaker 4: In order to achieve economic parity.
Speaker 2: With other sales tax sharing agreements.
Speaker 4: Staff recommends increasing the cap to $3 million or approximately half of the cost of the expansion. This is similar.
Speaker 2: To the agreements with both Worthington, Ford and Hooman Toyota.
Speaker 4: Additionally, since the expansion began in 2009.
Speaker 3: Staff proposes to change the sales tax.
Speaker 4: Base from 2010 to 2009, which would reduce the base from 221000 to 170000. Lastly, the 15 year term is proposed to restart as of January 1st, 2016.
Speaker 3: It's anticipated that over the 15.
Speaker 2: Year term of the agreement.
Speaker 4: Cable generate $10.8 million.
Speaker 2: In sales tax, with Cabe receiving 3 million and the city.
Speaker 4: Receiving approximately 7.8 million. This amended sales tax sharing agreement is intended.
Speaker 2: To ensure that Cabe.
Speaker 4: Can adequately compete in this dynamic market and continue to provide over 100 existing jobs.
Speaker 2: And this concludes my report, and I'm available for questions.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Let me take this over back to the council. Councilman Andrews?
Speaker 7: Yes. Thank you, Mayor. First of all, I'd like to thank Troy Toyota and his support, you know, for the important business here in Long Beach. And it's important business, especially in the sixth District. You know, they have continued to make Long Beach their home. And I am one of the largest, you know, which we find as one of the largest, you know, tax sales revenues in the city of Long Beach. So I find that this is a win win situation. And I want to thank them again. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. There's a motion and a second. Any public comment on the hearing at this time? Casey, no public comment on the hearing. Members, please go ahead and cast your votes. Hearing number two.
Speaker 1: Its conceptual motion carries.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. Next up, we have concert calendar. Item number six has been pulled. So if I can get a motion for three through 13, please. There's a motion and a second. Any public comment on either item three through 13 except for item six, please come forward. | Public Hearing | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing regarding an economic subsidy associated with the First Amendment to Sales Tax Incentive Agreement No. 32583 with Cabe Brothers, a California corporation, pursuant to California Government Code Section 53083; and
Authorize City Manager to execute all documents necessary to implement the First Amendment to Sales Tax Incentive Agreement No. 32583 with Cabe Brothers, a California corporation, for the expanded Toyota dealership located at 2895 Long Beach Boulevard. (District 6) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01052016_15-1189 | Speaker 0: So let me begin by transfer to our clerk. If you can read item number 21, please.
Speaker 1: Report from police recommendation to award a contract to Dell Marketing for the purchase of a body worn camera equipment, software support and cloud storage for a total annual amount not to exceed $210,000 citywide.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I'm going I'm going to turn this over to staff for an update and a report on this item, and then we'll we'll go from there. So, Mr. West.
Speaker 4: Mayor, council members. This is about body cameras. As you know, we've been working on this for approximately a year. There's money in the budget this year to do that. Chief Luna and his management team have been working tirelessly with the Police Officers Association to work out the kinks as we implement this. So tonight I'm going to turn this item over to Chief Luna and his team to go over the purchase of the hardware for the body cameras. And he can talk to us about the number of people participating in this one year pilot program. Chief Luna.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mr. West. And. Real quick, before I get going with my report. Mara Velasco, who is our financial officer, is joining me to help answer any questions that I know many of you probably will have. Deputy Chief Rich Rocky from our patrol bureau and Commander Paula Barron here is we're here as a team to answer any and all questions that you may have. So to start off, thank you to the mayor and City Council for your support and patience through this process. Our goal with the body worn camera program is to help us enhance community trust and underscore law enforcement legitimacy and accountability by using video to better document police interactions with our community . Our objectives for deploying the cameras are officer and citizen accountability. Reduce injuries to our officers, reduce citizen complaints, reduce uses of force, and enhance investigations. And what we've seen with the many other departments that we have studied is that these reductions that we're seeking pretty much do occur and in some large percentage numbers. Moving on, a committee was formed in March of 2014 to consider the use of body worn cameras. Objectives of this committee included to research best practices determine the feasibility of body worn cameras, identify the best product, or what we thought was the best product and vendor for our needs. Research and develop a policy for body worn use and identify infrastructure concerns. Subcommittees were formed to look at body worn camera policy. We looked at over 20 policies that covered body worn cameras, including best practices from the International Association of Chiefs of Police and the Police Executive Research Forum. Another subcommittee was looking at equipment. A separate one was looking at legal issues, financial considerations and technology. So as you could see, the subcommittee looked at really all of the issues across the board. The recommendations of the committee have led us to the development of a pilot program. The details of this pilot program will include camera deployment, which is planned for approximately March of 2016. It will take place in the West Patrol Division. We will deploy between 40 and 50 cameras to include patrol officers and supervisors. The financial impact of this pilot program includes your approval to contract contract with Dell Marketing for $210,000. It is being funded by one time, by a one time appropriation allocated to the police department in FY 15 for strategic technology investments. Additional equipment may be considered and purchased during the pilot program through alternative funding sources. This contract includes cameras, network components, software applications, cloud storage, training of staff and systems support to interface with existing systems. Although we are asking for $210,000 for this pilot program, we realize that full implementation of a body worn camera program will cost more . Additional cost are unknown at this time. Additional areas of concern to us include infrastructure, data storage and personnel to handle potential additional workload. In conclusion, there are three things I want to leave you with. One, the body worn camera is a tool. It's not the silver bullet. One of the things that we have learned throughout our research is body worn cameras are a tool to help us enhance community trust and underscore law enforcement legitimacy and accountability by using video to better document police interactions with our community. Number two, we will not know the full cost of the body worn camera program until the pilot is complete. And three and final. Just a reminder to everybody, because we're getting a lot of questions from many, is that this is a pilot program and we will learn a lot. We will document everything. And there will be many changes and adjustments as we move along. And and we're ready to do that as as the year wears on. So with that mayor and members of the city council, this concludes my report. And I can answer any questions that you may have.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Chief. I will have a couple council questions. So let me go through those and I'll close by making some comments as well. There's a there is a motion in a second. So I may start with the maker of the motion, which is Councilman Richardson.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I want to I want to just say that how proud I am at our city, our mayor, our police department and our peo way for stepping forth and and taking this on, testing this this is utilizing new technology to encourage 21st century policing. I know that these things are concerned, controversial in this day and age, and particularly in our time. I know that this is uncharted territory with respect to the fiscal impact and what the ramifications might be in terms of our public records and things like that. But I'm really proud to say that this wasn't a fight. This was done, you know, in partnership. And it will be it will be treated as such as a partnership. I know that this is I do have just a couple questions. I know that we are starting with about 50 units being deployed. And I think that's a start that's smart just to start small.
Speaker 4: And.
Speaker 2: Really measure it. So my first question is, what are the metrics? What are we going to how are we going to evaluate success or how are we going to track this thing? Councilman Richards. The four primary areas that we're looking at is reducing injuries to officers, reducing citizen complaints and uses of force in all of the research we did for the last year. We were looking at numbers in reductions in some of those areas that ranged between 60% all the way up to 80%. We're looking forward to seeing if that automatically or I should say, as a year goes on, if that will impact our numbers as significantly. That's why we picked the West Division to do this, is because historically that is one of the busier parts of town where these areas, these numbers are typically higher. So we will have the cameras issued to officers that will stay with them. They will not be rotated around. They will stay with these officers throughout the duration of that year. And then we'll be able to analyze what the numbers were in the beginning, to what the numbers were at the end, compare them, analyze them. And that will be part of a report that we will be turning in at the end of the pilot program to see if it was if it's something that we want to continue with, if it's something that we as a city want to invest money into, certainly. So I would I would just ask. So it's I'm glad to hear that there will be a report back to city council before the decision was made to. I see there's two one year extensions but the report will come the city council would it would that come in a two from four paper report? Are you going to come to city council and and give a presentation? I think it would be good if the council just knew whether the pilot will be eliminated or extended and had the opportunity to weigh in before before that decision is made. So how would that work? We know we're going to be putting a report together in what fashion? We haven't discussed it to that length. I have to discuss that with the city manager's office and see how we can best present the information that has been gathered. Another part I have not mentioned is we are working with Cal State, Long Beach, and although we have not solidified exactly how we're going to do this, we are talking to their academics and we're working together to figure out how they can help us with the report in analyzing all the information that I've just put forth. Thank you. I think that makes a lot of sense to work with an academic institution. So I would just I know that. So I know that this is a one year pilot. We only funded it for one year, correct? That's correct. Okay. So one way or the other, it would have to come to city council for funding if we extend the pilot anyway. That's correct. Okay. Thank you so much and good luck. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilman Price. May the second. Any comments?
Speaker 6: I do. Just briefly. Thank you very much, Chief, for the presentation. And this was an item that we had a report on at our public safety meeting, and Commander LeBaron and Deputy Chief Rockey did an excellent job at the presentation at committee. A couple of issues that were raised at committee that I kind of want to follow up on. One, to see if we've made any progress on in terms of identifying these issues in the future. And two, because I think they're their subjects of of general interest in regards to this item is because the costs are unknown. And given our budget projections for the next few years, what efforts are we taking to determine whether grant moneys are available for us to be able to implement this technology on either a broader scale or continue using it at the scale that the pilot is going to encompass?
Speaker 2: We are consistently looking for any funding opportunities that would assist us in this program. Maura, who said it to my left her shop is is consistently looking at them. And what we have to make sure as we move forward is that we're looking for these opportunities. But in a lot of what we've seen thus far, there's a lot of strings attached to them of things that they are mandating us to do if we take that money. So we have to be very cautious as we're proceeding forward to make sure that we're not putting the city in a place that they can't get out of two or three years from now, depending on our financial situation.
Speaker 6: Have we identified? A process regarding when and under what circumstances footage.
Speaker 1: Would be released.
Speaker 6: Under the pilot program.
Speaker 2: Yes, we have. That was part of our policy discussion. And and we have a policy that's going to work through this pilot program. And basically, when you have a criminal investigation, we can't release video when we're dealing with a criminal investigation or an administrative investigation. But what we do, in fact, see is that we will follow the public records request act policy that we have. And if it fits under that criteria, working with the city attorney's office, we will be able to release the video.
Speaker 6: How are we planning on transferring this footage to either the city prosecutor or the district attorney's office in terms of discovery? What is that done through the cloud or disks? How is it done?
Speaker 2: I'm going to let Commander LeBaron answer that that question.
Speaker 3: Councilwoman Price at.
Speaker 2: This point, we're not completely finalized.
Speaker 3: On that, but we are.
Speaker 2: Working with the district.
Speaker 3: Attorney up in Los Angeles, as well as our local district attorney's office, to establish a sharing option.
Speaker 2: And the software allows us to create a license, which we could share that information with them directly through the cloud.
Speaker 6: I know that when Commander LeBaron talked to the Public Safety Committee regarding this, we had some questions about the mounting options. I know that was one of the pluses of this company. Have you had an opportunity, Commander, since our discussion, to find out if we have any other mounting options that would allow for better placement in terms of evidence collection? Depending on the size or the height of the officer.
Speaker 2: Councilwoman Price, member of City Council. We have looked at that. This particular device will be in a sleeve, in a uniform shirt or a vest. We are looking more at a, you know, uniform shirt option with all of the tech technologies. They all have some limitations as to what they will capture and what they will not capture based on the positioning. This one does capture quite a bit of the scene as it is placed on the the uniform shirt.
Speaker 6: Consumer prices that I'm just checking off my notes. Sorry. Have we determined what the fee is going to be for our uploads to the cloud? Any specific figures that we've associated with this for the pilot so that we can start thinking about future costs associated with this technology? Councilmember Price, the quote that was prepared for us includes 43 terabytes of storage space. There was no fee on the monthly basis or per upload basis, but that total was provided to us by the vendor. Okay. Great. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman. Sorry, Councilmember Gringo.
Speaker 5: Thank you, Mayor. My concern is always with pilot projects, is that we should have more than adequate time to do it in one year. And now I understand that it's going to be coming back to the council at the end of one year. Is will we be emboldened? In Boulder. We hold it to this company should we decide that the data we've gotten thus far isn't sufficient to make a decision as to whether we want to go full fledged with this program or not? I would hope that if it goes back to the Council for reconsideration and should we decide not to proceed with their full fledged program, that we can go out again and solicit another vendor? Because my concern is, is that I don't see extending pilot programs to the same entity if the if the data is not there to proceed with a full fledged program. So is that part of the the thinking that we're going to have for the next go around if we were to decide to extend the pilot program to another year?
Speaker 2: We will be doing a full evaluation of how the provider or the company responds to us. After all, we are their customer. Our standards are high. We will have very high expectations of them, and they're expected to perform. And if they don't perform, there's other vendors out there. So they know that. We've we've we've talked to them and they're. They understand that full well.
Speaker 5: Well, I would I would hope that I'm going to be in favor of this. However, I would with the caveat that when it does come back to us in one year, that we take all our options into consideration for additional vendors if necessary.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember Mungo.
Speaker 1: Yes. I just want to a follow up question on one of my colleague's questions. I think that you've answered a lot of what we had, and I appreciate the presentation, Chief. In my experiences when going into a home, there are certain calls where family members are in vulnerable positions. And while the Public Records Act is vitally important. Victim rights are also pretty important to me. And I was hoping that you could communicate a little bit about that process and at what times we have discretion.
Speaker 2: Victim rights are an absolute priority to us. When we're talking about praise or when we release videos, if we're dealing with situations such as crimes involving children, sexual assault and things of that nature. Those are videos that are situations and videos that are very sensitive. We will not be releasing those within the policy that we have. It also talks of situations where, for example, if an officer's in an emergency room when they can record and when they can't. The policy is pretty strict about those type of situations. And again, because this is a pilot program and as we have studied many other departments, we have seen and heard about some of their failures. So we're trying to avoid those pitfalls. And I'm very confident in what the committee came up with and the policy that we've put together that that it's going to be pretty darn good in regards to actually very good in regards to protecting and respecting victims rights.
Speaker 1: I appreciate that, Chief. I appreciate the process that was first followed to get to this point. I know that there are departments all over the country that are looking at this, and I'm really proud of the methods that you went through in ensuring that we had a very high input, high understanding process. So thank you for that, and thank you for sharing the victim's opponents components. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Gonzales.
Speaker 6: Thank you. I first want to commend a police department in our way and all of the community members that were involved in this, because I think it's we've done things a little bit differently, like we often do here in Long Beach is, you know, we were rolling out a program, but we're really involving the community at large . And so I want to thank you all for doing that. I know you worked with CCJ and a few other community groups to get it right. A few questions I have. So I think you answered my question. I'm glad to see that this pilot program will be started in the West Division for those various reasons. As far as are we comparing? I have I mean, I know we've looked at other cities, but is there another city that we're looking at a little bit more closely that has done things that we'd like to do? I don't know if there's a specific component or a specific city.
Speaker 2: Yes, we've we've looked at several cities, including in in California. We looked at Oakland, we looked at Modesto, we looked at San Diego. We've been paying a whole lot of attention to what the cities of Los Angeles or LAPD is doing, L.A. County sheriffs. And again, we've seen some of the things that are working and some of the things that aren't working. And I think that's the advantage. And when I started my report and I thanked all of you for your patience, there were other cities that jumped the gun. They were, I think, more interested in headlines than they were in substance and actually looking at what can solve a problem. And I think a big part of our success thus far is that we've been able to take a step back and and look at what other people are doing and then figure out how to move forward with the best policy. Specifically, when we're talking about the finances as it relates to this, and we learned that from the cities I just named.
Speaker 6: Great. Thank you. And then which officers are who will be selected and at what times? I mean, do we know that at this point or have we given any thought to that?
Speaker 2: It will be assigned to West Division. The afternoon shift, which we call watch three and the officers were randomly selected.
Speaker 6: Read. Thank you. And then last question, because I do work for a technology company is I'm almost certain Dell is just. A compliant. Councilmember Price that it employer counsel Alberto Gonzales. That's correct. Our cloud host.
Speaker 1: Is Amazon Web Services.
Speaker 6: Which is officially approved by the FBI. ABC just complained. Just checking on that. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. And good work.
Speaker 0: Councilmember Andrews.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Mayor. You know, first of all, I think the chief and his staff there, because the fact that, you know, I think I understand that this video recording and the police, you know, action is enriching the county and it's good for the you know, for our police officers also, because I think this is the direction in which, you know, they're going. And we see a lot of improvements in it, you know, not only for our police department, but we have community also. And I still think that we need that, you know, the track, the cars to see how much we you know, we can, you know, to be sure that it is affordable so we can move forward citywide. Because I heard the chiefs said there's a certain amount, but it could cost more. So I think that's why I think it's important that we maybe, you know, we should do some tracking of it to find out, you know, the cost of this because it could be excessive. But, you know, they are intensive public records requested by many cities. They're receiving from body camera footage. So I'd like to make sure that we are ahead of all of this. And I want to thank you guys for the hard work you've done. And I hope it be very successful because I know it will be. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. With that, we are going to go ahead and take a vote. I want to just say a couple brief comments. The first is I want to thank our police department and our Police Officers Association for working on this together. Mean, this has been a project that we've all been working on for probably about a year just to get this pilot project ready. And I want to reinforce something that the chief said is that this is about getting this right. It's getting it it's getting it done the right way. We're going to pilot this in a way that really maximizes the success of the program. And we're really proud of the fact that we're rolling this down a way that's responsible. It's going to ensure that our rank and file employees were a part of the process. In fact, something that wasn't mentioned by the chief. But our police officers union and the police department had multiple committees assigned just to this project that have been meeting over the course of a year to prepare for for this vote and for this rollout of this pilot program. So it's been an extensive conversation. This is a national conversation that's going on. And I want to thank all the rank and file members that participated in this. It's our expectation that we roll out the best the best body camera program in the country, and that we do it in a way that's respectful to the officers that are wearing the cameras. But it also is of protects the public and that we're ensuring that we're being as transparent as possible. And so I think all of that is what's happening as part of this program. So I want to thank the chief and the team for doing that. Let me do public comment on this before we go to a vote.
Speaker 4: Thank you so much, Mr. Mayor. My name's Gary Shelton. I just. I have no objections to this at all. I'm. I'm anticipating that it's going to pass with. With flying colors, and that's a good thing. I wanted to underscore some points that were made in response to questions, particularly from Councilmember Price and Mongo in regard to the well, it boiled down to the problem that this is going to solve. And I think if we look back into recent history, going a year or two back from now, a problem was identified in the county that people didn't really understand how in the world they were going to find out what happened in the event of a police and citizen altercation of some kind. How we would get that information. And so body cameras were to were thought up in the general public as a way that that information would be brought to us. But I think it's really important that we understand that in order to get that information, especially in the context of a criminal case that might be underway, would require either the city's deciding to release the the information, the videos, or through a public records request, which may or may not be a successful way to get that out there. So what it boils down to is that we need as a community to continue our vigilance and no aspersions at all . The police department, I count those folks over there in uniform as friends as well as you folks here at the dais. But it's going to take the continued vigilance of the community to be certain that we know on a in a real time basis what has occurred. When police force is used and the body cam in Los Angeles is going to be used as a tool for the officer to assist him in writing his report. And beyond that, I don't know what they're going to do with it there. And so I wonder if that that wasn't mentioned as a primary use for the body cam footage in Long Beach, but that's what they're planning to do in Los Angeles. So any other information you might be able to impart or elicit from the staff would be so much appreciated. But again, community vigilance is all important. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Please come forward.
Speaker 3: Marvin Cummings in my name. I'm a resident of Long Beach, and I'm sitting in this audience and I say, Who's representing the taxpayers here? What is this, a joke? I can't believe what I'm hearing. I can't believe you're talking about Susie Price. She says, How much are we paying for service to the cloud? And she can't get an answer. He is spending $210,000. What are you getting fired? 50 cameras. You can buy a camera for $300 a piece. Service to the cloud. An average price is $50 a month. Los Angeles is playing well with something that's $85 a month. There's all kinds of prices. $50 a month. Service to the cloud would be a reasonable price for 50 cameras. That would be $30,000 a year for 50 cameras. So now we get $45,000. You're talking money for training. This is a digital camera is nothing to this. It's very simple. The trip we train. The train is it's easy to do. Yeah. You may have some software, you may have some issues, but I think so. You get a year contract on 50 cameras at it. You're talking $4,000 a camera. This is a disgrace. And you and somebody said, what do we need a city council for? Well, where is the where's the city manager on these purchasing? Since when do you write out a check for $210,000 and you don't know what it's going for? I think that what you're going to see I happen to be in the business. I don't I'm not here to sell my product. I came late for the game because frankly, when you people started, we weren't in the business. But what has happened in body cameras is the early people in who did business with certain people who wanted the publicity. What happened to them is other people came in and a better technology had better prices, which is very common in the tech field. Your technology is not so bad. There's better, there's worse. But the pricing is open ended. And to me, the taxpayers are getting raked over the coals here. Your check for $210,000. I call up the clerk's department. There is no there's no details. There's nothing. They don't have any details. It's one package deal and it's poor business. Private business does not operate in this fashion for $210,000. You should know what you're paying for. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Todd Stout. I'm just curious, you know, with all the technology companies in California, why are we doing business at taxes? I mean, you know, that's a heck of a rivalry going here. Texas and California round rocks doing better in some of our. So Toyota figured they had move there. That was one question. And the other question is the the 50 camels will be divided between the different shifts. It's going to be a shift. I don't know. And hopefully it works. I mean, if it can cut down some of the lawsuits that we've had that have been extremely expensive, you know, that would be wonderful to save some money for a change. I just wonder what the previous gentleman said is, is it a good deal? I don't know. I guess after a year we'll know. But I guess that a lot of people might want to see a breakdown on what the costs are. For each part of this deal. And maybe in the future we can do business in California and employ a few more people here. That's all we see on this council is we need places. We always need more jobs. Well, let's do contracts with California. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Surely researching your consultants or group and associates to Chief Luna, I want to take an opportunity to say I have never run into an officer. That threaten me in any way. I've been a resident of Long Beach since 97. When I started working for the homeless, it was your officers who knocked on my motorhome and when I was touring the city and mate to make sure that I was comfortable and letting me know what prospects of danger were in the area. Officers, no matter where they are, you face an affront because of your job. In my religion, the powers that be or ordained of God, what you are doing and your officers has been ordained for the time that we're in. Of course, in every institution, be it religious or non religious, we're going to have people who work for us who may be not be worth their salt or may be shifting in some way or another. But as a personal person standing here today, I think it's important that I say to you and your officers, you have a prayer coming from some people in this city because of the work that you have to do. May you have the grace to be cognizant and aware of those people who are serving under you, who may need some additional training, may need an additional word of encouragement, or may need to maybe step back in their own personal view as they execute their authority in the city. But thank you and thank you, and God bless you for what you're having to do. My former husband was a battalion chief with the city department in Los Angeles. And on his deathbed. His concerns were and all the fire department and police department are two different serving capacities. He was troubled about the internal issues going on in the department of which he served. That was something that the public could not handle. It was things that he could not discuss. But as being a battalion chief, you understand what kind of pressure there is internal. My prayer for you is that you're able to sort out those internal issues so that your officers who serve under you are able to find the grace to come on to their duty every day with a smile and and and an encouragement to serve in their capacity. Thank you for what you're doing. And I might not be there on Saturday, but I am aware and you have many people praying for you and your officers in this city more than who are complaining. Please know that tonight.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Please come forward.
Speaker 2: Amir Garcia, City Councilmembers. My name is Robert McNamara. I'm the CEO of Utility. We were the partner with Dell working on the body worn cameras of swimming. This is approved this evening.
Speaker 3: I just want to let you to come here in person.
Speaker 2: Let you know that our company is committed to your success. We're very thrilled to be working with Chief Luna and his staff, and our company is committed to the.
Speaker 3: Success, and we'll do everything.
Speaker 2: Possible to make it work for the city of Long Beach. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Mr. Goodhew any other public speakers? Kay. Mr. King. He'll be the last speaker then.
Speaker 3: Go ahead. Very good. Hugh Clark, as he. I support the concept. A couple of different issues. In response to the question from Councilwoman Price, the good Lieutenant Barron referenced. We're going to be checking with LA's D.A. or I wasn't sure if it's L.A., L.A. City or L.A. County D.A. if it's the L.A. County D.A., of course, they are now under they're in a situation which Long Beach will be in probably four months from now, i.e. under federal purview. I'd be comfortable getting information from them more so than maybe from it from the city of L.A. second or thirdly, I think it would be a good idea if we can develop it. They have body cameras for each of the council people. And or back in the council, their council chamber. So when they get off and go back there, that the public can keep an eye on them and so forth. In fact, I think there would be no problem funding it. I think the public would fund that instantly and so forth. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Let me. I actually had you know, we didn't have a full list, so I had a short list for public speakers, but I missed. So let me just do I have three people that want to speak to the public and then I'm going to commissions right after that. | Contract | Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFP 15-069 and award a contract to Dell Marketing, L.P., of Round Rock, TX, for the purchase of body worn camera equipment, software support and cloud storage, in an annual amount not to exceed $191,000, and authorize a 10 percent contingency in the amount of $19,100, for a total annual amount not to exceed $210,100 for a period of one year, with the option to renew for two additional one-year periods, at the discretion of the City Manager. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01052016_15-1333 | Speaker 0: Great. Congratulations. I'm going to ask you guys if you want to start making your way down. We're going to take a quick photo of all the new commissioners and the next commission item, which is the which is item 16 for one of the appointments.
Speaker 1: Communication from Councilman Austin and Personnel and Civil Service Committee recommendation to receive a charter commission appointment approved by the Personnel and Civil Service Committee.
Speaker 0: Thank you. The Civil Service Committee went ahead and approved this this item. This is for one of the charter commissions. So it is our new Parks and Recreation commissioner. And I want to welcome her as well. It's Margot Morales who's in the back. Margot is a District seven resident and we're appointing her to her first term as a commissioner of Parks and Rec. She has served in leadership capacities with the Los Angeles County Department of Parks and Rec from 97 to 2005. During her tenure, she worked in various administrative capacities ranging from capital projects, Special Assistant to the Parks and Recreation Director, Public Relations and Contract Administration. Ms.. Morales has had been a commissioner on the Pacific Gateway Workforce Investment Board brings a lot of experience when it comes to parks and parks management and also comes from a part of town that's not oftentimes represented on the parks board. And so I want to, Margot, welcome you to this commission. And with that, there is a motion and a second and there any public comment on this item. CNN. Please go ahead and cast your votes. And then if I can ask the council to come forward and we'll take a photo with the new commissioners. And I think motion carries.
Speaker 1: Comes when price motion carries.
Speaker 2: Okay.
Speaker 1: How are you guys? How are you?
Speaker 3: Are you good?
Speaker 1: Thank you very much for your time.
Speaker 3: Okay.
Speaker 4: Yes. You're going to. You're going to love it.
Speaker 1: Okay. I got to. You got to leave.
Speaker 6: Yes, thank you. We do a lot of things when we introduce our commission.
Speaker 3: All right.
Speaker 0: Let's come over this way.
Speaker 2: Yeah, let's go back behind. Let's go over here.
Speaker 1: Oh, look, it's better.
Speaker 6: Oh, I just had surgery. I thought the men.
Speaker 1: Are going to be okay. Where are we going? Somewhere. Oh, those are. Oh, I'm totally copying.
Speaker 6: Yeah.
Speaker 1: That's right. Thank you, guys. I know, I know. We're going to do something crazy.
Speaker 3: Oh, yes.
Speaker 0: Okay.
Speaker 1: Very talented. Oh, yeah.
Speaker 3: Oh, yeah.
Speaker 4: Oh, that's great. I thought I.
Speaker 0: Okay. We are doing management had a request to take to take 15 and then the Edison an item. So we're taking a 15. | Appointment | Recommendation to receive Charter Commission appointment approved by the Personnel and Civil Service Committee pursuant to Section 509 of the City Charter and Section 2.03.065 of the Long Beach Municipal Code. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01052016_16-0014 | Speaker 1: Report from City Manager Recommendation to receive and file a presentation and discussion by Southern California Edison detailing the cause of the July 15th and July 30th power outages and steps taken to address prevent future outages of a similar nature citywide.
Speaker 0: Mr. West.
Speaker 4: Yes, Mayor. Councilmembers were all aware that we had some severe power outages recently in the city of Long Beach. Southern California Edison is here to address that with us tonight with some of their senior leadership. I'm going to have deputy city manager Arturo Sanchez give a quick introduction and then we'll give it over to Southern California Edison . Arturo. Thank you. Good evening, Mayor Garcia and members of the city council. On September 8th, the City Council received a brief report from city staff regarding the outages that occurred in summer. At during that report, Edison staff were present and the city council specifically asked them to return to provide an update and to present the results of an independent and an internal investigation once they were completed. Those two investigations were completed in November, and this is the first opportunity that Southern California Edison has had to return to provide that report. Providing us the information tonight will be Dietrich, the senior vice president of Transmission and Distribution, Cedric.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Members of the City Council for the opportunity to speak with you this evening. Just first say that we take our responsibility to provide safe, reliable, affordable electric service very, very seriously and are deeply disappointed in our performance that led to these outages back in the July timeframe. I hold myself personally responsible and accountable for what occurred there, and we are taking the appropriate measures within our organization to make sure that these things don't occur. And I wanted to talk about those tonight in the form of just a brief presentation about the two reports that we commissioned to to look into this one was an internal investigation led by our own staff and have a traditional root cause investigation that involved the internal and external analysis and evaluations. Look at inspections and records, number of interviews and use to establish root cause analysis methodology to reach a cause for for the for the Long Beach outages. Second to that, we commissioned independently a company that has specific expertize and utility risk assessment operations and emergency management and that would be Davey's Consulting from Washington, DC to come in and take a look at independently both our analysis of the cause of the outages as well as our response to the outages, our response to the incidences which created the disruptions here within the city of Long Beach. We did take a very thorough look at that. And I just want to talk about the causes and gaps in recommended actions that have come out of each one of those reports and then certainly make myself available to answer any questions that the Council may have. As far as our internal investigation. What we identified as the cause of the Long Beach outages was improper operation and insufficient management oversight of the Long Beach network system. While the system had been very reliable since the mid 1950s, we did see it and in hindsight looking at it that there were a few mis operations and missed performances that caused the sequence of events that led to the outages that occurred July 15th and July 30th. Specific gaps that we identified that we have since addressed or are addressing is a lack of ownership of the responsibility for observing the reliability of the network by a single entity within our operation. We have now established that within our Long Beach district and our our Long Beach District Manager is the individual who's responsible for that within our company. We also have identified the need for more thorough operation protocols for operating the network. As we get got into the situation of identifying the problem and restoring the problem. And we recognize that we didn't have the most efficient and appropriate procedures for being able to bring the network back in the most timely manner. We also identified that some of our staff had not received recent training while they were experienced and capable, they had not received recent training on some of the unique natures of the equipment and the equipment alignments that are important related to the Long Beach Network. And we are addressing that. Yet also some of we did identify that by by looking at other municipalities and utilities that that operate networks, that some networks and utilities had looked at advances as far as the sophisticated controls and modeling that were available and have been since developed to allow us to have a better understanding and a better handling on exactly the conditions of the network, on the days in question, as well as all other days. So as far as actions and recommendations from our own report, I mentioned that we've we've established a network owner. We have gone through also and improve the mapping of all of our network equipment, our cabling. We found that that's very important also that over time we had made some slight changes to that and our mapping was not up to speed with exactly what the conditions were in the field. We have enhanced the automation of the network equipment for this equipment to now communicate with us remotely and inform us of the status. And we have a dedicated staff now looking at the status of the network. Every day we've developed that network modeling capability. So in real time, our engineers can look at, as things occur on the network, what the power flows are and what the capacity issues may be to make sure that we are not approaching any limits or any challenges associated with the network. We have improve our detailed inspections and equipment maintenance. We also, as a result of some of the vault lids becoming dislodged due to due to over pressurization events in the in the in the vaults. We did tether the vault lids here in downtown Long Beach on the on the Long Beach downtown network enclosures. We're in the process of we've already improved and implemented some, but we continue to improve training for our technicians, operators and engineers and also enhance our operational controls and measures for the way that we operate the network. The Davey's Consulting Report looked at our cause analysis, but also, as I mentioned, looked independently at both our response to the event as well as our preparation for and our what should have been our ability to ability to prevent the event. And in summary, their conclusion was that insufficient execution of the incident response and management processes for the network and the network outages were the cause of our issues there. There. While their report supported our conclusions, it also pointed out some additional measures that we continue to look at. One of that. One of the things. We identified and we appreciate the feedback from the city staff and the city officials was insufficient communication and interaction upfront with critical stakeholders. We are making improvements to ensure that we do have a more robust response to situations like this, whether they were to occur within Long Beach or within other parts of our service territory. I've already mentioned the lack of federal protocols in the operation of the network. We were able to reach out to some of these other utilities and we had in fact experienced individuals as part of this Davey's consulting report who had been involved in other network issues throughout the country, come in and provide us some of their lessons learned and learnings from some of the shortcomings that they had experienced. We did have a delayed understanding of the incident complexity. Some of that goes to the way our systems reported out to us, the condition here in the in the city that night of July 15th. We have addressed that so that we have a clear understanding of the complexity of the incident. And we did recognize that this issue for us was somewhat unique, where traditionally we had seen more widespread problems across multiple districts or across multiple areas. This was a very concentrated issue within a specific part of our service territory that has unique equipment and unique operating characteristics and required more engineering analysis and understanding of exactly what the cause was. And that's the part of our branch, our incident command system that was not yet fully mature. But we are using again the learnings from this incident to make sure that we build that into our incident command system and into our response to future events. So we have also completed most of the actions and recommendations coming from the Davey's Consulting Report. We do have a few that we continue to work on. One is enhancing our incident response and stakeholder communication. Again, your feedback to us has been very valuable here. We recognize our shortcomings there, social media, particularly in our ability to work very interactively with you and your first responders in real time to share information, and then also improving our local agency collaboration. We recognize the impact we had on first responders and upon a number of not just the businesses and the customers and folks in the Long Beach area, but all the people that support day to day work and life here in downtown Long Beach and making sure that we are interfacing appropriately with all of those local agencies. So in conclusion, I just want to reiterate that we're deeply disappointed. We apologize. And we do accept full responsibility for the extent and duration of the outages. We're committed to providing that safe, reliable and affordable power to our customers. We take that responsibility very seriously and we take your feedback and improvement recommendations very seriously. Also, we are focusing on completing all of our immediate actions. We have completed many of them as well as the follow up and subsequent corrective actions. We continue to study the Davey's report and some of the recommendations contained therein. We have learned quite a bit from being able to to use some of their experts who had experience in the city of New York and some of the other major metropolitan areas with problems that they've experienced on their network. Also, one bullet that I wanted to point out is this partnering with our Electric Power Research Institute. While that may sound a little subtle, what I want to point out there is that there are a number of municipalities across the country that have these, what I'll call a smaller network configuration. And there have been problems on those networks. We certainly don't use that as any kind of justification for the problem here. But we're able to take a look at the corrective action plans that they put together as a result of their issues and compare ours to theirs and make sure that ours is as robust and appropriate in making sure that we address all the appropriate problems and issues that that we encountered here. We continue to improve our restoration protocols for critical and significant events and provide ongoing training to to our staff to make sure that that they're able to interact effectively, not just with customers. But, as I mentioned, with with all the local agencies, we will work to complete the balance of the corrective actions. And then we'll also do an effectiveness review six months from now to ensure that these actions have all been completed effectively and that the internalization of these actions has been built into our system. So, again, apologize for the for the inconvenience of the outages. We do take full responsibility and it is certainly our issue to address. And with that, I'll pause and see if there's any questions from members of the city council.
Speaker 0: Thank you and thank you. I want a couple of comments and then I have a motion in a second to receive and file. And if there's council questions or comments, we'll take those as well. Let me just first just begin by obviously, you know, I want to and I mentioned this already to the to to the president . Obviously, we're grateful that you guys stepped up and admitted full responsibility. I think that's most important. It was an incredibly difficult event for the city to go through. And I and we can't forget or gloss over the fact that it affected a lot of people, both their income, their health, their livelihood. It affected our operations. It was a financial impact to the city, to businesses, to conventions. And most importantly, it took a toll on people's emotionally to have to not have power for days and days and days. And not having information is difficult, especially for seniors. For those that need special support or have special needs. And we've talked about all of that. And so the fact that you guys took that responsibility, I think is important. It doesn't change the fact that what we went through was was difficult and not something that we ever expect to go through again or want to. We do appreciate that. I know that we've been able to resolve some of our financial questions with the city. And so I think that is a positive step in the right direction where I think we still have some challenges. And I think you've begun to address some of those and I've mentioned these is all of these next steps I think are expected, and we're we're expecting those to happen. You know, two things that I think are important is one, I think your SC is aware that there is a community confidence breakdown. I mean, there is a lack of confidence, I think both from myself, personally, the body, but the community. And I think the community needs to rebuild that trust over time. It's not going to happen overnight. And I think that it's incumbent upon Edison to go out into the community and. Communicate, engage, be present at community functions. And so I think that presence needs to increase. I think we need to be able to answer questions. We get questions all the time from the community about what's happening or what the next step is. And, you know, as you know, we're not the utility. And so we try to answer what we can. But I think you guys having a presence in the community is really important. And I will again double down on what I mentioned before, which is the communication piece, which I thought was a complete failure during the crisis, needs to be strengthened. And it sounds like you're aware of that. You know, the fact that I think myself and others were for some folks, the main form of getting information through through Twitter or through email is not acceptable. You know, that's something that's your guys job to get information out to everybody. And we should be there to provide support, to provide emergency response. But we don't know what's happening every single minute. And I think and so I'm glad to hear that that's something you guys are addressing. Absolutely. So I do appreciate that. And I think that that's a really important step. The communication and the community confidence building are two things that are really important moving forward. And I'll just add also that I think these two reports are important, and I appreciate the kind of introspection that's happened in the company. Long Beach is your largest client. So we know we this is a relationship that is critical for our both sides. And I think that we we're also as you know, we expect the last staff the the the PSC report should be out, from what I understand, in the next couple of months, first part of this year. Mr. West or Mr. Sanchez, do we know when that will be out?
Speaker 4: We don't have a date, but we are expecting it to, you know, hopefully in the next couple of months.
Speaker 0: Yeah. I mean, I've been it's been communicated to me that it would be the first part of this year. And so I think we expect that. And I think it's important to to have all the pieces of both the internal review and the state review to put together a full picture of kind of what happened and then what the appropriate response is. And so thank you for coming and giving this report to the council and answering the tough questions. And I think there will be additional questions once we get the PSC report as well. And it's important to answer those honestly with the public and to be out there. And so we await that. There is a let me let me get the most in and the second for the and file, which is Councilwoman Gonzales and Councilman Andrews. And turn this over to Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 6: Great. So I, too, want to thank you all for being here as well. I know it was a tough time for us in the summer, and I just really do appreciate the fact that you're here. You're apologizing not to this body, but just to the public, because we did have to answer to them quite frequently. But I will I don't intend to belabor the issue, but I will. It's communication, communication, communication as much as possible. And I think we've all learned a lesson in that. You know, we learn from these instances crisis is are never expected. But it's certainly something that we we just learn from move on and then we go from there and hopefully better the process. And so I will continue to say that now I in speaking with your government relations team who is great, I know that they had talked about additional precautions, especially for our seniors or those with special needs, finding a list to identify where they're at. So there's not you know, I know while we're going through this issue, it was, you know, contacting public safety, letting them know who was where. And so do we have are you currently conducting like an identification process to know where people are, especially those with higher risk health needs
Speaker 2: ? Yes, ma'am. We are we do keep a list of folks that have medical necessity for electrical power. And we continue to look at that process and ways that we can improve that process. We are also looking at better ways that we can, in each of our municipalities, identify senior centers and other places that may be high priority items for us or high priority locations as far as being able to provide some communication. So that was some of the recommendations coming from the Davey's report. And we're absolutely looking at them great.
Speaker 6: Especially those that are in the high rise buildings. It's hard to get down for them or, you know, they have elevator access, no elevator access after the power's out. So that's great to hear. And then lastly, I know many of our residents, you know, the first district, I think was hit the hardest, I'm sure is. You know, and as far as customer service, I know there were a few residents that contacted our office specifically about contacting customer service, and they were my neighbors who lived in my building. We were all affected, but they had mentioned that they, the customer service did not you know, they talked about their power outage and customer service did not identify them as being a power outage resident. And so frustrated quite a few residents in getting their reimbursements or getting their food checks for food that had been spoiled, especially for some seniors. So I know some of them had been pretty swift and quick, but there were others that didn't get that. So I don't know how that information is being relayed to your customer service, but I would just leave that as another point to think about, because we did get a few comments related to that. Otherwise, again, I want to thank you for being here. I appreciate it.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember. Councilman Andrews.
Speaker 7: Yes, thank you. I also would like to commend you and your crew for coming in tonight and accepting this responsibility. But I don't think we need to be labor on, you know, what is happening and how we're going to take care of it. Because you guys came up here to let us know that you are taking a very serious, you know, look at this. And I really believe that whatever has happened, these things will be able to be solved in the future. And I don't know why it was so prevalent in my district because I never got one call. So evidently you guys must be looking over the six district because we didn't get any outage. So could be God, it could be your group. But I want to thank you for it and just keep up the good work, all the other complaints that's on them. I'm not complaining. I just want to thank you guys. Look.
Speaker 2: I'm not touching anyone. All right.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmembers Hooper.
Speaker 2: Thank you. And I'd like to thank you for the report tonight and being here. And I find the report incredibly.
Speaker 4: Revealing and very useful.
Speaker 2: And I'll just speak about downtown for now. I think the common thinking was there was a hardware issue or an old city. It's an old network. There were probably some hardware issues involved. But your analysis here says, no, it's human error, it's management processes. So to me, that's I don't think we can guarantee it's kind of a wakeup call that that this was the cause, not something else. But what worries me about that is that's the type of thing that can devolve over the years. You can get a system in place now, and if management changes and whatnot, you're back to square one. So I'm a little concerned about that. Secondly, and I'm kind of I'd like to be a forward thinking person and we have a new civic center going in here. The first thing I believe we need to get straight is that we're going to have power to that civic center. And considering you're you're not dealing with an existing structure anymore, is there any process, are there any processes in place or any kind of, you know, reassurances you can give us that you're going back to square one and trying to work on the network to supply power to the whole area? Yeah. Thank you for your question. We have we were already looking at the new civic center and we have several considerations that we're looking at. But we currently don't see any issue with with being able to provide safe, reliable, affordable service to the to the new civic center. You know, that that facility can be both on the network as well as off the network. And that's one of the things that we're looking at. And we will be talking with with the appropriate members of the city staff about our current plans right now would be to not have it on the network. But again, that's something that we can be speaking with the city staff about. But we we have no particular loading issues on the network. We don't have any particular overload issues here in the Long Beach area. Again, it was human mistakes that occurred over time that led to the outages. So it's our commitment to make sure that those things don't occur again.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman. Richard. I'm sorry, customer. You all done? Okay.
Speaker 2: Councilman Richardson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And no pun intended, but I'm still in the dark on the last. Last time you came. I asked about that lay down yard just along the 17, and it was supposed to be temporary, but it's going like four years. And you guys said you would get back to us and let us know what the status is or how long it's going to be there. So I still want to know that. And then and in case you didn't know, there's a power outage right now in North Long Beach. We are very well aware of all the outages that occur in Long Beach and are prepared to talk about those. I'll also share with you that tonight we are seeing issues across our system. Okay. Right now we've got about 10,000 of our 5 million customers out, primarily due to the wind and rain associated with the storm. But we are very closely monitoring all those outages and including the Long Beach outages. So you think we can maybe have a conversation about that later on? Yes, sir, we will. We will absolutely follow up with you. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Mangum.
Speaker 1: Thank you for being here. Over the last several weeks, I've had discussions with the new representative, that is our government relations individual from Southern California Edison. And as you said, there have been communication challenges. Our office has provided opportunities for Southern California Edison to participate in community events. I think the initial response from the staff member was, I'll get you information to hand out. And I think that that's not our expectation. I think we were very clear about that. It's been a week and we'd very much like to hear a positive response that you'll be participating in the upcoming community events in February. It's critical that our community has that face to face contact that the mayor and I feel very strongly about. And so our office will follow up again tomorrow and we hope to hear that positive response, because this is this is an opportunity we're providing the constituents, all of them in a gathered area for you. We're doing a direct mailing to the community about the event and what I had expected to hear from a company that has turned their their thinking around would have been. Absolutely. Yes. Thank you so much for bringing constituents together. Let us seize this opportunity to engage with the community. So I look forward to hearing from you tomorrow.
Speaker 2: Okay. Thank you for your feedback.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Seeing no other council questions at this time. Public comment, please. Thank you. If you're public comment, please come forward.
Speaker 3: Sure.
Speaker 2: No, I think.
Speaker 3: Larry. Good. You click as the address. Let me begin with a positive comment. And quite frankly, it's the only positive, constructive observation I've had in dealing with community efforts in the Southern California Edison. And that was back in 1995 when a community effort went forward to update and to put in complete operation the six flagpoles that line the Marine Stadium. And it was a great community effort between the residents growing community and the ship Chandlers and so forth. And Southern California Edison stepped up and provided the one of their poles. They no longer use Metropoles, which is the base we have for our flagpole in the at the Rowing Center. But beyond that, the conduct of Southern California Edison, in my view, has been directly repugnant to what a good corporation should be. For almost ten years now, we've been trying to get information relative to what was originally just a small electrical pad in a light in Marina Vista Park, which the Planning Commission recognizes were ugly and had to get out of there. And for the past eight years have been trying to get a straight answer out of the corporate office, and they've essentially given the community the little finger they need to that $82 billion corporation of what or whatever it is, needs to get their act together and haul ass out of that park and find an appropriate place to put that equipment. I think there's been an unauthorized or at least the community wasn't aware of it. It looks if you go there now looking and based upon the information that City Light and Power and other contractors have said, it looks as if somebody is trying to establish a sister city relationship with Schenectady. There's so much power in there and we can't get a straight answer at a Southern California Edison that needs to be moved. And it's particularly important for two reasons. Number one, it's right in the middle of a search path for Emerson Army. But number two, we need that space. There will be the open channel within a year created and so us. So they need to find a location of their own. One other thing they can confirm or deny, but it was my understanding from the former resident association in Belmont Shore had indicated that Southern California Edison was fined the largest fine in the state for lying about customer falsifying customer service reports as a result. So so their higher management could get bigger bonuses. I don't know if that's true, but I'd like them to tell us tonight. Thank you. That's true. Thank you. And also find a place.
Speaker 0: At times atmosphere. Can you.
Speaker 3: Find a place to put that transformer.
Speaker 0: Next speaker?
Speaker 4: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Pardon me. It's Gary Shelton again. Appreciate the report we received from Mr. Dietrich. I appreciate the pointed questions from my council member, Lena Gonzales. Thank you for that very much. The item is talking about the root cause, and we heard what the root cause is. And so I really appreciate what Council Member Supernova had to say because it dovetailed with what I was thinking all along and listening for, but did not hear in Mr. Dietrich's report, which. Well, I'll start by saying maybe we've had the same. Maybe you've had the experience I've had, particularly as a kid years ago, where if the waffle iron was on and the microwave was on, I wasn't a kid when we had microwaves, but the waffle iron in, let's say the stove was on and somebody pushed down the toaster and the circuit would blow. Now, that was the cause of the circuit blowing. The root cause, I suppose we could say, was improper operation and management of the system. But I think what you're going to be asked tomorrow by your constituents is what happened? And we didn't hear that. Did something melt? Did something overheat? Did something cause gases to blow up? I live about a hundred feet from where the first manhole cover flew in the air and was leaving under yellow tape to go to your city meeting with police, telling us, watch out, you got to go that way. There's other manhole covers going up into the air. Something was going on besides improper operation and management of the system. I came here tonight and sat through a lot of meeting, hoping to hear what that was. If it was a simple connection that twisted, or if it was something that that melted or if it was something that snapped. I think we deserve to know that also. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Alex. Speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Tom Stout I'm just curious. Business Journal has all this development that's going on down here, which is a lot, and it's going to put a lot of stress on the system that we have. If it did, the system couldn't support what we have, and I don't buy that at all. Management. I mean, a lot of it is, you know, there's in it management every place, even in this city. So the bottom line is, if we can't support the infrastructure for the what we have in the city now, when you add hundreds, if not thousands of new drawers by having more rooms, condos and such. How are you going to assure us that you're not going to continue to overload the system? I mean, I happened to be out of town when it went out in Wrigley, so that didn't really affect me. Nothing was damaged or everything worked fine when I returned. But, you know, these continued out is that there's more to do than just bad management. That's a part of it. But, you know, lack of training, poor quality of workmanship, all have been pointed out in various ways. But I'm really concerned that all this development is going to overload a system that's not adequate already. How's that going to be addressed? It wasn't mentioned that any of the meetings about City Hall or the development, it's you know, nobody seemed to really be concerned. But if you were in one of the parts of town that has a power failure and I don't remember any sitting having has many power failures as long each day . Maybe there are, but there sure not any around here that we know of. So I'm concerned and I think a lot of people are. What's going to happen when all this other stuff comes online? We need some answers.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Any other public comment on this item? Okay. Seeing seeing none. And again, this is a continuing conversation and certainly not the end of this conversation. I know that staff has been in a lot of contact with the team and that continues. And and Mr. West, I expect that when the PUC report comes out, you would come back to counsel and that we'd get a presentation on that as well. Okay. Thank you. There's a motion and a second on this. Please cast your vote to receive and file.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next item, please.
Speaker 1: Item 18 recommendation from Economic and Property Development and recommendation to execute a supplemental agreement to management agreement with SMG for the completion of certain capital improvement projects for the sea side way, pedestrian bridge and connections at the Long Beach Convention and Entertainment Center, located at 300 East Ocean Boulevard, District two. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to receive and file a presentation and discussion by Southern California Edison detailing the cause of the
July 15, 2015 and July 30, 2015 power outages and steps taken to address/prevent future outages of a similar nature. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_01052016_16-0023 | Speaker 1: Two ordinances. Item 22. Communication from City Attorney Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code relating to procurement during a proclaimed emergency or disaster. Read the first time and lead over for the next regular meeting of the City Council for Final Reading Citywide.
Speaker 0: It's a motion. There's a motion and a second. Any public comment?
Speaker 4: Mayor I'm sorry. Just real quickly on this motion, we have two amendments on the floor. We would like to make sure those are found a page three, line 27 and page four, lines three.
Speaker 2: Four, five and.
Speaker 4: Six. And what we have done is we have made changes inserting. I'm sorry, I'm pointing in here. Inserting on page three after the word bids or proposals to add flexibility. And on page four, we are changing the term bids to responses so that it increases the flexibility for the compliance with the FEMA regulations. And with those changes, we would ask for approval on first reading.
Speaker 0: With. Long as changes are accepted, we have a motion and a second. Vice Mayor. The changes are okay with you on that motion and Councilman Andrews okay with you. Any public comment? Members, please cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Councilmember Richardson. Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. I think now we have no we we're done with the regular agenda. So let me let's go ahead and go to announcements and also. Yeah. Me do announcements first. So I'll start. I just want to make sure I invite everyone to this. | Ordinance | Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by adding Chapter 2.85 relating to procurement during a proclaimed emergency or disaster, read and adopted as read. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12222015_15-1340 | Speaker 1: Communication from Councilmember Richardson, Vice Mayor Lowenthal, Councilwoman Price, Councilman and Con Councilman Austin recommendation to consider naming the new North Branch Library, the Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library, and refer this item to the Housing and Neighborhood Committee for consideration.
Speaker 0: Thank you. With that, I'm to turn this over to Councilmember Rex Richardson.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm honored to make this presentation tonight of this historic proposal. Before I begin, I want to thank our fellow co-sponsors for their support, Vice Mayor Lowenthal, Councilwoman Price and Councilman Austin. I believe and predict that north long beaches best days are ahead of it. I also believe that the best way to predict the future is to create it. The youth of our community represents the future of our community, and I believe we should do everything we can to inspire and empower the next generation. That means making sure the investments we make into the physical environment of our community, not just add to the esthetics and property value of a neighborhood, but also connect with and inspire the next generation.
Speaker 0: Councilman Richardson, sorry about this. I have to make this announcement because it's due to another item. And I don't want those folks having to be here if they don't have to be. Item 16 has been an item 16 has been withdrawn. So those who are wondering about that item. It's actually coming back at a later time. But I just wanted to make sure some of the folks knew that. And so back to the councilmember. Thanks. Sorry about that.
Speaker 3: So the youth of our community represents the future of our community. And I believe that we should do everything we can to inspire, empower the next generation. And that means making sure the investments we make into the physical environment of our community, not just add to the esthetics and property value of a neighborhood, but also connect with us and inspire that next generation. I believe libraries should inspire the next generation. Our new state of the Art North Library is an opportunity to inspire, and I believe that we can and should utilize this library as a means to inspire young people to retire and to go further. So before I get into the details of my proposal, I think it's appropriate to help walk through walk the public through how we got here. Over the past few months, I've had the opportunity to engage with students from Jordan High School about the new library. A concept has come from those initial conversations that I believe is absolutely amazing. The concept is to name the new North, the new North Neighborhood Library in honor of First Lady of the United States, Michelle Obama. After the initial concept from one group of students, we shared this idea with staff from Hamilton Middle School and students from Hamilton Hamilton Middle School, as well as youth from Andy. Andy Street Community Association. The Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library sparked that same enthusiasm and excitement among those young people. Then we took the next step of sharing this idea with every neighborhood association president in District nine to get their input and feedback. And of the ten presidents we spoke with, all ten not only supported the idea, but publicly added their names to the list of co-sponsors. We've tried over the past few years to work closely with our school district leaders, so we took the additional step of sharing this concept with school board member Megan Kerr, who also enthusiastically supported this idea. And finally, knowing that this library has taken many years to come to fruition, we took the additional step of reaching out to the last two generations of District nine member council members about the idea, and former council member Steve Neal added his support to the idea. So given the broad level of support in the community, it's made sense to take the next step of evaluating what the First Lady stands for and how that aligns with the North Long Beach neighborhood. First Lady Michelle Obama is a mother, wife, lawyer, writer, an amazing first lady. She has become a role model for women and an advocate on poverty, awareness, education, veterans issues and healthy living a product of public schools. Michelle Robinson studies sociology and African-American studies at Princeton University. After graduating from Harvard Law in 1988, she joined the Chicago law firm Sidney in Austin, where she later, later met Barack Obama, who would become president of United States. After a few years, Ms.. Obama decided her true calling was working with people to serve their communities and their neighbors. She served as an Assistant Commissioner of Planning and Development in Chicago City Hall before becoming the founding executive director of the Chicago Chapter of Public Allies and AmeriCorps program that prepares you for public service. In 1996, Ms.. Obama joined the University of Chicago with a vision of bringing campus and community together. As Associate Dean of Student Services, she developed the university's first community service program, and under her leadership as vice president of community and external affairs, volunteerism skyrocketed. Ms.. Obama continues her efforts to support and inspire young people during her time as first lady. She has four main initiatives as First Lady that very closely aligned with the North Long Beach community. The first is joining forces. In 2011, Mrs. Obama and Dr. Jill Biden came together to launch Joining Forces, a nationwide initiative calling all Americans to rally around service members, veterans and their families in support them through wellness, education and employment opportunities. Joining Forces works hand in hand with the public and private sector to ensure that servicemembers, veterans and their families have the tools they need to succeed throughout their lives. And as you may know, North Long Beach has been hosting our Veterans Day Parade and vet fest for many years. The play parade runs along Atlantic Avenue in the and next year, the march, we will march right in front of our new, new library. Her focus is her focus on the needs of. Veterans very nicely aligned with our community. The second is let's move in 2010. Ms.. Obama launched Let's Move, bringing together community leaders, educators, medical professionals, parents and others in a nationwide effort to solve the epidemic of childhood obesity within a generation. In alignment with this initiative, the City of Long Beach is proud to be a Let's Move city as we passed the resolution for this initiative in October of 2010. Also in alignment for the past four years, North Long Beach Community has been deemed a healthy eating, active living healing zone through support through the through support that the Health Department received from Kaiser Permanente and the Coalition for Healthy North Long Beach. The work of the heals on the Coalition has made strides in creating a healthier environment for all ninth District residents. The First Lady's third initiative that closely aligns to our new library is the Reach Higher Initiative in 2014. Ms.. Obama reached launched the Retire Initiative, an effort to inspire young people across the nation to take charge of their future by completing their education past high school, whether at a at a professional training program, a community college or a university. It aims to ensure all students understand what they need to do to complete their education by encouraging academic planning, summer learning opportunities in school and afterschool. Extracurricular enrichment. The same type of enrichment that will be provided by our North Neighborhood Library. The fourth and final initiative is called Let Girls Learn. In 2015, the Let Girls Learn initiative was launched, and it's a U.S. government wide initiative to help girls around the world to stay in school and stay involved. This this global initiative is also well, well aligned with the purpose of our library. So I like to play take a moment to play a video that highlights the first lady's work on education and her commitment to helping our young people succeed.
Speaker 1: There is nothing more important to this nation's future than investing in our young people. And education is at the top of the priority list. Now we know that as adults, we know that as administrators. Now we have to put our efforts where our knowledge is, and we have to make sure that young people understand that reality as well.
Speaker 4: I'm going to get there. I am working hard every day.
Speaker 5: I'm the future and I am determined.
Speaker 4: It may be hard.
Speaker 6: At times, but I have goals.
Speaker 4: And dreams.
Speaker 5: And work to do.
Speaker 0: I'm going to get there.
Speaker 7: I believe in me.
Speaker 0: I believe in me. And I'm on my way.
Speaker 4: I'm on my way. I believe in me.
Speaker 3: We are the class of 2020.
Speaker 1: And the class.
Speaker 4: Of 2020.
Speaker 0: I am the class of 2020.
Speaker 4: I am the class of 2020. We are the.
Speaker 6: Class of 2020.
Speaker 1: The president's North Star goal is that by the year 2020, we want to make the United States the leader in college graduation.
Speaker 4: Rates around the world.
Speaker 0: We're trying our best to become the future.
Speaker 3: Of America or even.
Speaker 0: The future of the world.
Speaker 8: It will completely erase the stigma that our generation is lazy and is afraid of work.
Speaker 1: I just want a better life. I want to better myself and basically be the best I can be. I want young people to understand that the challenges and trials and tribulations they face are not weaknesses, but they are things that.
Speaker 4: Can make them stronger and.
Speaker 1: More competent and more able to deal with the challenges of getting an education.
Speaker 4: Going forward.
Speaker 1: No one is born smart. You become smart through hard work.
Speaker 8: If I'm a doctor and you don't call me Dr. Harvey, you know exactly how much, how hard I worked and what I've achieved.
Speaker 4: And I'm just like this.
Speaker 6: One little person.
Speaker 4: In this big world, and I have to be different. And how do you want a career or a job? When you get older, you have to put 100% into your life now before you turn into an adult.
Speaker 1: We want our young people to be prepared for the jobs of the future. And as I've said, if most of those jobs in the year 2020 are going to require an education beyond high school, then we have to inform students of that and do whatever it takes to prepare them so that they can grow up and raise families of their own and be successful and pursue their dreams. And that's what I want to spend my time doing for these next several years and beyond. And that's why the North Star goal is important. We don't have a.
Speaker 4: Choice but to achieve this goal. It's a tough one, but nothing good comes.
Speaker 1: Easy, so we don't have a choice. We have to reach that North Star.
Speaker 3: Thank you. I know that there were some technical issues, but I think you guys get the gist of it. So. Now, I think it's important that we consider the context for this proposal. First, consider that we're in a period of time where the largest retailer in the world, Amazon, has no inventory. Uber, the world's largest taxi company, has no vehicles. Facebook, the world's most popular media owner, creates no content. And Airbnb, the world's largest accommodation provider, owns no real estate. Is it smart to say that the traditional role of libraries will change as well? This also means reevaluating the purpose of institutions like libraries simply from depositories, from books to hubs for community community resources with a much broader focus from community and life skills learning to career development and job search. So but by changing the way we think about libraries, we should also think about the way we intentionally connect our environment to the next generation. And I believe we can do a better job of ensuring our communities can connect with and identify with our local facilities and infrastructure and landmarks. Here is a list of 19 public institutions in North Long Beach. Zip Code 90805 listed our seven parks, 11 schools and one neighborhood library. When you break down how these North Long Beach institutions are named, only 11% of them are named after women. Two are 19. Only 11% of them are named after people of color. Two out of 19. And of those institutions named after individuals, 63 are named after 63% are named after national figures. All of these figures have tremendous stories and legacies. Can you honestly say that our city has done the best job we think we can of making sure our youth are connected with and inspired by the facilities we dedicate? Now let's compare this to some of our demographics here in the north Long Beach area. According to the latest data of the American Community Survey, approximately 30% of our population are youth. 27,924. And by both population count and percentage, we are the largest and youngest zip code within this city. And our youth are extremely diverse. Most diverse. Most notably, 90% of our youth age under 18. And under our youth of color. What does that mean for our future when 93% of our youth can only connect or identify with eight with 11% of the facilities in their community? This past weekend, I went and watched Star Wars and I noticed on the Star Wars movie how they intentionally diversify the lead roles in their cast. Women lead an African-American first mate and a Latino pilot. And if Disney can get it, I think we should get. Should we be surprised if we don't see the kind of community ownership we'd like to see and have is if we don't see the kind of community ownership we'd like to see out of our young people. And if we have issues with vandalism and graffiti. There's a study that came out in 2005 called Creating Culturally Responsive Schools that studies that states cultural. Cultural disconnect often leads to poor self-concept, discipline, problems in poor academic outcomes for ethnic minorities. While the library is not a school, I think the sentiment it expresses remains true for youth in North Long Beach. So we're in a moment in time in North Long Beach called the Uptown Renaissance. This is a period where our residents are more engaged than ever while we're making significant investments in our infrastructure parks, schools, public institutions. But we missed the mark. If we don't inspire the next generation and create a new sense of pride in our community. Sometimes this means thinking differently, considering new approaches, and having the courage to stand up to the forces who resist change. According to the 2010 census, 70% of 90805 residents have moved to nine out of five since the year 2000. This means that North Long Beach today is a community of newer citizens, younger families who have helped to not only continue the up the uptown renaissance, but to re-energize it. So next steps, the next step of our if our proposal passes this evening, will be to have the Department of Parks, Recreation, Marine and our Library Services Department conduct further outreach around this concept with our park and library patrons. Secondly, the Council Council's Housing and Neighborhoods Committee will discuss and consider the proposal. And finally, I've committed to our Long Beach Library Foundation that my office will host a community forum in in January to further discuss the proposal. This will be very well publicized and open. Now I have a few a few clarifying questions for staff. Number one, I've heard issues about this proposal being precedent setting in terms of naming a building for a living person. Has the city done this before? And are we outside of the scope of our authority.
Speaker 7: Mr. Mayor, members of the council? Councilmember Richardson. We actually do have policies in place through an administrative regulation that is advisory to the Council for naming facilities, and we've done facility naming as many times before. There are actually some provisions in our air that talk to, you know, this type of process. And actually, just recently, the council went through a process, the same process to name the Internet, you know, center theater against I'm sorry, for former Mayor Beverly O'Neal. So we have been through this process before.
Speaker 3: And along that same lines, I'm going to ask Mr. City attorney, what is the spirit of our current naming policy? And are we within the spirit of the regulation of the regulation?
Speaker 7: Councilman Richardson, members of the city council, I guess if I had to summarize the spirit of it, is that the buildings and facilities, public buildings and facilities owned and operated by the city that we are attempting to name after a living person, should be named after someone who has made a significant contribution either to the nation, the city of Long Beach or the state of California. And I think you've just gone through and articulated why Michelle Obama would fit in one or more of those categories. So that is the underlying spirit.
Speaker 3: Thank you. And back to Mr. Assistant City Manager. How would you compare? In terms of process, I've heard questions about process. How would you compare the process that we've outlined and the process we're beginning tonight to other recent other processes in recent history of Long Beach.
Speaker 7: So the typical process as outlined in the air is for an idea to come to the city council. The city council then refers that to the Housing and Neighborhoods Committee, what is now today called the Housing Neighborhoods Committee. And then it comes back to the council. As I understand the motion before us, what is being proposed is an additional public outreach process on top of the standard process that the city uses, as I understand it, to include additional outreach that library and parks would do. And in addition to the efforts that Councilmember Richardson is currently working on, and then bring that to housing and neighborhoods, and then again back to the city council for a decision.
Speaker 3: So traditionally, the first point of a process is what?
Speaker 7: There are a couple of ways that it can start. It either can come from the community to the as a filing with the city clerk to the city council's attention. Typically, it does come with a motion or agenda item from a city council member to agenda, or is it at the city council level and then referred to Housing and Neighborhoods Committee for further review before it comes back to the Council.
Speaker 3: So would you consider that this process was premature in any way compared to any naming process in recent history that you recall?
Speaker 7: No, this is following the same process and actually adds additional steps.
Speaker 3: So this has additional steps than what we followed in recent history in the past?
Speaker 7: That's correct.
Speaker 3: Just wanted to clarify, typically, does the city does the city of Long Beach or city staff engage in this type of outreach before the city council submits a proposal to engage?
Speaker 7: Not in recent memory. Perhaps in the past some of these have been staff driven. In recent memory, I can't recall any that were generated by the city staff. It normally comes from the city council and then goes through the process as outlined before.
Speaker 3: Thank you. So. So that's it. This proposal is historic, but not precedent setting in nature. We've gone above and beyond the outreach process that we've established in the past, and the process is well within our scope of the law. And that said, I move the motion as written as for my colleagues for support and may the force be with you.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. There's there is a motion and a second on the floor. And so we have some council comments and then I may open up to the public. So Councilmember Austin, who made the second thank you.
Speaker 9: I'll be very short and brief. I think my colleague really did a great job. I want to congratulate our council member, Richardson. It may the force be with you all as well. I think he did a good job of making the point. This is a I think I've known Councilmember Richardson for many years. We've had many conversations about the future of our city, the future of North Long Beach. And I know before he got elected and when he first got elected, he talked about doing things big. And this is big. This is a big step for Long Beach is a big step for our shared community. And this is will be something that is bigger than both Councilmember Richardson and any of the councilmen council people up here, because naming this library will be something that stays with this community for many, many years to come in perpetuity. And so this is a big, bold decision that I support wholeheartedly, and I don't think there's anything else to be said there. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Gonzales.
Speaker 6: Yes, thank you. So I have, of course, my own comments to make. And then Councilwoman Woman Price, she's out for surgery, but she asked me to say her comments as well. So I just want to thank as well Councilman Richardson for and our council colleagues for bringing this forward. I myself used to live in North Long Beach. So when I talk to my mom about all the things that are going on, she's really amazed at how beautiful North Long Beach is turning out with, of course, medians and new storefronts. But now something like this, that the fact that we're able to call potentially a beautiful library after Michelle Obama is wonderful. She is a woman with integrity and advocate for local youth literacy and veterans. She's our first lady. And I certainly believe why she would qualify for this. I don't know if we need further explanation or to continue talking about why she needs to be selected for this. And I wholeheartedly believe that. I remember when the vice mayor, Robert Garcia, at the time wanted to name Promenade Park after Harvey Milk. And I know that there was a lot of pushback for that. And now we finally have a park, the only one in in the nation that's named after Harvey Milk. And now potentially we can have the only place named after Michelle Obama, which is even more wonderful. So I believe in this name and fully support this idea. I asked my colleagues to do the same and and certainly support not only us here on the council, but also everyone here tonight, especially North Long Beach. And and for looking at and thinking of North Long Beach in a broader scope, which is always very important. So thank you. And then I'll move on to Councilwoman Price's comments. So she says, I regret that I am not here this evening to share my thoughts with my colleagues directly. I had foot surgery yesterday, and despite every intention to be here tonight, the recovery process seems to be more involved than I had forecasted. I want to thank Councilman Richardson for opening the discussion on this item. I know that the opening of the North Library is a very exciting development and a huge step in the effort to empower Uptown. Over the past week, I have received many emails and calls from my constituents, some of whom are very involved in some way in supporting our libraries. I have also talked with Councilman Richardson about his vision for this process based on the agenda item as worded, the possibility of naming the library after the first lady is something that is only in the preliminary phase. The process will involve discussion at the commission level and with stakeholders such as users, the Library Foundation and residents of Long Beach. I understand and respect Councilman Richardson's reasons for wanting to name the library after the First Lady. I do believe, however, that there is, since such a decision, would be a departure from our naming policy. This item should serve to initiate a longer, more transparent process, which will involve involved most certainly more public outreach. That is her comments. And thank you. Appreciate it.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next up, I have Vice Mayor Lowenthal.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I wanted to thank Councilman Richardson for bringing this item forward. I know that. When many of us joined the city and the city government, we were all tutored in the way things were done and the way things had to be done. And I champion any one of us, especially Councilman Richardson tonight, who takes a step forward to recognize somebody while they are still in the thrust and throes of doing the work that they do. And so I do believe in honor. I do believe in honoring tradition and protocol. But I think there are times where it's completely appropriate to step aside and say that an individual in our nation or in our community is worthy of being recognized. And what better way to do it in a time when that individual is still working to advance the causes that they are working on? And our first lady takes a stand on issues that I think really is meaningful for all of us educating girls. A lot of us have focused on the disparities of opportunities in developing nations, but we have those same disparities here. And for a high profile celebrity brilliant figure, to take on that cause is something that's very much about Long Beach. And I'm personally honored that we are a city that does things first when others don't want to take the chance or risk doing that. And this is worth doing. And I thank you for that, and I thank you for coming forward with that.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And Councilmember Ringo.
Speaker 5: Thank you, Mayor. When I had my voice in support of this motion, I think that Councilmember Richardson has done a phenomenal job and presented it to us, does his research, and I am especially encouraged by the transparency of the whole thing that he's going to be having some public input on. This is going to be kicking around to the community. Certainly there's nothing to be hidden in regards to the intent of the of the naming of the library, I think is very inspirational. And it would be a great opportunity for our children to go to the library to learn more about our first lady, our first African-American first lady, to learn more about diversity and embracing diversity. I think that's the most important message that this stimulus library does is precisely that. And the force is with us. Thank.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I'm going to I'm going to go ahead and go public comment and we're going to come back I'm going to make some comments as well once this comes back to the council. So we turn this over to public comment. Please line up and just make sure you say your name for the record and please begin.
Speaker 4: To make sure that the kids. Good evening. Mr. Mayor and city council members. My name is Tanya Thresh into a Long Beach resident. And in the north and in the north, Long Beach Library Service area. I'm here to speak in strong support of naming the new library in honor of First Lady Michelle Obama. I'm proud to stand here today with a room full of colleagues and esteemed friends who are raising signs saying yes to Michelle Obama. Mrs. Obama is a proud mother, wife, accomplished lawyer and public servant. First Lady Obama has been a champion for veterans families, healthy food exercise programs, and an advocate for improving children's literacy through the Read Across America campaign. Naming the new library will send a strong message to all of our daughters and future generations of children in North Long Beach. They, too, can go to Princeton. They, too, can have a Harvard Law School degree. Reading and education are the pathway to that unlimited opportunity in our country. By naming the new law library after First Lady Michelle Obama. We will not only help to increase the public space here in North Long Beach, but this new state of the art facility will inspire our community to be more civically engaged, utilizing this new safe space for community forums, Girl Scout meeting, sharing new ideas and interacting with one another. I believe that this is a powerful, positive and wonderful concept. I find it a bit troubling that there's some opposition to even bringing up this proposal. I know the Press Telegram editorial board does not speak for me. Why can't we have a public conversation about renaming our local facilities? You know, there's an Eleanor Roosevelt High School in North Carolina, even though she was born and spent most of her life in New York City. Laura Bush has a library named after her in Austin, Texas, even though she's from Midland, Texas. Naming public naming our facilities. Public facilities for living public figures has become incredibly common, as we've heard over the last 25 years. This proposal is about moving Long Beach forward to be a more representative of our city of today and not just yesterday, as was stated. Today, more than 80% of long beaches youth are students of color. Why would we not like to have a role model like Michelle Obama named for one of our local libraries? Tonight, I would ask you to move forward with starting this process. I believe that this is the right thing to do and it sends a positive message not only to my daughter, but to others, young people across North Long Beach. I look forward to your affirmative vote tonight. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Who's going to go first? Good evening, City Councilor. Mayor My name is Current Bash and I am a fourth grader at Longfellow Elementary School and proud and a proud member of Girl Scout Troop 5193. I came out tonight to say yes to naming the new North Long Beach Library after the first lady, Michelle Obama. I am nine years old and I love to read. I am currently reading Key to the Treasure by Peggy Park. Michelle is that Michelle Obama is the only first lady I have ever known. I will love to finish reading Keys to Treasure in a library named after her. To me, she is a beautiful, smart and fun and I hope to be boss like her when I grow up. Please vote tonight to tonight to name my local library after Michelle Obama. As you make your decision, may the force be with you. Thank you. And I would like to ask to put up your pink signs if you are supporting. Dear Councilman Rex Richardson. My name is Corrina Williams and I am a student at Hamilton Middle School in North Long Beach, California. I support naming our new library, the Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library. One reason the library should be named after Mrs. Obama is because she inspires me every day. When I was in fourth grade, a boy made fun of me because I am half black. Sometimes when I got in my head, I would show him how it feels when someone talks to you like that. However, I told myself not to let it bother me and I would to think of Michelle Obama. She's black and successful. When I grow up, I will be like her. This is why I feel it is appropriate to name the library after Michelle Obama. She inspires us minorities here in Long Beach. My second reason is that she donated $250,000 to local library so kids can read, learn from the books, get good grades and go to college. She even says one of her rap songs. So you had with knowledge. She shows that through reading books. You can learn a lot and get good grades to go to college. Here are some reasons why some people think the library shouldn't be named after her. One reason is because people might think she is selfish because she wants a library named after yourself. Another reason is that she is not a Long Beach native. People who do not like Michelle Obama might graffiti the library and say things. Overall, she is a great role model, believes in higher education and motivates us to read. In conclusion, I think Michelle Obama should have the new library named after herself because she is a very inspiring Obama. I hope that this shows you that the library should be named after Michelle Obama. Sincerely, Corrina Williams. Dear Councilman Rex Richardson. My name is Bilal Siddique and I am a student at Hamilton Middle School. I am in in North Long Beach, California. I am supporting our new library now. Michelle Marie Oberman Neighborhood Library. Michelle Obama once said, If we want to go to college, fill your head with knowledge. This shows that she inspires people to go to college. The library should be named after Michelle Obama because she donated $250,000 to local libraries and she cares about education. Also, she is not a shy person. She made a rap song and went on The Ellen Show. Michelle Obama wrote in her rap, A dream is just a dream is just a dream until you go hard. In other words, this means that a dream is just a dream until you get an education. Michelle Obama is energetic. She can relate to us young people because she made a dance challenge to encourage encourage people to exercise. And another reason is because she is a role model. She encourages youth to take responsibility. Some people would say we shouldn't in the library after Michelle Obama because she is not a Long Beach hero. It would throw off the tradition for naming things after Long Beach Heroes. She didn't live in Long Beach, but she lived in South Side, Chicago. She can relate to us because because these are both low income cities. To conclude, we should name the library after Michelle Obama because she'd be. She cares about the impact of education on youth. Also, with only 80% of Long Beach High School students graduating on time, this library can make it at least 90% of students graduating on time. It will help them with resources and studying. So these characteristics show why we should name the library after Michelle Obama. Sincerely Bloom City.
Speaker 0: Thank you so much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Shirley Brassard, senior consultant, Swarm Group and Associates. I intended not to be in town tonight. However, when I read through the Gazette that this meeting was coming and this motion was being forwarded, I thought, okay, this might be the reason why I'm still here. And initially I had a question which I will state after my statement. If Mr. Richardson had recommended his mother. Receive the name of the North Long Beach Library. Many people would wonder why. They might consider honorable, but they would wonder why. Some would probably laugh if he would name his the library or propose a motion to name the library after his wife. Some, again, would think it was honorable and somebody might look at him sideways. But in bringing forth this motion. That this library would be named in honor of our nation's first African-American first lady, Michelle Obama. Nobody has to wonder why. Across the globe. No one will have to wonder why. Even those who might find reason to disagree. They can't wonder why. Before the end of time. And this goes to whether or not we buy into the creationist theory or the evolutionist theory. But according to my studies before the end of time, God has to reconcile some things in the Earth. As we're forwarding our celebration of Christmas, those of us who celebrate that as being the birth of Christ, whether or not that December 25th is arguable, as we move forward to December 25th, we're going to have to at some point reconcile his birth, Jesus birth, his death and his resurrection. Some a fast forward for a minute into next year. This time next year, next year, we'll be celebrating Passover. Right before Jesus got ready to be hung on the cross that he was carrying. A black man was pulled out from the side. From North Africa. They just found their black man on the road and made him carry Jesus's cross. That same Jesus whose birth we will be, some of us celebrating a couple of days from now. History had to see a black man in the White House. We had to see it. That we would name that library after her is but a small token.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Greetings to the mayor and the council members. I am Clarissa Spencer and I serve as the President of the Lumbee Alumnae chapter of Delta Sigma Theta Sorority Inc., a 102 year old public service sorority with over 250,000 college educated women from all over the world. Our chapter here in Long Beach was chartered in 1986. We are here today to support Councilman Richardson's recommendation to name the new North Branch Library, the Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library. First Lady Michelle Obama stated, I believe that education is the single most important civil rights issue that we face today, because in the end, if we really want to solve issues like mass incarceration, poverty, racial profiling, voting rights and the kinds of challenges that shocked so many of us over the past year, then we simply cannot afford to lose out on the potential of even one young person. We cannot allow even one more young person to fall through the cracks. As First Lady Michelle Obama, through her national initiatives, has shown that education is the gateway to success. Specifically, the Reach Higher Initiative, which inspires every student in America to take charge of their future by completing their education past high school. The initiative seeks to make sure our students understand what they need to complete their education, access to learning opportunities. A library can offer that having exposure to college and career opportunities. A library can definitely do that. And supporting families, schools, counselors and kids so kids have a safe space to learn and study. A library can definitely offer that too. In closing, the idea of the Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library was initiated by the youth from the Long Beach Jordan rap program. Our kids have spoken and we should listen. They are our future leaders and I want their voices to be heard. And I stand with them and for them in their support. Let us give our children a library in their community named after someone who they can positively, positively identify with and who 100% believes in literacy and education for all in the 21st century. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please. Honorable mayor, distinguished. Merry Christmas. My name is Dave San Jose. I was born here in Long Beach in 1940. I guess I must love this city because I'm still here. I want to give you a little bit of history about North Long Beach, which we always known as the orphans of the city . I'm going to cut my stories a little bit short because I only had a few minutes one day. One of the students at Jordan High School went over after school and baseball practice. He was quite a baseball player. Went over to a phone booth. A lot of you here don't even know what a phone booth is. He was called his girlfriend. All of a sudden, a drive by happened. He was shot and killed. Our community came together and said, What we need is a youth center. Let's start helping our kids. And so our big focus is and has been all about our kids. We were fortunate enough to start a program there. We had the Future Generation Youth Center, about the only youth center in the last ten years in Long Beach. And that was brought together because it was the right thing to do. And the community came and did that with all of our councilmen. Another thing that happened was all of a sudden we had redevelopment. Redevelopment came in and I think it was Jerry Schulz had mentioned that we could have a fire or a police station. And I never believed that we could do that. We got together, the community got together, and we fought it. And everything about it was a giant fight. Anyway, here we have one of the nicest police stations in North Long Beach. It belongs to us so we can be proud of. All of a sudden it came up that we can have a library. I mean, a fire station. And I think Bell was the councilman then. And we never believed that we can have that either. All of a sudden, the community got together and we only had a three little three bedroom house for a fire station. And here he had these great big ideas that the community finally came up with the ideas of having this great big fire station. Now we have one of the best fire stations in the city because we believe it. And the community came together. What this is really about. Then we had redevelopment and redevelopment came in and said, we can change our city, we can have new buildings, we can have all of these things. Well, we don't have those things. Mainly what we have is a bunch of white fences. But one idea came up and it was the library and everybody with redevelopment. There were hundreds of people from this started 16, 17 years ago. That's when the idea first came about. And it was possible we could have a library. Not for us. I'm 75 years old. It's for the kids. We really need this up here in North Long Beach. And so we worked on it. We worked on it. And the only money that we did set aside was the money for the library. So we do have a library. And that's the reason that I think the library should be named after its parents who gave it birth 17 years ago, the community. And we did that for our kids because we care about our kids. I guess my time is up. Yeah, just got to wrap it up, so I got to give everyone the same amount of time. Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Good evening, Mayor Garcia. City council members. My name is Kate Huizar, and I'm the interim executive director for the Long Beach Public Library Foundation. I also my father and I both lived in North Long Beach for many years. I would like to first thank Councilman Richardson for getting the community so engaged and excited about naming the new North Library. The foundation feels strongly that residents of North Long Beach and residents of Long Beach should feel that they have an input in the library's name and their development. After all, it is their library. Therefore, the foundation strongly supports the idea of hosting a community forum in which names can be suggested and discussed. And I know Council and Richardson, you've agreed, you know, that this is an extra step you should take. We the foundation also looks forward is looking forward to a new main library and many other exciting civic projects throughout the city. It is important, as we have today, to be transparent about the process of naming, define and communicate the standards of criteria for such processes and include the Long Beach Committee and important decisions such as naming and others. There are many notable community leaders and literary icons deserving of this honor, and we look forward to learning the name of this, the name that the Long Beach community chooses for this library and those other institutions. Whatever the name, the foundation is committed to supporting North the North Library by raising the much needed funds that will enhance it, creating a space that will best serve the community and be something that the community can truly be proud of. We look forward to working more closely with Councilman Richardson's office, among others, on our North fundraising campaign, engaging community members and business owners in his district and beyond. As an independent nonprofit, the Long Beach Community, Long Beach Public Library Foundation, excuse me, has provided over $20 million in support of our public library system in the past 18 years. We have been actively involved in the North Library discussions and I personally look forward to meeting with all of the City Council members to further discuss the Foundation's plans to support the new North, the new main and other libraries in our city. Thank you and happy holidays.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Good afternoon, Council members. Mayor. Thank you so much for this opportunity. My name is Dr. Sabrina Sanders and I'm an educator, university administrator, community leader and a homeowner in the city of Long Beach, ninth District. As a passionate educator, there's nothing more important than presenting the role models that inspire our children. Someone that exemplifies the values, the philosophies, and walk the walk of what we hope to instill in our young people. Michelle Obama is that role model. So many of our young people finally, finally are relating to our first lady, whether it's in her background of grassroots organizing and going door to door in neighborhoods exactly like ours, advocating for those that are not always represented at the table, standing strong and addressing the issues of health and wellness are speaking on behalf of the value of education for our country. She understands our communities and stresses the values for progress for our neighborhoods. She has impacted our community in ways that have never been touched by a national leader. Only because we can relate and connect to the First Lady, Michelle Obama, in so many ways. We have been so excited for so very long about the transition of North Lawn Beach, going back many, many councilmembers and many mayors ago. It's a new day in North Long Beach. Naming the library after a renaissance woman. A person who our community identifies with a national leader. First Lady Michelle Obama. A model of the leadership and altruism that we aspire for our youth and will exemplify in our vision for our community. Have a great evening.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Dr. Sanders. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 10: Get there noon. My name is Bill Sanchez. It's great to see so many friendly faces again. I'm encouraging you to share, as some of you already know, for your new ship, Long Beach and occurring, you will be U.S. high school senior. I thank here today and support Councilman Rex Richardson's decision in May in naming the new library after Michelle Obama. We have named most of our public libraries and schools after presidents or famous authors. First Lady Michelle Obama is a lawyer and a writer. Along with being the first. Along with being the wife of the 44th and current president of United States. Made her the first African-American first lady of the United States. Naming the library would be a symbol of gender equality. By demonstrating to us that we as citizens of Long Beach are making the change. Here is a quote by First Lady Michelle Obama. No country can ever truly flourish if it stifles the potential of its women and their private so of the contributions of half of its citizens by supporting a female role model. And those messages and that's where I ended her quote by supporting female role models such as herself and becoming a role model. A role model for women and men. For advocating probably awareness, higher education and healthy living. So why not name this new library after Ms.. Show Obama. After a great role model that supports the point of a public library raising higher education. Thank you. And may the force be with you.
Speaker 0: I'm loving all the Star Wars tonight. I won't have to. I'm going to work that into my comments after, I think, next speaker. Good evening.
Speaker 3: Honorable Mayor Garcia.
Speaker 0: And councilman.
Speaker 3: I am Benjamin Miranda representing Jordan High School.
Speaker 0: The Jordan Rap Program, and I'm currently the president of the Omega Brothers program.
Speaker 3: I'm here to give support to the councilman, Rex Richardson, on behalf of naming the library, the Michelle Obama library, the same way he supports not only the ZAE Sisters and.
Speaker 0: Omega Brothers program, but Jordan High School.
Speaker 3: And the North Lambie's community as a whole. One example is last year Councilman Rex Richardson gave us the opportunity to be part of the first youth participatory budgeting meeting. Actually not meeting. I'm committee sorry, where we had so much fun, met so many new people and at the end we ended up winning first and second place with the marquee and first place and the solar lights for this forest in second place. Thanks to the Councilman Rex Register and we also have had the chance to develop a closer relationship with the Long Beach Unified School District member Megan Kurt. Councilman Rex Richardson is always in full support of the youth in pushing us to do better by coming by Jordan. Coming to Jordan High School and inviting us to community events. Thank you for listening to the youth of Long Beach and considering our idea of naming the new library. Michelle Obama Library. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker. Good evening, honorable mayor garcia and Long Beach City Council members. My name is Angel Pozo and I'm here representing Jordan High School and the Jordan Rep program as the Omega Brothers vice president. I would like to give a great thank you first to Councilmember Rex Richardson, because if it wasn't for him, I would not have the opportunity to be here today. Speaking on behalf of Naomi, the new library, the Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library, says you don't normally get the chance to have a voice or say in what's going on in our city or in our community. But thanks to Councilmember Rex Richardson, we have had the opportunity to have a voice in many city events and other occasions. For example, last year as a freshman in high school, I had the opportunity to host one of his events called Community Conversations to discuss the Whole Village initiative. The reason I would like to name the library, the reason why I would like the library to be named after the First Lady, Michelle Obama is because just as Councilmember Richardson engages the youth, First Lady Michelle Obama has also launched many initiatives in order to inspire youth both in health and education. For example, in 2014, she launched the Reach Hire Initiative, which is an effort to inspire youth, youth and other people across America to take charge of their future by completing their education past high school. I am proud there is someone as high up in her studies who cares about the youth. I feel strongly that we are the future. Thank you for your time and I hope that our ideas and opinions can be taken into consideration. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Hello. Good evening. Honorable Mayor Garcia and Long Beach City Council members. My name is Melissa Rodriguez and I'm here representing Jordan High School and the Jordan Rap Program.
Speaker 6: As vice president of the VI Sisters.
Speaker 4: Program. I would like to thank Councilman Richardson, who has led us his high school. Students have a voice and opinion in our community. I've been in this program since my freshman year and currently I'm currently a senior now. Throughout all my high school years. Sorry. This is the first time that we as students in Jordan High School have a voice in our community. He continually puts keep. He continually puts us in the front. And we aren't treated as kids. We are actually treated as young adults who have actually have a voice. Councilman Richardson allowed us to voice their opinion on naming the library the Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library. A main reason on why US students, especially as US ladies and the Jordan Rapp ZAE Sisters program, will like to be naming this library after the First Lady is because she is a great inspiration and is seen as a role model to us women. An example given on how our First Lady inspires us youth is how she launched the US Government Worldwide Initiative. Not to let let girls learn to help girls around the world to go to school and stay in school. It helps educate and empower young women. She's sharing stories and struggles of these young women to help inspire and have their own education. This relating to our program on behalf on how we as a diverse group of young females who focus on helping one another, empowering each other as women, we focus on reaching a higher education, even though all of us go through our daily struggles. Michelle Obama, to us, in our eyes, a true leader and an inspiration. Thank you for listening to us youth and in voicing their opinion. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Okay. Next speaker, please. Should we keep it going here?
Speaker 4: Good evening, Honorable Major Garcia and lovely City Council members. My name is Cathy Servants and I am representing Jordan High School along with the Red Program as assistant president. We are thankful for having the opportunity to work with Rex Richardson and Amy, the new library after Michelle Obama. We have gathered over 200 signatures from students at our school in favor of naming the new neighborhood library, the Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library. We feel that she is a great role model and inspiration to us and others. She has inspired us and has showed us how much she cares about children and youth by all the things she does. For example, the Let's Move campaign, a campaign where children receive healthier food to live a healthier lifestyle. She has also created a Web video where she motivates women to stay in school and go to college. It feels good to know that there is people out there who cares about us and wants us to do better and accomplish our goals. We will also like to thank Rex Richardson for taking in consideration our ideas and for also always supporting our program. I really hope you take in consideration our ideas and thanks for having us here tonight.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: And I don't think you. Good afternoon, Honorable Mayor Council members. My name is Megan Kerr. I am a resident of the eighth District and a lifelong Long Beach resident. I also have the privilege of serving on the Board of Education for Long Beach Unified School District, and to tell you, I couldn't be more proud of our students . But I've also been in this game long enough to know that following students is absolutely the worst.
Speaker 2: Place to.
Speaker 4: Be. You have a copy of my support letter in front of you, and I just want to reiterate a few of the things that were said. This is absolutely the next great step in having this conversation move to the wider community. Councilmember Richardson has brought this forward in a very thoughtful and thorough way with steps outlined in ways that the community can give meaningful engagement in this process. We know that the naming of public spaces and buildings is requires much reflection and even more so when we recognize and honor individuals by the nature of our humanity. None of us is perfect and critics will find something wrong with any potential honoree. So in in this process, not only considering the contributions, but the context is incredibly important. Each generation will define for themselves who they find to be heroic, who they find to be role models. And as I stand here, the mother of children, the ages of people who just spoke to you, they're defining this very clearly as who represents them, who inspires them. I hear it again and again in the short time that we've been talking with this publicly. The response I get from children as young as ten and 14 is, That's great. She's so cool. They really understand that this is a person who speaks to them. And so as we continue to develop North Long Beach into the most technologically advanced and modern education corridor from the construction of Jordan High School, a potential community center and this library looking forward with this naming, is absolutely the right thing to do. And I thank you for your affirmative vote in moving this process forward.
Speaker 0: Thank you, board member Kirk.
Speaker 4: Good evening. I'm a I'm the one who always groans when they have these long speaker lines. And here I am, part of it. Good evening. My name is Dr. Johnny Rex O.D., and I'm a resident at Long Beach living in the Forest Park on the 300 block of South Street. Over the course of the last year, I've been to many city council meetings to support several initiatives that have been put forth this year to better Long Beach and better my community. Most of the time I choose not to speak, not because I don't feel like I have something to say or feel that I have a voice . But because many of the voices advocating on behalf of our community are voices I trust to communicate the needs of the community I reside in and reflect the shared vision many of us have for the new trajectory we are paving in the Uptown Renaissance. Today I stand before you because some of the voices weighing in on the proposal are not voices I believe accurately reflect the new North and this collective vision. And I want to make it unequivocally clear that I am genuinely excited about the prospect of naming our library after the current first lady. And let me tell you why. With communities in transition just like ours in North Long Beach, it is important to have symbols to rally around, to demonstrate that there's something special about our community. These symbols can take a myriad of forms. We currently have the opportunity to combine the pride and excitement we feel when we think about our brand new library with a public figure that inspires us to new and higher levels. Who encourages us to expect more from ourselves and more from those around us, including our elected officials? A public figure that inspires the next generation, the next generation of future leaders of our great city of Long Beach. I think we can all agree that our goal in making Long Beach a destination city is to make sure all parts of Long Beach have destination points for local, regional, national and international visitors. Right now, we in the north are in a time of rebranding. Determining what this new trajectory will look like and what legacies we will leave for the next generation. The old connotations and assumptions about North Long Beach are slowly fade into the background as the new short as the new North is being shaped and molded. Let's continue to be progressive, to be out of the box thinkers and to be a community that inspires and aspires. So I will end with Go Long Beach and go uptown. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 7: Good evening, Honorable Mayor. City Council. My name is Andy Kerr from the eighth District and I felt compelled this evening to speak on this issue for a couple of different reasons. First of all, I'm currently in the eighth District, but I spent the first 25 years of my life at Orange and 64th, right across the street from Grant Elementary School in North Long Beach. And so the North Long Beach community is very dear to my heart. And I still spent a lot of time there. And the North Branch Library was very important to me as I was growing up. So I was very excited to hear a couple of years ago about the the new building that will be happening for that community and very excited about that. I was the first member of my family to graduate from college and in addition to my parents who threatened me within an inch of my life if I didn't. I also think the North Branch Library Library for teaching me a love of learning, a love of books because of the hours and the hours that I spent there. And the other issue I went to to speak on tonight was as a member of the Homeless Services Committee representing the eighth District and Councilman Austin. And you, Mr. Mayor, and I've also have been a member, a board member of an organization named Housing Works, which provides permanent supportive housing for people who are chronically homeless, at risk of homelessness. And many of those people that that my organization and the homeless services people in the city of Long Beach have served have been veterans . And Mrs. Obama has been an incredible leader on that issue. I have seen my organization, Housing Works, House Veterans, who have been on the streets, living on the streets virtually for my entire life from the Vietnam War era, and have seen them go to housing because of the leadership of Mrs. Obama, because the Veterans Administration now gets what it takes to end chronic homelessness among veterans. But it wouldn't have happened if it hadn't been for her leadership. And with. Because of your leadership, Mr. Mayor, and the council and our wonderful staff here, I'm proud to say that the city of Long Beach is on pace to reach the goals set by Mrs. Obama to end veterans homelessness in the city of Long Beach. And I'm very proud of that. So that's all I have to say. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Makes me feel.
Speaker 4: Good evening, Mayor and City Council Persons. I'm Liz Gonzalez. I'm an educator and a creative writer. And we are celebrating our sixth year as homeowners in North Long Beach in Eagle North.
Speaker 5: My name is George Martin. I'm a biologist and musician and part of Uptown Ward.
Speaker 4: Together we run Uptown Word Reading and Arts Series, which we began in North Long Beach. One of our missions is to promote literacy and in addition to bring writers to North Long Beach that represent the community. And then that means people of color. It was so important to us to do this. We didn't have a venue, so we held pop up events every month. And starting next month, January, we will now have a home at North Branch Library. And we just wanted to say, as people who promote the letters, promote literacy and the arts, that we wholeheartedly support this recommendation . As a girl, I grew up going to libraries and I would have loved to have had a role model like Michelle Obama and been able to attend a library named after her. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening. My name is Charles Durning. I'm a 60 year resident of Plus of Long Beach. It's wonderful to hear the enthusiasm for this new library. And though I may offer up another alternative, it's like standing on the beach with a tsunami or global warming. We may all end up north Long Beach. But having said that. We do have a city policy in place, and I think that policy stands for a lifetime of service. We have many people in North Long Beach that that perhaps could qualify under that. I offer up two people that were husband and wife. They were Judge Marcus and Indira Hale. Tucker. Judge Judge Tucker was an African-American. He was the first judge to be put on a municipal court. He was long recognized for his position on youth. And if he had someone on probation and they didn't make their grades, he left them on probation. Indira Hale. Tucker had a passion for books. She she had a program at our libraries where the new kids could come in. And not only could they take out books, but they could take out toys. She she started the resource center for. The African American Society. She coauthored a book on the heritage of African-Americans in Long Beach with Aaron De. She was a founding member, excuse me, of our Long Beach Public Library Foundation. I think the other thing that is a consideration and if we do go forward with this Mrs. Obama's name, I would challenge all of our counseling and council women. The goal is to raise $700,000 for North Shore Branch Library for their computer learning center and the other electronic and books that they need. I would challenge you to be of assistance in raising that money so that we could have the best library possible in north our region. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next speaker, please. And I'm going to I see a I'm going to close out the speakers listening to anybody else. There's two more. Okay. So I'm going to close off theirs. Okay. So after the next the folks that are coming up, I'm closing the speaker's list. Yes, sir.
Speaker 5: Good evening to the council, to Mayor Garcia. My name is Otis Hogan. I'm a member of the Human Relations Commission and chair of the Highland Park Neighborhood Association. I've been most inspired this evening by the people who are the community members who came before me, especially the young people who spoke earlier. But moving on as a 16 year old transplant to the city, the Long Beach Library and Long Beach Poly was what first inspired me to develop a lifelong love for Long Beach. So when it comes to the.
Speaker 0: Library.
Speaker 5: Project with love and appreciation, I believe the whole North Long Beach community is pleased and excited to see the new library take shape on Atlantic Avenue. I am here today inspired and excited at the prospect of this building being named after the First Lady. I, for one, and I know many others in our community. Will be proud to be a patron and supporter of the Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library. Thank you. Go uptown. Go Long Beach.
Speaker 0: Right. Go Long Beach. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Good evening. I'm Marco Cooper and I represent Andy Street, which is located in North Long Beach. And any street community is and supports Councilmember Rex Richardson's proposal to name the new library after Michelle Obama. The if you look at the demographic in North Long Beach, it consists of many African-Americans, according to statistics. People are more likely to associate themselves with places that they can relate to. Michelle Obama being African-American will shake more kids in the community. The library is named after her. The first lady is a great role model that the kids in our community can look up to, given that she has similarities with the youth in the city . After construction is complete, the 25,000 square foot library will be a great location to get kids in the neighborhood, a place to get resources or do homework after school. However, more than that can be accomplished by naming it after the First Lady. She's a perfect example of what hard work and determination can get you. People will always be more supportive of a person they look up to. Obama is a respected woman throughout the community because she's an advocate for education and has earned her own degrees at Princeton and Harvard Law School. If Obama's name is attached to the new public library, it will send the message that if kids work hard enough, some day they will be able to accomplish as much as she had. Or even or maybe even more. North Lawn Beach has improved over the past several years. However, we still have room for improvement, namely the new library. After Michelle Obama will give guidance and inspiration to kids throughout the community to strive day in and day out to reach their goals. If the City Council approves the proposal, it could be huge for the community. It will give African-American kids hope, knowing that the biggest neighborhood branch library in the city is named after an African-American woman. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening.
Speaker 5: Everyone.
Speaker 7: Mayor Council members. My name is Charlie Scott.
Speaker 0: The third and I grew up in Long Beach. You know, I.
Speaker 3: Went to Hamilton Middle.
Speaker 5: School. I then went to Long.
Speaker 0: Beach, Jordan go Panthers. After that, I went to Cal State, Long Beach.
Speaker 7: And I've just been rooted in the community and in this community. My parents still live.
Speaker 0: In the same house like this is where we lived north Long Beach. And at this point in my life, I have seen it evolve into a place that other places in Long.
Speaker 3: Beach are saying, what's.
Speaker 0: Going on and the.
Speaker 3: Renaissance down in North Long Beach. And I didn't.
Speaker 0: Say we're looking forward to a new library. And in this library, the name we're looking forward.
Speaker 3: To see.
Speaker 5: On it is Michelle.
Speaker 0: Obama. Neighborhood Library. I'm up here standing before you to speak to you for.
Speaker 3: My little niece that was just born in October.
Speaker 0: Because as she grows up, she's going to make her way to Grant Elementary School at Grant Elementary School. She's going to then go to the library and then the library. She's going to see this name, Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library. And in that library, she's going to understand that she comes from North Long.
Speaker 5: Beach, from the.
Speaker 0: Stop that we come from. And she can not only make it to the White House, but change as a catalyst for the rest of the world. So I stand for of first.
Speaker 3: And then I stand for.
Speaker 0: Myself. And then I stand as a voice of the community to say to everyone here, we're all people from Long Beach and we all.
Speaker 3: Want best.
Speaker 0: For what's for Long Beach in this.
Speaker 5: Moment right now.
Speaker 3: And I'm asking.
Speaker 0: You to vote and.
Speaker 5: Say.
Speaker 0: Michelle Obama. Neighborhood Library on the north side of Long Beach.
Speaker 5: Where I came from. Now. It's a new.
Speaker 0: Name. It's a new library.
Speaker 5: And it's.
Speaker 7: A new direction.
Speaker 0: Because in North Long Beach, it's time for a new direction. It's time to be able to.
Speaker 7: See someone.
Speaker 0: That mirror images or reflects who we are as.
Speaker 5: A community. And in this community.
Speaker 0: We are strong, we are intellectual, and we are thriving right now. This is the next phase of what North Long Beach will.
Speaker 3: Become in the next 22 years.
Speaker 7: For Alyssa.
Speaker 5: My name is Charlie.
Speaker 3: Scott, the third.
Speaker 0: And again, I'm speaking to you on behalf of.
Speaker 5: The Michelle Obama.
Speaker 0: Neighborhood Library. Vote for the library. Let's let's do something to make our youth proud of our.
Speaker 7: Decisions in the future.
Speaker 5: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Mike. Speaker, please. And I have three more speakers and lady at the end is the last speaker. Lori Margaret Smith, you're in line. Okay. No, that's okay. So we have four more speakers. That's okay. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Lori Angell. I've lived in North Long Beach since 1989. I've seen the neighborhood change substantially, yet I am still there. A lot of people left, but I am still there. And many like me stayed. And we fought for almost everything that people are enjoying right now, including the library. 15 years working on the library. Now, my head's getting turned a little bit today because first of all, Michelle Obama doesn't come up in my vernacular very often. I read the newspaper, I read magazines, I watch the news every single night. I watch intently. And I have not heard any of this about Michelle Obama before. So seriously, I am serious. I'm not lying. I'm being very serious.
Speaker 0: Let's make sure everyone has a has a right to make their comments. And if I could just have the audience, please be respectful.
Speaker 1: So I appreciate greatly getting the perspective of the individuals in the audience. That being said, I've been looking forward for 15 years for the completion of the North Branch Library to celebrate North Long Beach. What I am concerned about is that this is coming up now. We're going to have to pay $47,000 to change this and change that and put in a new sign. Why didn't this come up two years ago? Why couldn't the why couldn't the neighborhood and the community discuss this two years ago? Why now? Why three days before Christmas? Is this coming up now? So that's my objection. I think the process is really fouled up and I'm disappointed that this is where we are. I've been speaking against this naming because I don't know who Michelle Obama is. I know who she is. But I equate her to politics. I equate her to being the wife of who I consider a very good leader. And I don't feel that most first ladies deserve this kind of recognition. I would like to see President Hillary Clinton lie very personally, but that's just me. So good luck. I'm hoping for more discussion and I'm just a little disappointed that this wasn't better discussed in the neighborhood.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Good evening, Mayor Garcia. Vice Mayor Lowenthal, City Council members. My name is Margaret Smith. I live in the third district. My address on file, and I am speaking as a former president and vice president of public affairs for the Long Beach Public Library Foundation. We are really, really excited to be a part of this discussion about the transformative potential of the new North Library.
Speaker 4: Many have asked us.
Speaker 7: What is the Foundation's position on the naming of North Library? You heard from Kate Huizar, our executive director. I would like to.
Speaker 1: Quickly summarize.
Speaker 7: Our key three positions. First of all, there is much discussion about who should be honored. We are not not taking a position on any specific individual. There are many deserving candidates. Let the community decide. Secondly, we are most concerned about the process, both for North Library and for future naming opportunities. We are glad to know that the process will be transparent and inclusive of the entire Long Beach community and we are very appreciative of Councilmember Richardson's commitment to that approach. Last. Whatever the decision about the name. As was said earlier, the foundation will continue its active campaign of support and fundraising to make this an amazing north library for all of the individuals here tonight and the entire community. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please. 30 2:00 as they address a number of items. First of all, one of the things I think everybody can agree on when the time comes to make that announcement of who the library will be named after. And if we select Steve Harvey, let's make sure that the teleprompter is working. Okay? My affinity for the library is not limited to the nexus I referenced last week relative to the having a relative that who designed the L.A. Public Library. My mother was a librarian and in the small world department earned her degree from the same place that Eleanor Richardson. Who for 20 years was our director of Librarian Services. I went to school. I was. I clearly support the building of the library, in fact. When you first announced it a number of months ago, I gave you the I think will probably be one of the first books there, The Boys in the Boat, which parenthetically, if you have not read, you should read. It is a tremendous, tremendous book. On what life was like in the deepest depths of the Depression in this country. Some of those experiences we're expressing, we're experiencing right here and now. One of the things and I mentioned this to Councilman Rex Richardson that struck me and I was a little disturbed about. I see only the signs from one side. That tells me the process wasn't completely open, period. I've been down to this council chamber one or two times, and when there are major issues, they're generally people equally in number represented and so forth. And I don't see that here tonight. That's a little troubling. Equally troubling was the fact that people were referencing it's people of color. I don't give a rat's rear end what color somebody is, and that should not matter whatsoever. People are saying, well, right now we've got 90% or whatever the percentage of African-American. The realities are. With by the time ten years from now, 15 years ago, 15 years from now, that profile is going to change. And if you don't understand that, look at the changes, the population and the migrations into this country. It might be Syria. It might be Muslim. It might be Irish. You never know. So let's check that at the door. Somebody once said, you know, it's not the content, it's not the color of the stain, but the content of the mind. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. Equally important, if you want to. I think that would be an embarrassment to the first lady because she doesn't want to be seen as being elbowed. Elbowing your way in. Last comment. Time is up. Study Google and study the China. Thank you, Mr. Cole. You know, understand time is the time is out. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Good evening, honorable mayor. Members of the Council, ladies and gentlemen. I want to thank you all for affording me the honor of speaking here tonight. Here are a few suggestions that I. That have an opportunity to please all involved.
Speaker 0: I'm sorry. Just to get your name for the record.
Speaker 2: I'll run it. I live in ninth district for tomorrow.
Speaker 0: Perfect.
Speaker 2: Thank you. I live in the ninth district. The policy in Long Beach is to name a public asset after someone who has been dead over a year. Although it can be overridden, it shouldn't be. There are solid, significant reasons for that policy. Michelle Obama is still alive. The history books have not yet been.
Speaker 4: Finalized about her. And I'm sure the.
Speaker 2: Force is with her as well as everyone else here today. She will have a very long life ahead of her. With a lot more history to write. We cannot begin to predict that a person who is so young will always deserve the designation being proposed here today. However, the aforementioned city policy does not extend to school districts. A suggestion would be to the youth of Jordan and all the other schools in Long Beach work at a designated special area in their school honoring the First Lady so that all of the future generations may be reminded every day of Michelle Obama as an inspiration for their dreams, aspirations, goals and personal achievements. If the north Long Beach.
Speaker 4: North Lawn.
Speaker 2: North Library branches to be named after someone. There's strong support for the name Mr. Bill Baker. Also, Judge Tucker. I can find many facts that point to them as the reason the library has become a reality in our neighborhood. Years before our current councilman took office. With all due respect. His support, their support over the years and dedication should be an inspiration to all of us where many may have given up. Another suggestion would be to honor our veterans.
Speaker 4: There's strong veterans support in North Long Beach and the veteran theme is already going down Atlantic. Or just simply leave the library name in honor of our great city where I.
Speaker 2: Am proud to live. And have dedicated many hours to its improvement. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. I think that closes public comment there. I think everyone spoke. Okay, good. So let me take this. Let me take this back and I'll make a few comments and I have a couple I have one other comment and then we'll go to to the motion. So let me let me just say, first of all, that I want to thank everyone for coming. And regardless of, you know, what do you think the library should be named or shouldn't be named? This is important part of the process. So thank you all for coming. I especially want to thank and congratulate all the young people that came out tonight. And it it makes it makes me very proud that there's youth in our community, in our schools that are so active in what's happening in the city and the fact that they felt compelled to to come up with an idea about a name of a pretty important, significant building, public building that we're building. And the present that to Councilman Richardson, I think, is really, really special. And regardless of what you think of the name, I think that's something that should make everyone proud of our of our youth in the city of Long Beach. I think just as a point of of, you know, of clarification and this has been brought up. We look at all of our institutions in Long Beach, and I think there's been a lot of great suggestions that have been that have been made. We have a we have what I would call a pretty decent mix of folks that are that our buildings are named after. Some are national figures. We're across the street from Lincoln Park or Cesar Chavez Park. Are there are more local to our history, whether it's Drake Park or other names that we've made? Some are or are authors or folks that we aspire or love something about, like Mark Twain, which was the last, I think, library name that we name that we that we chose for for our last big library in in central Long Beach. And sometimes we name things for folks that are that are still with us that have made great contributions like we just did for Beverly O'Neil, who is the former mayor of Long Beach. And so the city, I think, has always had a process in as long as I've been here. It has always began with a councilmember from that district who was the elected representative of that district, would bring forward a name and a process for the council to consider. And I think that's what's what's happened through this. I know not everyone loves a name and that's okay, but I think that's something that there is a process. And I just want to remind us that the actual agenda item is pretty clearly states for the council to consider this and then to begin a public outreach and deliberation process over the course of, I'm assuming, over the next few weeks or months. So that's all been said. Personally, I'll say that. When I think about particularly women and young women and young girls to be able to look up at a library and be able to see the name of someone that inspires them, that represents them, that looks like them, I think is something very, very special. And so I think I think our first lady is I, I think someone I read in a comment or somebody sent me an email that mentioned, you know, she's she's just the wife of the president. And I would say that he is probably the president because he married Michelle Obama. And and I think that, you know, she probably anyone that she married would probably one day become the president. And so I think listen, I think she personally I think she is a incredible choice, that name on a public building, I think. But that doesn't also mean that there aren't other incredible names that could consider. And I think that's important to say, because she is a great a great name. But all the other names that have been mentioned, some great people in our own local history, I think in the press telegram mentioned three or four African-American leaders that have been very influential. They're all of value. And I think that's important to note for everyone. Everyone that's been named has done and made incredible contributions to our city. And we should value whether they're a national leader and they impact things like like our veterans or our education policies nationwide that affect our local schools or whether they're folks like were mentioned earlier, someone that led the way on legal issues. That was our first municipal judge. That was African-American or first African-American, a woman librarian. All sorts of different names are out there that are all worthy. Not one is not more worthy than than the other. They've all contributed. One thing that I the councilman and I mentioned earlier, and I want to make sure and I'll bring this up and I think that he is very open to this and I think is encouraging is when when when this gets built. And over the course of the next few weeks, as we discuss this and the Library Foundation is involved and others are involved, there's a lot of people that went and were involved in the process of this library and a lot of great leaders. And I've heard actually a lot of great women that have been involved as well. And so I think that there's opportunities as we look at the library, whether they're reading rooms, whether they're spaces around the grounds to also be able to honor all of these great leaders, women, community leaders that all were a part of this important building. And so, Councilman, I'm hopeful that as this process moves forward, that regardless of what the final name ends up being, and I certainly know that the Michelle Obama name has a lot of support, that we look at ways of honoring all of our local champions as well. And I know that you were supportive of that. And so, councilman.
Speaker 3: So, Mayor, I'm absolutely I've committed this to two former council members. I've had this conversation with former council members. We just had a brief conversation with the Library Foundation. I think there's plenty of opportunities to to highlight our local leaders, and I think we should do that. I've heard names. I remember Bill Baker was around when I first started working for the city, and I had tremendous respect for him. And I know Dr. Marks, but Judge Tucker is, you know, comes up in and there are a lot of I think it would be really interesting and looking at how we can highlight other women in Long Beach and around our grounds of our library, other establishments, and we have a main library coming up. So I really think that this is an interesting catalyst moment for us to really kind of look holistically about how we how we make sure everyone has some attention and we and we think strategically about how we also raise money for our establishments. So. Absolutely. Mr. Mayor.
Speaker 0: Great. Well, thank you. And I want to thank all of you for for coming out and for supporting something, especially the young folks, for making what I think is really a great suggestion. And so thank you, guys for for doing that. And with that, I want.
Speaker 3: To finally just say I just want to say thank you to everyone who who took the time to come out both sides of the issue. You guys were very passionate. I heard a few things. People said, oh, I was moved by the comment or I may not have known very much about the first lady, but this is the community process. This is the beginning. And I'm hoping that we have a strong community as a result as a result of this. So thank you so much.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. And with that, there is a motion and a second. And again, the motion is for the council to consider the new North Branch Library as the Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library and request library services and Department of Parks to conduct outreach and engage youth and library patrons around the naming of the library and move and to move forward. And so thank you for that. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. And thank you all for for coming out on this issue. Thank you. And then we're going to continue our meeting. I know. I'm sure most of you won't stay, which is okay. So just if I could just ask you as you exit, just to, you know, be as quiet as possible so we can continue the meeting. Thank you very much. If I can just do the consent calendar real quick. Okay. There's a motion and a second. Is there any public comment on consent? KC Nunn members, please cast your votes. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to approve naming the North Branch Library, the "Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library," in honor of her contributions to youth, education, literacy, and the United States. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12222015_15-1295 | Speaker 1: Recommendation to conduct a study session to receive and discuss the city's capital investment needs for transportation, infrastructure and city facilities citywide.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I'm turning it over to staff.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Members of the City Council. Infrastructure is one of the most important things that a city does. In addition to providing public safety and our services, it is one of the chief core missions of a city is to provide streets and roads and facilities and and all the things that go into infrastructure. From time to time, we get questions from the council in the community about what are our infrastructure needs. We wanted to present a presentation to you today to give you a, you know, an estimate of what those needs are over the next ten years. And so I will turn it now over to our deputy director of Public Works, our city engineer, Sean Crumby, who's going to go through a brief PowerPoint presentation to talk at a high level about what our needs are over the next ten years.
Speaker 11: Good evening, Honorable Mayor and Council. As mentioned, the presentation for the study session tonight focuses on city infrastructure needs. This study session continues a series of presentations this year by the Public Works Department. In March of this year. 2015, the City Council was presented with the state of our streets and in October this year with an update to the city's parking assets. Tonight's presentation reflects the collaboration of the Public Works Department with other departments of the city. So the presentation is going to begin and highlight what's being done with current resources, followed by a transition to unfunded needs and conclude with funding shortfalls. Over in the city. So to begin, Strong Foundation, Strong City, that's the motto of the public works department. And I think it's important in regards to to relay the strength of infrastructure within the city or the importance of infrastructure within the city. The definition of that infrastructure can vary along beaches. Infrastructure extends beyond the roads, bridges and sidewalks of the city. Other infrastructure components include public safety facilities, storm drains and pump stations, community centers and parks that bring together people of all ages. Our energy, infrastructure and new technologies such as fiber optics, all of these components are related. Improving the infrastructure enhances the quality of life for all residents and continues to make Long Beach a national leader in livability. In this past fiscal year, Long Beach has continued an aggressive infrastructure program that brought over 50 park projects through completion, responded over 2200 facility repairs, rehabilitated 55 lane miles of arterial streets and 16 lane miles of residential streets throughout the city repaired five major bridges and enhanced a variety of bike bicycle infrastructure throughout the city. Within the capital improvement program. The City Council adopted fiscal year 2016 capital improvements this September. This budget includes 50.6 million in spending on new projects. Just a summary of a few key projects not intended to be comprehensive are shown within this slide. As approved by the City Council last week. Work will begin on the Civic Center, which includes City Hall Headquarters, the main library and Lincoln Park. Installation began on 25,000 LED street lights citywide. The East Police to the East Division Police to Station Project will be completed near the start of 2016. Project continues. Progress continues on construction of the Northshore, which are the North Branch Library. Work also is in progress to force wetlands, gum binder park as well, as well as critical road work on Ocean Boulevard and Alameda Avenue. With street projects, bicycle infrastructure is added, most notably will be the Pacific Bike Boulevard and Sixth Street projects under progress this year. So infrastructure needs. It's clear that despite the immense progress that's made, there remains a lot more to do, much more to do. Long Beach is at a critical juncture with aging infrastructure and facilities. The slides remaining from here will highlight the major investments needed in our city infrastructure. So taking into consideration all of the infrastructure needs, the total infrastructure cost over the next ten years is $2.8 billion. The rest of the presentation is going to focus on what comprises that $2.8 billion. But in addition to that, we're going to cover infrastructure. We're going to cover maintenance needs that total $40 million per year. So transportation infrastructure, the first component to be covered. These include components that move people throughout the city, but also is a key component to facilitation of goods, movement and economic development. This infrastructure includes not only what's visible above the roadway surface, but also a network below the surface, including our cities stormwater system. So first is our street inventory. This slide was taken directly from the city's payment management program. The city of Long Beach has about 177 miles of major roadways, plus an additional 600 miles, 609 miles of local roadways, encompassing 169 million square feet of asphalt and concrete surfacing throughout the city. Even though major roadway networks, even though that comprise less than one quarter of the total network by length, it actually represents 35% of the paved area on a per mile basis. An average major roadway cost approximately $2.3 million to construct. Whereas. A local network as a local network. Whereas the local network represents 65% of the pavement paved area, with an average replacement cost of just under $1,000,000 per mile. So this slide depicts some pictures of different pavement condition index conditions throughout the city label. There are the values 100 would be a brand new street. Zero would be a failed street. In all cases, all of these streets are in need of repair. So this slide provides the average estimated peak PCI for road conditions for the next ten years based on three funding scenarios. Our city's entire road network of streets, both major and minor roadways, is currently at a pavement condition index of 60. As adopted by the City Council, major roadways are currently funded at 11.4 million and minor roadways at 4.9 million this fiscal year. That's the $16.3 million that's shown. However, to bring the backlog to 20%. At maximum would require a 14.3 million and 16.6 million. For major and minor roadways, respectively. That's the 30.9 million that's shown. The optimal solution, however, which eliminates all the backlog and brings the city's network to an average pavement condition index of 85 would require 17 million annually for the major roadways and 25 million for minor roadways. That's 42 million. In sum, the optimal solution would require 420 million over ten years, which is 257 million more than what is currently budgeted. If we continue to fund at the 6.3 million current annual level. According to experts in payment management, backlogs that exceed 20% and above tend to become unmanageable. The cost of repair and maintenance of streets increases as this condition becomes worse and the PCI drops without adequate funding to reduce that backlog. The needs increase every year. Other components of transportation needs totaled 933.4 million. Alleys are estimated at 60 million in repair work. There's currently no funded ALI program within our capital improvement program, but there have been recent, numerous discussions about funding needs, bridges, connect to city streets and have needs totaling 365 million. With the Shoemaker Bridge estimated at 250 million of that total stormwater includes 147 million for rehabilitation of 24 pumps and 108 million estimated for the Long Beach Mosque project. Sidewalks, bicycle infrastructure and parking structures have received improvements but have needs totaling over $70 million. Shown her pictures of typical infrastructure needs. The photos show the condition of our sidewalks and unpaved alleyway. Unpaved alleys in the upper right. Our bike boulevard. And what happens when a pump station fails? Community. Community infrastructure and non transportation related infrastructure that the public relies on. Spanning public safety, library services, parks, health facilities and the coastline technology and other city services. The city owns 414 buildings totaling 6.8 million square feet. The facility condition index or rating for city buildings assessments have poor condition. These buildings do not receive the maintenance or have not received the maintenance necessary to extend their or maximize their useful life. Adequate maintenance extends or maximizes the use of all of these buildings. So we'll start with public safety. The unfunded needs for public safety totals more than $130 million. Fire replacement. Replacement fire stations. Seven, nine, ten, 11, 18 and 19. These fire stations range in age from 48 to 79 years. Improvements are needed to address workplace safety, public accessibility and workforce privacy issues, including separate gender restrooms and locker. And locker rooms. Police wear and tear at the police academy range and facility are needed to support and train officers to meet current public safety standards. Many of the Academy's facilities are located in trailers put in place in 1998 and were never intended to last the past 17 years. Classrooms, locker rooms and staff offices at the Academy are located in these trailers. Recruit replacement of the academy with a new permanent facility is estimated at $20 million. A new crime lab and property facility is needed to meet the 21st Century Police Department. This is estimated at $15 million. The remaining balance is for needs that other facilities, such as the jailhouse and substations. The Echo see. The Emergency Communications and Operations Center needs power supply, stability and backup power. Before you. Some pictures related to the police academy, which is still in temporary trailers. Fire Station ten is in need of replacement after nearly 50 years of service. It shows daily wear and tear, typical for a 24 hour facility of that age. Parks and Recreation. 365 million needs have been identified across 162 parks, 26 community centers, historic sites and other facilities. The above are only a sampling of those projects. The projects include new developments to the park systems, but many of the projects reflect age parks with the toll of deferred maintenance. One example of a large park is Halton Park. That's a 95 year old park that is one of the highest, if not the highest, utilized in the city and in need of and have needs that need to be addressed. The most significant item, however, includes the need to obtain update irrigation systems citywide, which account for almost a third of the projected total. In addition, roof replacements across the city account for another 21 million. These photos show conditions to conditions of parks across the city. A Community centers are in need of repair. Playgrounds have failing equipment. Roofs need replacements. Restrooms are dilapidated, and irrigation system systems need improvements. Coastal infrastructure for coastal areas. Parks, Recreation and Marine have identified 12.7 million in unfunded projects, largely largely driven by the need for Alamitos Bay Channel dredging, as well as improvements and general maintenance of facilities. In addition to the improvements at the marinas, beaches and waterways in June of this year, the City Council approved an update to the five year Tidelands capital priority needs. That's reflected that reflects the realities of declining oil revenues. This list is in order of highest costs, not necessarily and is not intended to be a priority for the project for the projected needs. Shown in the picture is the Junior Lifeguard headquarters, which serves hundreds of junior lifeguards and does not meet today's needs. An additional 14 million of projects has been identified for LED conversions. Currently, a $6.7 million project is funded to convert street streetlights throughout the city. The 14 million in additional needs includes conversion to existing outdoor lighting at parks as well as other post lightings. Other city facilities, unfunded needs at various other facilities total just under $70,000,000.60 8.8. The public works yard includes consolidation of its three facilities, the library services various maintenance needs across the whole library system health has. Heating, ventilation and air conditioning flooring needs for a new mobile health clinic. Fleet Services has needs to repair the fleet service facility, where 1.4 million in facility maintenance is needed at the Temple, Temple and Willow Complex. Structural maintenance, such as window replacement, floor resurfacing and traffic striping, and the need for a camera system amount to almost 75% of that total estimate. Here's some photos demonstrative of the capital needs of the Health Department's facilities, with pavement damage, wall and floor cracks and other capital needs. Further needs are shown at the Fleet Services Library Services in Long Beach, gas and oil. Technology and innovation have needs totaling just over $70 million. The city is in need of updating its handheld radios for public safety, which amount to $40 million of that total. Additionally, radio system backbone as well as other radio infrastructure adds 13 million. Needs also include fiber optic connections throughout the city for future development and support initiatives taken by the Bloomberg I-Team. Maintenance matters. Maintenance is a critical component to effectively manage infrastructure and protect the investments that are made by the city. So while this presentation has primarily focused on one time capital needs throughout the city. Maintenance of existing and new facilities needs to be considered. While the Public Works Facilities Management Division has an operating budget of 4.4 million annually in the adopted 2016 budget. The Facility Condition Index report noted an annual need of 15 to $20 million to the upkeep of over the 100 facilities within the city. Additionally, Parks Rec and Marine have identified annual minutes cost needs of 20 million for basic repairs, upkeep of current and new facilities combined. That's a total need of $40 million annually. So in summary, taking into consideration all the projects that have been identified, the total infrastructure cost is 2.8 billion over the next ten years. This reflects projects identified throughout tonight's presentation, inclusive of the $40 million in maintenance needs that were discussed.
Speaker 0: Thank you. A couple of things. So the first is I just want to make sure I know that we were initially going to present this last week and a couple of members aren't here. So I want to make sure, Mr. Modica, that in kind of your next round of briefings in the next week, that you kind of are able to present all this information because it's important information to the rest of the council members.
Speaker 7: Yes, Mr. Mayor, we can certainly do that and we will make this public. This will be available, this presentation for the public as well. I wanted to let you start.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. And then and then the other piece I want to just to mention is there is can you expand on the issue? And the one the one that's concerned me for a while is the issue about for every dollar that we're not investing, the cost dramatically increases over time. And I don't know if what staff want to comment on that.
Speaker 11: Absolutely. Great question. So as the condition of the city's infrastructure declines, the repair costs increase. So as they're ignored, those repair costs go up and it costs more to bring them back to the condition the longer we wait.
Speaker 0: Okay. I have a motion in a second for to receive and part of the report. Let me go and do public comment. Is there any public comment on this item? Just come forward.
Speaker 9: Good in council. Mayor Garcia, Tom Stout information is on file. You know, you guys just voted to add dates for a half a billion dollars last week. And you have all these infrastructure needs a total, almost that amount that's deferred. You guys have been deferring maintenance ever since I moved along Beach in 1986. The street at my house in Chestnut, the 3100 block has never been repaid since I moved here in 86. It's funny that Mr. Ranga Street was paved many years ago. It wasn't any worse condition than mine. Yet there seemed to be some favoritism there. You paved from Pacific. I guess from Willow to 31st Street, from Pacific to the river. But why did you stop at 31st? There, there. The streets south of us were no worse condition than the streets where I live. I mean, drive on it. It sounds like a hardwood floor that the glues no longer sticking. All you hear is a cluck, cluck, cluck, cluck when you drive over it. And you pictured some of those streets. We're never going to get anything done because 90% of the general fund is compensation. You spend ten or 12, I mean, maybe 15 million a year on paving the road, yet you spend a hundred million on your own pensions, and that's going to continue to increase, you say, by about 3 million a year. So in 2021, when Per says you all this money? It's going to be, you say, 135. A lot of other people say $150 million. That means that all the stuff that you keep spending money on is not going to provide us any more services. Hers is a, you know, saying it's the elephant in the room as a gross understatement. You guys talk about the great pension reform you had. That's a parks pensions will be $150 million by 2021. And now $150 million will go forward for the next 15 or 20 years. Where are we going to get some extra money to make the repairs in this city that we need? When compensation takes everything and pensions will grow up more because there will be raises raises add to their pensions. So, you know, I don't think that, you know, nothing's got better. And since I moved here, it's got more expensive. Property value goes up. Property value goes down. Property value goes down because infrastructure is hurt. And it's always going to be a low priority in the city. You have a lot of nice slides, but nothing ever gets repaired.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Thank you. Any other public comment? CASEY None. And actually, I just was just informed that we missed two slides at the end. I'm sorry, Mr. Modica. So I think if you want to just quickly put those up zero.
Speaker 7: And if you could bring those up real quickly, I'll cover those. So what we wanted to point out on Slide 30 is that we do dedicate a fair amount of resources towards our infrastructure. We have about $31.1 million worth of our own city funds that we spend on infrastructure maintenance citywide. That's not all. General Fund, a lot of that is, you know, in the various departments. But we also do very well at bringing in federal, state and regional funds. So these are MTA funds. These are state for state transportation funds and federal grants for infrastructure as well. So that's about 24 million. And then we also go out and look for new grants that are specific for for infrastructure, for example, to force wetlands received almost all of its funding from state grants of 12.5 million. So that's about $67.6 million that we brought in in 2016. However, on the next slide, as you can see, if you take that $2.8 million billion dollars and assume that if we were to fund all that need over ten years, essentially, even with that $67 million, our annual shortfall would be about $212 million per year. So while we are doing very well at securing funds there, there is a tremendous need. And what we have currently doesn't cover what what our need is over the next ten years. And with that, we're available to answer questions.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I'm going to go first to the make or the motion, then I have a series of councilmembers. So, Councilmember Austin.
Speaker 9: Thank you. And I want to thank the staff for this very chilling report. $2.8 billion over ten years is is it's not making our job as a city council any easier, that's for certain. And the decisions that we make. The needs are clearly vast and untenable with our current level of funding and our current finances. I get as a council member and I'm sure many of my colleagues do as well, request we leave from residents to to pay attention to the the neglected infrastructure in the streets, alleys, sidewalks. And I know we all do the best we can with the resources that we do have. The limited resources that were was just just outlined for you. And I think we do do a great job of patchwork and addressing most critical needs in our districts with the with the limited resources that we have. But. And then when it when we have inclement weather, when we have rain, where we're reminded most of it, I mean, I think I received a few text messages or people sent me pictures of puddles in front of their their homes. And it is very, very difficult to to tell people, hey, you know what, I wish we had the resources to to pave your alley or to order to fix your street, your curb and gutter. And so we are going to, as Mr. Stout said, have to make infrastructure truly a priority. We're going to have to do it when? Now. Have to step up and potentially. Make us make some tough decisions. I did did have a couple of questions in regards to this. I mean, I understand we have a number of you laid out basically everything, but some of these areas are don't they receive uplands funds some of the more coastal area of the highlands once.
Speaker 7: Yeah. So some of the coastal needs are covered by tidelands funds. So we did show those though not everything is required under on that list would be paid for by general funds that could be paid for by other funding sources such as Tidelands.
Speaker 9: So they're not not of $2.8 billion is necessarily. Um, there's, there's a whole there, there may be some funding coming in other sources to, to, to meet those needs. Is that correct?
Speaker 7: That's correct. When we looked at this analysis, we didn't focus just on generally funded. We focused generally on our infrastructure and our technology needs citywide. And then, you know, the various funding sources could fund certain pieces of that.
Speaker 9: So this was a big picture kind of overview.
Speaker 7: Correct. And I should point out that these are rough estimates that not every single project that the city has is included in there. Some have very strong engineering assessments. Some are very rough estimates. It was more of a a picture to the council of of a general outline of our infrastructure needs.
Speaker 9: Well, I think it was it was it was necessary. I don't think I've ever seen anything this comprehensive. Um, and like I said, it was, it was chilling for us to see that, that type of number. I do think that I do have some, some, some hope because I think the payment management plan that we have in place will help us prioritize street repairs. And and we have a system in place that that will will help us move move that program. But I think, obviously, where we're short on on on finances and revenue, I'm concerned that without identifying new sources of revenue, the city will not be able to address this $2.8 billion of long term infrastructure needs identified tonight without cutting critical services. And as the speaker mentioned, yes, we do have employees. Employees cost. It is the cost of running a government. It's the cost of running a city to try to to be able to deliver the services and to maintenance and and do all of the great things that that the city of Long Beach does. You know, our residents live here for a reason because they enjoy the city. So that said, I'd like to request that the city manager and finance staff work with the city attorney and city clerk to provide options for new sources of revenue. I mean, let's let's put it out there. We we've got an overview. We have a understanding of what our infrastructure needs are. Let's let's let's show us how to get there, how do we fix it? And I think this council may need to consider options for identifying sources of revenue to make needed investments in infrastructure and other important city services. And so what I'm asking for staff is can you guys come back in the next few weeks in an early part of next year with some information to help guide this council on a decision in that regard?
Speaker 7: Yes, that's something the council would like. We can certainly provide that.
Speaker 9: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember. I'm sorry. The second the motion with Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 6: Yes, thank you. I want to think staff a staff Shawn and say Ron and everyone that was a part of this for taking this over. I know with Reagan this has been a large undertaking, but it's a really great large picture, as we've been talking about, as to what our city needs in terms of infrastructure. And I will certainly be and always have been an advocate for better infrastructure. You know, as we put forth the alley plan or the alley agenda item a few weeks ago, you know, of course, we're very committed. I also like what Councilmember Austin mentioned. I think, of course, we certainly do need dollars to be able to make all of this happen. But looking specifically at leveraging dollars, you know, sitting on both the state and federal legislative committee, for instance, we've done great work with Shoemaker Bridge. I know in going to DC and really talking to the Department of Transportation or talking to our Congressmember Alan Lowenthal, about specific funds that we may need. So this is a beautiful document for us to go and take when we're at these different committee meetings to really give them a picture of what Long Beach will look like . So I just ask that maybe we look at, you know, for instance, Prop 84 funds that were used for Craftsman Village Park. I know, just kind of documenting a little bit more detail as to what other funds could be used in leveraging these dollars. And then I think I did hear, but I just want to make sure the document will be added online as well.
Speaker 7: Yes.
Speaker 6: Okay, perfect. Great. Well, thank you very much and great work.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Council Member Richardson.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Mayor Garcia, and thank you to staff for that presentation. I appreciate the comprehensive nature. I am also deeply concerned about our inability to invest in our infrastructure. We can only go so far with respect to taking a triage approach on how we handle our our critical infrastructure needs. And I know that there are tremendous needs across the city. And I was glad to see that there was really sort of reflected in this report, like our counterpart community center, 95 year old community center. I know about this center, but I know that there are needs and stories just like this across across across town. So I know that our residents don't want a second rate city, and I know that we all want to be proud of our neighborhoods. And we also want to, to some degree, control our fate and not always, you know, wait on grant funding to handle the important things that are that are vital to our community. So I think this is certainly appropriate, and I'm going to be in support of Councilman Austin's recommendation as well. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I have very little info.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I, too, would like to thank staff for putting this thorough presentation together. I know a lot of work went into the research and really review of our entire city. We have talked for quite a long time about investing in our city and our city's infrastructure. There have been councilmembers here before. Many of us joined this team that have expressed how difficult it is to really catch up, let alone stay ahead of our infrastructure repair and restoration needs. And so the beauty of our city being as old as it is, also comes with these challenges. And I think investing in the infrastructure will ensure that all of the progress that this city is making is supported. Failing infrastructure is difficult. We have in many areas just really considered ourselves in the position to do spot treatment. And I think taking a wholesale approach, really a whole wholesome approach to shoring it up is very important. And in the past, certainly in the retreat that we had last year, I want to say it's about a year ago we discussed our priority being infrastructure repair and restoration and all of the technological innovations that we pursue and are really advancing in, especially with the new innovation team that's been supported by the Bloomberg grant. All of that will be for not if we have crumbling infrastructure. And so, Mr. Mayor, thank you for your commitment to looking ahead for how this city can be secure really well beyond any one of our ten. And I think that's that's really one of the key roles we have here is to ensure that the city is shored up and can be stabilized long after that has a lasting effect long after our tenure. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember Ringo.
Speaker 5: Thank you, Mary. And I want to thank you all for obviously putting this forward. It's been a long time since we had any kind of study of this nature to look at our infrastructure and how we can we can fund it. I know I asked earlier when I was meeting with the city manager, you know, how are we doing on oil? Because some of these projects are oil, talent and other resources. And apparently there's no change in the fact it's going further, further down. So revenue is going to be a big challenge. So I'm going to support Councilmember Austin's motion to look at this even further. We don't have full council tonight. So, I mean, we're not going to have that robust discussion as we probably could have or should have. But I'm looking forward to bringing this back again in the next few weeks so we can get a full, full extent as to what what's out there and what types of action could take. And I wouldn't especially thank Council Member Gonzales for bringing up the alleys. And alleys is a big thing in my district and certainly having that included in this study is is important because a lot of neighborhoods are suffering in regards to what their alleys look like and the access that our city employees are refuse collectors have in terms of being able to pick up the revenues from from the alleys . And of course, there's the the issues of our public safety buildings and our parks recreation building. So I'm looking forward to the next report that we get the update and moving forward with this. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I want to just start by thanking staff. I know you guys actually work really hard on this and working on this for a while. And and I just want to thank the entire public works, Parks and Recreation and the city management team. I know technology, innovation, Health Department, everyone was involved in some way in this project. I know Public Works took the lead and I just want to thank you because I know it's very extensive and certainly there's an enormous amount of need. And so thank you for that. And I also just just wanted a couple just kudos. I think I do want to thank you know, Councilman Austin has been on this issue particular when it comes to the statewide advocacy piece. And I want to just remind us that we still also have an opportunity to hopefully also work with the legislature in this next upcoming cycle as they look at ways of trying to get cities transportation dollars. And we're in a situation today, unfortunately, where the state and Congress have chosen to do very little to help our transportation road repair, street repair needs. And so we will continue, I know, through the state led committee in particular, but also just to a further extent to to a lesser extent. But we will still do some work in the federal committee on trying to get some sort of package down to our cities. Obviously, there's no guarantee that's going to happen, but I know that work will continue. And I want to thank Councilman Austin and Councilman Richardson for I know that the work that's happening on the on the committees and to staff. So this is great stuff. You'll get this report online. You'll get the information back to the to the full council. And I know put that information on line as well so that it's all out there. And and that's it. We have a motion and a second to receive my father's report. Members, please go ahead and cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And I'd like to. Next item, Madam Clerk.
Speaker 1: Item eight Report from Economic and Property Development. Recommendation to approve the Uptown Property and Business Improvement District Annual Report and assessment for the period of January 1st, 2016 through December 31st, 2016, and authorized payment of $54,000 in city property assessments districts eight and nine. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to conduct a study session to receive and discuss the City’s capital investment needs for transportation infrastructure and City facilities. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12222015_15-1339 | Speaker 1: Motion carries. Item 11 Report from police recommendation to execute an amendment to contract with galls for the furnishing, servicing and delivery of uniforms and accessories to the Long Beach Police Department. To increase the contract amount by $55,000.
Speaker 0: There's a motion in a second just to clarify, because I actually won't actually and emailed me this question earlier about this item. The this is not the have anything to do with the body camera issue, which I got a couple of questions about. And from what I understand, Mr. City, Mr. City Manager, the the the body camera purchase contract is coming back on January the fifth. I know we had said a couple of weeks ago, a couple of weeks, and from what I understand from Mr. West, that's the day they're coming back. So.
Speaker 7: Yes, that's correct. Okay. Scheduled for the.
Speaker 0: Fifth. Okay. So so that's coming back the fifth. That is not this item in front of us today. Is there any public comment on item 11? CNN members, please cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Motion carries. Next item report from Public Works Recommendation to amend contract with Excel Paving Company for the rehabilitation of Pacific Avenue between Anaheim and PCH to increase the contract amount by 293,000 to allow for additional street work districts one and six and amend contract with Sally Miller for the rehabilitation of Bixby Road between Atlantic and Orange to | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager to execute an amendment to Contract No. 32483 with Galls, an Aramark Company, LLC, a Long Beach-based business, for the furnishing, servicing and delivery of uniforms and accessories to the Long Beach Police Department, to increase the contract amount by $55,000, for a total amount not to exceed $1,516,150; and
Increase interim Purchase Order No. BPPD16000001 with Galls, an Aramark Company, LLC, by $300,000, for a total amount not to exceed $400,000, and extend the interim purchase order through June 30, 2016. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12222015_15-1326 | Speaker 1: Next item report from Public Works. Financial Management and Fire Recommendation to award a contract to worldwide construction for fire station workforce privacy for a total contract amount not to exceed 2.5 million citywide.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Any any public comment on the item? CNN members, please cast your votes. Oh, I'm sorry. Absolutely. Can we get a can we get a staff update on this item, please, before we vote? Thank you.
Speaker 7: Yes, this has to do with our gender separation. And I'll turn it over to Mr. John Crumby, our city engineer.
Speaker 11: Good evening, honorable mayor. Council. This item is coming forward to adopt construction contract with worldwide white construction for tenant improvements focusing on workplace workforce privacy at four fire stations located throughout the city, the fire stations, number two, four, ten and 22 are in need of immediately upgrades to improve working and living conditions of the men and women that serve the stations. Proposed changes would provide adequate privacy modifications, improved building configurations and gender accommodations. Over the past four years, the fire department and in conjunction with the Public Works Department, has been investing investing significantly on improvements to several fire stations. The changes to data provided improved privacy modifications, building configurations and gender accommodations, also known as workforce privacy improvements. Past improvements have addressed health and safety issues. The abatement of lead in asbestos containing materials. And improved compliance with current code regulations. The improvements to these fire stations also are intended to improve public's perception of Long Beach Fire Department quality and readiness. Construction has already begun or already been completed. At fire station seven, 13 and 17 stations in order of construction within this project, or Station four, two, 22 and ten. With that staff is available to answer any questions.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilman Austin.
Speaker 9: Yes, thank you very much. I think you answered my question. I wanted to know what progress we've already made. And you've already said that. Do you have any anticipation on when new stations after this is complete will be scheduled for upgrades or.
Speaker 11: So the. The gender accommodations is proceeding in order of the the needs. And so we'll continue to do so. We do not have the the next schedule project ready to go yet.
Speaker 9: Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. There's a motion and a second. Any public comment on this saying now please cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Motion carries. Adam 15 Report from Economic and Property Development, Development Services, Financial Management, Library Services, Parks, Recreation and Marine and Public Works. Recommendation to declare ordinance binding and determining that a credit is due against the transportation improvement be applicable to the city. | Contract | Recommendation to adopt Plans and Specifications No. R-7036 for Fire Station Workforce Privacy; award a contract to World Wide Construction, of San Pedro, CA, in the amount of $2,085,427, and authorize a 20 percent contingency in the amount of $417,085, for a total contract amount not to exceed $2,502,512; and authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to enter into the contract, including any necessary amendments thereto. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12222015_15-1343 | Speaker 1: Communication from Councilwoman Mongeau Councilwoman Price Council Member Super nine and Councilman Austin. Recommendation to request the city attorney to draft a resolution in support of Homeowner's Exemption Awareness Month.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 9: Yes. Councilmember Mongo actually took the lead on this matter and asked that we sign on his support. It sounds like it's something that's going to be good for taxpayers where they can save up to $7,000 in property tax. Credits for their homes. And as a homeowner, I certainly support that. I know many of my residents would as well. It's important that we, I think, jump on board with this. This is an initiative coming out of the county assessor's office, and I look forward to working with his office and doing the outreach and making sure that our residents are well informed. I urge your.
Speaker 0: Support. Great. Thank you. There's a second on the motion. Any public comment on this item? CNN. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Thanks, Marilyn. Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Kira. Moving on to announcements, let me first do the second public comment period. If there's any second public comment period. KC None. Then I want to do announcements. I want to just begin. My first announcement is just to adjourn in the memory of Councilman de Andrews's nephew, Gary Cornbread. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Attorney to draft a resolution in support of Homeowners' Exemption Awareness Month. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12152015_15-1313 | Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you. We're going to transition now. Give me 1/2, please. Just want to give folks a chance to exit. Okay, Madam Kirk, if we can, we have the first hearing. And just as a reminder, we're going to do the other four public comments during the regular public comment period time right after the hearing. So, Madam Clerk, we can read the hearing item.
Speaker 0: Please report from Economic and Property Development, Development Services, Financial Management, Library Services, Parks, Recreation and Marine and Public Works. Receive the supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing and adopt a resolution certifying a supplemental EMR and approving a site plan, review and conditions of approval. With respect to the Civic Center project as described in recommended actions one, two and three declare the ordinance respecting the Transportation Improvement Fee Credit as described in recommended action for as red and laid over to the next regular meeting of the City Council. Authorize the City Manager to execute a project agreement with Plenary Edge Moore Civic Partners LLC for the Design, Build, Finance, Operation and Maintenance of the Civic Center Project and all other ancillary documents necessary for such project as described in recommended actions five through 13 declare the ordinance respecting Prop L as described in recommended actions 14 red and laid over to the next regular meeting of the City Council. Authorize the City Manager to execute an MCU with the Port of Long Beach as described in recommended action 17 and approve the expenditure and appropriation requests as described in the recommended action 17. This hearing requires no.
Speaker 1: Want to do the oath.
Speaker 0: Please stand.
Speaker 1: If you're doing the oath after, I think we're going to do the statutory duty to do an oath for this and think we did, but.
Speaker 2: Yes, it.
Speaker 10: Is. An oath is required.
Speaker 1: Okay, so if you're testifying on this issue, please stand. Please stand. Thank you. Only those testifying. And if you're not standing. Okay. Thank you. Perfect. Please raise your right hand. Madam Clerk.
Speaker 0: 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 1: Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. With that, I'm going to turn this over to our city manager. Mr. West.
Speaker 7: Mayor, council members. This is an issue. This is a project that we've been visiting for perhaps the last ten years. This council and previous council. First and foremost, we're at this stage tonight because of a serious public safety issue with both the city hall and the library. After Hurricane Katrina in 2005, the federal government required cities to assess all governmental critical structures. In 2006, our assessment showed major seismic deficiencies. City hall wings would separate, resulting in a policy to secure in place. The library roof was too heavy, resulting in the removal of landscaping and soil. At that time, we were investing only $12.6 million annually in our civic center complex. Today, ten years later, we continue to only invest the bare minimum. The same 12.6 million. Since learning the building had severe seismic issues. Combined with a collapsing economy, we stopped investing in optimal maintenance. A recent engineering study concluded that we should actually be spending $19.5 million and leave annually for the Civic Center Complex. On any given day, we face major issues. We have chiller problems. Plumbing issues. Asbestos in our stairways. Technology issues. Elevators breaking down daily. And security problems with the layout of the building. The Civic Center. Earthquake issues have come back to the city council occasionally throughout the past decade. In 2013, the Council directed us to perform a peer review. The city hired Mr. Nabih Yousef, one of the premier seismic engineers in America. Mr. Yousef concluded the city hall and library buildings were in much worse shape than previously thought. Both City Hall and the library could simply collapse in a large event. So what are our options? We could move, retrofit or build a new civic center. Regarding moving. There wasn't much interest to simply lease part or all of a building in the downtown or elsewhere in the city. In order to do that, we would still have to do a parcel tax. Regarding retrofit, the cost would be approximately $180 million, and that would also require a parcel tax, and it would also require City Hall in the library to move to another venue for a year or more during the remodel. This would end up giving us a building that would survive an earthquake. But after that earthquake, it would be red tagged and probably unusable. That less left us with the option of a new civic center. The council asked us to put on our thinking hats and find a creative way to fix this situation with minimal increases to the budget and no new taxes. Lucky for us. At the same time, the state was doing the redevelopment project across the street for the courthouse. Lucky for us, we had department heads who were very involved in that project. Using what we learned. We proposed to the City Council ap3d film project, public, private partnership, design, build, finance and operate. We felt we could do this project using the annual $12.6 million in the budget with annual CPI increases. Combine that with other existing structural dollars that were spending approximately $3.4 million. The expectation of further one time dollars. And also the value of putting some of our city property into play around the Civic Center area. This would provide us with a new civic center with little or no cost to our residents. First off, I cannot say how impressed I am with the team working on this and the incredible financing plan they have structured. It's simply amazing. I have to give congratulations to Mr. Mike Conway, John GROSS, Amy Bodak, Glenda Williams, Tom Modica, Craig Beck and also Richard Anthony working at our city's attorney's office. So I thank you, city attorney Charles Parkin, for all of Richard's help. We also have to thank the Long Beach Harbor Department that includes the entire board. The executive director, John Slinger up, the managing director of finance and administration, Steve Rubin, also Doug Sereno, Sean Gorman, Jamila Volkman and Erica martin. This is arguably one of the most important projects we as a staff have recommended. This is why we have been reviewing this solution for at least two years. A new Long Beach civic center will change the face of Long Beach for the next half a century. There are only three large cities in California on the water. San Diego, San Francisco. And Long Beach. We are poised to uniquely be taken advantage of our location. Long Beach will be unique in all of California, if not America. With this new civic center, we will have an 11 storey city hall, which will be the seat of government for one of the largest cities in America. Next door will have the 11 story port headquarters building, soon to pass Los Angeles as the largest cargo port in America will have. A world class brand new library will have a world class urban park. We'll have new three streets with open courtyards and gathering areas. And on the private side, there will be opportunity for several tall structures for residential hotel and office uses. Already a 200 unit condo complex has already broken ground, and all of this is basically on the waterfront. Finally, given the importance of this projects, it's critical that we share with you the financial aspects of the deal the risks, the rewards, the significance and how it evolved. Basically, it is pretty complex, but at the same time it is pretty simple. And know that the numbers you're going to see include 75% of the general fund with 25% of enterprise funds. At the end of the day, this is a small percent of our budget and includes input from over 100 meetings with the stakeholders and community . And if you look at what it will cost us to provide this new housing, so to speak, a city hall, a library in a park will be spending less than 3% of our general fund budget. Already the Parks and Recreation Commission have provided their unanimous approval for Lincoln Park. The Planning Commission has provided their unanimous approval for the entire development. The Harbor Department has unanimously approved the RFQ, the RFP and the selection of plenary adds more. And they will be voted on this project on Thursday night. So without further ado, I'm going to turn this over to Amy Bodak. She will lead off the presentation with a secure and designed presentation followed by Mike Conway and Jon GROSS. And I apologize for the length, but this will be about a 48 or 45 minute presentation. So, Amy, take it away.
Speaker 11: Mr. Manager. Thank you very much, Mayor. Members of the City Council. It is a great honor for me to be here with my fellow colleagues at the department head level. This has been an extraordinary effort and we are very grateful to have participated in it on your behalf. As Mr. West said, I'm going to be leading off the presentation. It's critical for you to understand the entitlements within which you are being requested to consider tonight. Those considerations actually must occur, and if you so choose to move forward, we do need those approvals to occur first before you can move forward in any other actions related to this project. So with that, I am going to start off by just reminding you and for the general public what the guiding principles were related to this project. These guiding principles were included in an RFP that was issued in 2013 that really spoke to what we were trying to achieve with the developed with the development of this project. We were very clearly trying to focus on all the work that had been done over the previous five years related to the adoption of the downtown plan. There were many sessions related to setting forth a vision for what the downtown should and could be, and the guiding principles for the Civic Center project fall in line with those principles of the downtown plan. So everything that we're going to be showing you today is fully compliant with the downtown plan. It does not need any variances or cups. The only approvals that you're being asked to consider from a project perspective, a design perspective, is the supplemental air and the physical design and layout of the project sites. So we also set forth a number of goals in addition to those lofty principles of what what kind of environment we're trying to create in the downtown. And those goals were also focused on fiscal restraint and the ability for us to manage our resources appropriately for the next 40 years. We were extremely concerned about how the facility would operate and be maintained over the course of 40 years. We were very concerned about how we could shift the risk of a significant development like this off of the public sectors shoulders and onto the private sector shoulders. We also had a primary goal which will we will go into in great detail related to affordability. And essentially that means, as you know, living within your means. We expect the city to live within its means as well so that we can continue to provide necessary services that the community expects of us. We agreed with the City Council, who set very strict parameters for us that we did need to be very cognizant of our financial stability so that we could afford what we were going to be asking a developer to design for us. So a little bit of background. We did the city council authorized the staff to release a request for proposals in February of 2013. A year later, we issued a request for excuse me, a request for qualifications in 2013. A year later, in February of 2014, the City Council authorized the issuance of a request for proposals to a shortlist of developers. Those proposals were submitted in June and in December of 2014. Just one year ago, the City Council selected Plenary Edge more civic partners as our negotiating partner. It has been an extraordinary year that we went through when the City Council approved this project last December. I don't think any of us understood the magnitude of the work that would go into getting to today. So I do want to thank the City Council for their support in understanding what staff has gone through for the last year and trying to get you the project where we are today. So again, the requested entitlements that we're asking you to consider is the adoption of a or certification of a supplemental environmental impact report. I'll go into that in detail a little bit further. And then also an approval of the site plan for the Master Civic Center BLOCK, as well as a third and Pacific site that the city owns. So just for the the project components, City Hall is, as Mr. West said, an 11 story building. We are currently housed in a 14 story building. The layout of the building will shift significantly from what you see today. The port headquarters will likewise be an 11 story building. The main library will be in approximately 138,000 square foot brand new facility that will be relocated to the north end of Lincoln Park. And then Lincoln Park will remain in its current location at its current size. I do want to emphasize that we are not reducing the size of Lincoln Park at all, and then the two buildings will be the two port headquarters in City Hall will be separated by a public civic plaza, which was critically important to us in the selection of the ultimate partner. We also are looking at your approval for conceptually some center block development, which could include up to 580 residential units, up to 200 hotel rooms, parking spaces and ancillary retail. And then conceptually, for the third and Pacific site entitlements that would approve up to 200 residential units with ancillary parking related to that. You should know that we have taken seriously a goal that you put in the RFQ and in the RFP, that there be a housing affordability component. And so 10% of any residential units that are constructed on the two private development sites must be affordable to moderate income families. There is a regulatory agreement in the myriad agreements you'll be considering tonight that would be in place for 55 years for apartments and 45 years for ownership units to ensure the affordability of at least 10% of those units for that period of time. We're also looking at three new parking structures, two public street extensions, and then, of course, the demolition of the existing old courthouse next door. The demolition of this building, the demolition of the main library as well. So I want to orient you a little bit. So the Civic Center site is this is Ocean Boulevard right here. This is Broadway Pacific Avenue here, Magnolia Avenue here. This is the federal building here, the new state courthouse here. We are located approximately right there, Broadway, a parking structure for those of you who visited today, that's where you parked this evening. The main aspects of the design of this was to breaking up the super block that was created four decades ago by extending both Cedar Avenue and Chestnut Avenue through the site. We also wanted to focus on the the extension of First Street through the site, both physically through a private street here, and then from a pedestrian mobility standpoint through the park and then through the Civic Plaza. The view on First Street terminates at the sit at the Civic Center with the the new City Council podium and the new City Council chambers. So there is a very distinct view corridor that terminates right here, essentially at the seat of government for the city. So. I'm going to see if we can make the laser brighter. I'll just describe it verbally. I meaning Mike Conway. So this slide demonstrates the mobility and access that will be created throughout the site. We have been speaking to Long Beach Transit about new bus lines and bus routes that are going to be surrounding the site to enhance mobility for the city. We're also talking about new bicycle boulevards and bicycle parking facilities as well.
Speaker 6: So Mr. Conway is walking around. He has shaky hands.
Speaker 11: This is Mike Conway, director of Economic and Property Development. This is other duties as assigned. So Mike is pointing to Mike, if you could point out, the first street corridor. I'm not sure this is going to.
Speaker 8: Work for me.
Speaker 11: I shall do my best. Council and members of the public make it. Okay. Come on down. Come on down, Mr. Conway. So this this site, this slide demonstrates for you how the blocks are broken up and how the civic uses are grouped together. On the left hand side of the slide along Magnolia, the existing police station and fire station number one across the street is the civic use, which is the courthouse parking structure and then the Anderson Federal Building. So you can see that city hall and the port headquarters are labeled on there. And it really does consolidate those civic uses into one portion of the site. The library, however, is much more oriented to the residential and the commercial users of the downtown and is in a much more open and engaging position. We've oriented it towards the north of the site in order to focus its its front door essentially on on two things. One is the residential neighborhood to the north and then the other one is to Lincoln Park. In the middle is the private development in yellow, which would be a link to the residential and commercial development on the south side of Ocean Boulevard, and then the residential and commercial development that is on the north side of Broadway. To the top of this slide, here's the proposed site plan of the three blocks that comprise the Civic Center Super BLOCK. You can see that the main library is to the north of Lincoln Park, to the northern edge of Lincoln Park. It sits on top of the existing Lincoln Garage, which will remain in place and will be seismically strengthened to support the weight of main library. Lincoln Park will be reoriented to be much more open to Pacific and Ocean Boulevard. It is still the the 4.9 acres that it is today. Cedar Avenue is directly to the left of Lincoln Park. And then you get to the middle, the mixed use commercial residential complex of the center block. Moving to the left of the screen again is city hall and the port headquarters. And you can see within city hall there is a projection that points to the bottom of the screen, and that is where the civic center, the civic chambers are for the city. I want to spend a couple of minutes orienting you to City Hall and the port building. Both of the buildings are oriented very specifically and sited where they are to reflect their essentially their constituency. They also, as buildings talk to each other and they are very much related in their design and the intent of the lobby building that is labeled lobby that is actually the port headquarters. They have views located, oriented out across Ocean Boulevard. They are responding primarily to their constituency, which, of course, is the harbor and the port complex. They they respond, however, to city hall, which is located where the the words lobby and public counter and council chambers are. City Hall and the port building are both 11 story buildings. City Hall is slightly larger in that it does contain the council chambers as well. It will contain all of the administrative functions that are currently in City Hall now, as well as some relocated functions. It will include the public counters as well as the permit center on the fourth floor, which would be relocated to a different floor in this building. City council chambers are going to be much more accessible. They will be oriented along the Civic Plaza so that there is a better relationship between the public gathering space outside and the function of governmental decision making inside the council chambers. Here is a view of both of the buildings from Magnolia and Ocean Boulevard. The building on the front, which has some blue and red on it, is the port building. Both buildings are similar, but they are not identical. The port building is actually designed to be reflective of the colors. An array of cargo containers that define the business of trade and commerce. And then the civic building is a little bit more staid and reflective of of a timeless nature of democracy. This you can see that we have tried to open up the corner of Magnolia and Ocean Boulevard to encourage folks to find the entrance of City Hall. We understand that that is difficult at times, and we'd like to rectify that by making it very clear where the entrances to both of those buildings are. This is the same view. But at night you can see that that we have a lighting component to both buildings that would add some impact to the skyline at night for both of the buildings. I also want to point out that the buildings are oriented respectively. The port building has a canopy roof structure that orients it to the south and then the city hall has a roof structure that orients it to the north to reflect its views to the greater city beyond. Again. Here's the Ocean Boulevard entrance right at the corner of Magnolia and Ocean. We hope that this is very clear where the entrance to City Hall is, where the port building will be. We will be developing a signage package in greater detail, but this should give an indication of those of those pathways. So moving on to parking and access, the the pink square at the lower left hand corner is going to be a subterranean parking structure that will be for city hall and port employees. There's access points for deliveries off of Chestnut Avenue and then access points for employees off of Magnolia Avenue, as well as exit points on Magnolia . The Broadway parking structure will remain the same. It's going to stay in its location. The entry and exit sequence will remain the same as well. Lincoln Garage will be in its same location and generally in the same configuration as it is now. But its access will change and will be taken via Chestnut Avenue through an underground tunnel. Lincoln Garage and the garage under the Civic Plaza will be employee only parking. Public parking will remain at the Broadway garage. I also want to point out on this slide, you can see in yellow at the far upper right hand corner of the commercial third and Pacific block, that is the first piece of the private development that we expect to be developed in as part of the entitlement request tonight. So now moving on to the center block, the big, bold red arrow that crosses the screen indicates the first Street View corridor and the private street between two commercial buildings . The commercial buildings, as I said earlier, contain approximately 580 residential units and up to 200 hotel rooms, as well as subterranean parking to serve those functions. The gray square above that is the Broadway parking structure where the visitors parked tonight. The yellow is essentially where we are sitting today. That cannot be developed until city hall is demolished. City hall cannot be demolished until we're relocated. Here is a view of what the potential private development could look like on the center block that the developer is proposing a potential high rise. We will clearly have to wait to see what the market will bear when when that site is ready for development. But you can see the corner where all the trees are. That is the opening of Lincoln Park, right on the hard corner of Pacific and Ocean Boulevard. This map shows you the park connectivity with Lincoln Park, the buildings surrounding it, and how we expect pedestrian cyclist visitors to access both the library and Lincoln Park. As I said earlier, Lincoln Park remains in its same configuration. We just essentially upgrade it and add more usable open space. The library has moved from the south to the north and then we have a number of programable uses that will be included in Lincoln Park, including a another dog park, a children's play area, a new restrooms and new restrooms to the south of that.
Speaker 8: And.
Speaker 11: A little bit right there. And then to event lawns. We also have an event terrace towards the south that can accommodate special events and special event users. This is an example of the different configurations that can occur in Lincoln Park. We do expect this to be a lively addition to the downtown that will capture the growing residential demand for events in urban parks. We can have small gatherings of, you know, moms and dads and their kids, folks walking their dogs and taking them to the dog park. At the same time, we can potentially hold a symphony with up to 11,000 folks enjoying an outdoor concert. So the design of this park is highly adaptable and flexible and should reflect the growing needs of the city as additional development occurs in the downtown. Moving on to the library. The library has been oriented, as I said, both to the north and to the south. The South access provides great views into and from the park to the library. The library has a exterior that is meant to be very welcoming to constituents, first time users, as well as long time users. It's also oriented along Broadway, as I said earlier, to focus on the residential neighborhoods that are to the north. This is a view from Pacific and Broadway, looking at the corner of the library, anchoring the link, the northern portion of Lincoln Park. This is also a view from the park itself looking north towards the library. We are hopeful that users of the park will also become users of the library and vice versa. Part of the project included a significant aspect where we wanted to encourage connectivity through the site and to the site, and that is being done through both a history walk and a cultural loop. The city and the port, as you know, have a number of archival resources that could and should be made available to the public. That does include some of the artifacts that are currently located on Lincoln in Lincoln Park on Current Centennial Plaza as well. These include the Marlin sculpture, the Centennial Clocktower, and, of course, the statue of Mr. Lincoln. The Parks and Rec Commission, as well as the Planning Commission, also recommended the relocation of a historic civil war cannon back to a site within Lincoln Park joining Mr. Lincoln. And that will be accommodated as well in the park in the park design. Focused very much, of course, on night lighting and how you move through the site at night. We want this park to be highly utilized and very safe. We want the location to encourage downtown residents and visitors to use it. So we are looking at a number of lighting schemes as well throughout this whole process. Here is an aerial view looking south towards the water of what the potential build out could be. You can see the park acting as an urban landscape opportunity for the downtown to gather around, and that is our goal. So moving on, we were required to do a supplemental environmental impact report. The downtown plan did a programmatic air that attempted to assess all the potential impacts of future development. We were not sure if the Civic Center would be able to fit under those. So we had to do a square review. And the purpose to seek was to disclose potential environmental impacts of development projects to the decision makers so that they understand those impacts as they move forward. It's also to consider potential feasible alternatives to the development project. Part of the Square review is is I should say not part of secure is really prescribed by state law. And so this flowchart shows you the sequence of steps that were taken and where we are today, which is asking that you consider making a decision on this project. As I said, the supplemental E.R. addressed a number of potential development impacts. But because it can't foresee all developments, we did focus this specific air on the on the Civic Center project itself. We are required to look at a different number of class of impacts, class one, class two and class three impacts under SEQUA. The definition of those impacts are on the slide before you. We looked at Class one impacts, which are significant and unavoidable, and these are those three impacts, air quality. We live in a non attainment area in Southern California, so every single development project has an impact on air quality. That is that is an expected impact. So there may be operational emissions issues and then exposure of new residents to air contaminants as we go through the construction process. Cultural resources. We do need to point out that both the old courthouse and the City Hall and library are considered potentially historic resources under sequa. And we are suggesting as part of this process that you make a statement of overriding considerations to allow the demolition of those assets from a cultural standpoint, and then noise and vibration. We do expect that there will be some temporary construction related noise and vibration that will occur over the term of construction. Class two impacts are significant impacts, but they are made to mitigate a, which means that at the end of the day they are resolved in one way or another. Under Sequa, these include esthetics, air quality, noise and vibration, and then miscellaneous issues. In this case, there were some concerns about the potential for an increase in vermin with the demolition of both the courthouse and civic center. So we did take that into consideration and do have mitigation measures for all of these issues that will address them so that they are no longer considered significant under sequa. There are also some minor impacts that will occur, but they do not raise up to the level of any kind of significance. We do have some mitigation measures in place for these, but because they are considered less than significant, we actually can move forward with this project even with these potential impacts. Lastly, we are required to look at alternatives. One of the required alternatives under SEQUA is the do nothing alternative, and there are many reasons that we're not supporting that alternative today. We did look at the ultimate build out of the downtown plan. We also looked at adaptive reuse of the buildings, and we also looked at a potentially smaller project. Given the goals and objectives for the project and the need to house administrative functions, the reduced intensity alternative and the adaptive reuse alternative were not viable alternatives. They did not meet the business needs of the city. So we are proposing what we're proposing is what we consider the project. And we have prepared for you a statement of overriding considerations to. Deal with the potentially significant impacts that will remain. There was a number of opportunities for public comment just on the environmental document. Mike And we'll talk about the myriad community input opportunities that existed for the remaining part of the project. But we are here today at the city council hearing. Towards the end of the road on Sequa. So with that, I am going to turn it over to Mike and Mike is going to walk through affordability and I'm pretty sure he's not going to need a pointer, so I am not going to be stepping on the dais.
Speaker 12: Thank you, Amy. So continuing our presentation, John GROSS and I will walk while actually will run through some of some of the staff's efforts since December 9th when City Council selected the project team. A lot has happened in one short year. Staff have completed or substantially completed the transaction term sheet, the basis of design conveyance documents and the project agreement with considerable Council support and leadership from the Mayor and Senator Laura. Senate Bill 562 was passed and signed by the Governor, providing clear legal authority for the city to pursue the procurement structure. We have started the abatement of the old courthouse and relocation of the storm drain at third and Pacific. And we have received an updated fixed price proposal and the project has been reviewed and approved by the Parks and Rec Commission and the Planning Commission and the State Lands Commission has also been briefed on the project. So during this same time frame plenary Edge, Morlot launched an extensive community outreach program, resulting in over 100 meetings with stakeholders and community groups throughout the city in both English and Spanish. Separately, there is a secure scoping meeting, a study session with both the Parks and Rec Commission and the Planning Commission and Workshop Workshop sessions on both the new main library and Lincoln Park. I'd like to spend a few minutes on the aspect of affordability first. It's important to recall that the responses to the RFP and the estimated project cost were submitted last June of 2014. 18 months have passed and some costs have increased. However, staff have spent some considerable time seeking ways to manage these cost increases. To add a little bit more detail to the sources of these cost increases. They include labor and material cost escalations since June of 2014. These actually work out to be about $600,000 a month for the city and $600,000 a month for the port. So delays can be extremely expensive for this project. Also, there is discoveries during due diligence that revealed the requirement for a specialist abatement in the Lincoln Park garage. There's been some community generated design changes, including a consolidated and streamlined permit center, articulated building design and exterior lighting. Relocation costs between the city and the port in order to isolate tidelands funds from any other fund. And those are related to both construction and operations and maintenance. And lastly, there are some financial market fluctuations relative to interest rates, but staff has identified a number of alternatives that can be offered that can offset some of the cost increases. And these include one time funding for capital cost operation and maintenance efficiencies and reductions, value engineering refinements, optimized equity levels and returns. Optimize fixed and indexed elements of the service. Fee reduction of developer and design builder fees. An on site point of sale for construction materials and long term property sales and transient occupancy tax offsets. So as a result, this is an important slide. This summarizes the cost increases and the cost decreases to the service payment, the revise service payment and with the long term tax revenue offset the net long term project cost of the city. This slide is all in 20 $13, which is a little somewhat hypothetical, but are used in order to compare the service payment to the 2013 cost to Occupy a civic center, which was identified a number of years ago as $12.6 million. And as Mr. West has indicated, this $12.6 million hasn't really moved since 2005. After applying offsetting cost decreases to the increases, the net increase in service payment is about 1.8 million, 1.88 million, which is about 15% higher than 18 months ago . This results in a service fee of $14.48 million staff and these are in 20 $13 as well. Staff is also recommending that a city controlled design contingency of 14.5 million be included in project costs, which would increase the service payment. An additional 4.5 I'm sorry, 4.5 million. Thank you. Which would increase the service cost payment, an additional $230,000. This would revise the service payment to 14.71 million or 17% higher than 18 months ago. If the design contingency is not used during the design phase, it will be used to apply to the first full year of service payment . And lastly, the private development is expected to generate property taxes, sales taxes and transit occupancy taxes, which would have a long term offset to city costs, offsetting that revenue against a service payment result in a long term annual cost to the city of 13.77 million in 20 $13, or 9% higher than 18 months ago. Separate from the project could be related to the civic center or costs that will continue regardless of the project goes forward. These other ongoing annual costs total $3.27 million. Council may recall that in their November 11th, 2014 study session of Hilton Park that staff identified up to 3.4 million other ongoing annual costs. And these costs still remain one significant source of these ongoing costs as the cost of off site leases that were not integrated into the civic center. Primarily, these leases are Workforce Development and Housing Authority. These leases were determined to be more expensive to housing in the expanded City Hall, created too large of a parking demand and better serve the community at offsite locations. And for these reasons, these offsite leases are proposed to remain offsite. Allocated costs are those departmental overhead costs that are applied to their occupancy of the civic center, and they will continue into the new civic center as well. To provide context to the $14.71 million service payment. Is it appropriate to analyze the cost of continuing occupancy of the existing City Hall and main library and the budget that is needed to ensure that these buildings are well maintained? The 2013 Parsons Assessment Report identified 234 million and needed capital investment over the next 35 years to ensure a like new physical condition of the civic center. This equates to $6.7 million a year on average for 35 years. Even with this significant investment, City Hall would continue to be functionally obsolete and energy inefficient. Additionally, employees and visitors would continue to be at risk in a significant seismic event. The budget for Civic Center has remained constant at $12.6 million since 2005. This budget does not reflect the funds necessary to maintain the buildings or reinvest in building systems. As a result, the buildings continue to deteriorate. If $6.7 million per year were added to the budget, as recommended in the Parsons report, the budget for Civic Center in 20 $13 would be 19.3 million instead of 12.6 or 12.6. So since 2013, the city has been pursuing a public private partnership to design, build, finance, operate and maintain a new civic center. The critical elements of this P3 debuff from procurement model is related to long term operations and maintenance. It is this long term operation and maintenance contract and hand back provision that buildings will be in a good or better condition that achieve the highest value for the city. The service payment covers all maintenance operations and lifecycle investment for the 40 year term, guaranteeing buildings that remain in good condition. If any element of this 40 year operations and maintenance contract is removed or changed, the guarantee at hand back will also change, severely reducing the value to the city. In that regard, certain services that are now provided by city employees will be provided by the project company. And as a result of Proposition L analysis was conducted which revealed that the necessary operations and maintenance services can be provided by the project company at a cost of less than what would be provided by city staff if provided at the same level. The city manager has long stated that employees identified in the Proposition L study will not be reduced in hours, duties or compensation, and city staff have and will continue to meet and confer on this issue. Now I'd like to get into a little detail on the project agreement. This is only a 700 page document. I'm sure you've all read this by the time of this meeting. The project agreement is the contract that sets forth the obligations of the parties during the construction and through the 40 year operations and maintenance period. It allocates risk, establishes the service payment and defines terms, identifies events of default, outlines, releases and indemnities, termination rights and termination payments. Risk allocation. It's one of the fundamental benefits of a free procurement model. The intent is to shift risk to the party most capable of managing the risk while the private partner is best capable of managing construction, cost and schedule and ongoing facilities maintenance. Some risks are best managed by the city, including secret clearance authorizing legislative legislation and construction inspection. There are other areas where risk is shared and staff is recommending that the city accept certain elements of risk. Some of these areas include regulated site conditions, differing site conditions, latent structural defects, possessor of interest tax and force majeure events. The risks associated with these elements include project schedule, delay charges, cost to address discovered risks and costs to modify the project. The recommended city contingency can be used to address costs associated with these risks as well. And from the project company perspective, these risks would be covered by contingencies which become project costs and which increase the cost of the project. In some instances, it is more prudent to accept the risk and the possible one time costs than it would be to fund a significant contingency over a 40 year term. The first element of risk for the city consider is regulated site conditions.
Speaker 2: Which I will.
Speaker 12: There's regulated conditions.
Speaker 10: Jeepers. Yeah, I think I got it.
Speaker 12: And so regulated site conditions regard involved the old courthouse site and these are unknown site conditions that when discovered, require oversight by a regulatory agency. This would include things like underground storage tanks or Native American artifacts. Since the old courthouse site is owned by the city, has been fully developed with the existing courthouse since 1958 and has been fully investigated by the project. Company staff recommends that the city accept the cost of this risk rather than finance a significant contingency over the 40 year term. The next element of risk for the city consider is differing site conditions. These are conditions that differ from the from those identified on site investigations conducted by the project company and as it relates to the old courthouse site. The concern relates to the soils underneath the old courthouse building. Because the project company was unable to collect soil samples under the building. The project company cannot eliminate the risk that the soils under the building might significantly differ from the soil surrounding the building. Geotechnical engineers have opined that this risk is low. Nonetheless, the project company would need to carry a significant contingency to protect themselves from this risk. Staff have negotiated that the first $1 million in additional costs due to differing site conditions are borne by the project company. The second million dollars in costs would be borne equally by the city and the port. If there are costs above that amount, the city and port shall determine an appropriate allocation or terminate the project agreement and pay a termination fee. Staff again believes that accepting this low risk is better than financing a significant contingency over the 40 year term. Similarly, the soils beneath beneath Linkin Park were also inaccessible and the project company was unable to thoroughly investigate. And as a result, project company seeks a similar risk sharing protocol as established for the old courthouse site. Rather than establishing an additional contingency, staff recommends that the $1 million project company contingency for the old courthouse site cover both the old courthouse site and the Linkin Park Garage as differing site conditions related to the old courthouse site will have been resolved before the start of work at the Linkin Park Garage. There will be an established contingency amount to apply to this risk if the cost of differing site conditions at the Linkin Park Garage exceed the remaining project company contingency. The city will bear any additional cost or may choose to terminate the project agreement and pay a termination fee. Staff again believes that this allocation of risk and cost is better than financing another significant contingency over the 40 year term. Another element of risk is latent structural defects. These are defects in design, workmanship or materials of an existing structure that are not readily discoverable, even with appropriate investigation. The project company's testing of the structure of Lincoln Park Garage reveals that the structure was built according to permitted plans and it is unlikely that there are latent structural defects . However, the project company could not test every area that may need to be structurally modified in order to support the new main library. The project company believes the city should bear any costs related to latent structural defects because the city owns Lincoln Park Garage built the Lincoln Park Garage and evidence indicates the minimal risk relative to latent structural defects. Staff again recommend city accept this risk. Rather than financing a significant contingency over the 40 year term. However, similar to differing site conditions. If there are any remaining project company contingency from regulated site conditions and differing set conditions, these funds shall first be used to address the costs related to latent structural defects possessing interest tax . There is a risk that it may be applied to the project. Possessor interest occurs when there is a private and beneficial use of a publicly owned nontaxable property. There is a risk that the county assessor's office may determine that there is a project company interest in the Civic Center over the 40 year term and apply a process or interest because our agreement with the project company over the 40 year term is simply a contractual provision for services. There appears to be no possessive interest. Additionally, outside councilors opined that there is a low risk of the application of possessing interest. So staff recommends again that the city accept this risk rather than finance a contingency over the 40 year term. Project agreement with all its appendices, which which was provided on a disc to City Council, was also uploaded to L.B. Civic Center AECOM. There are many more terms and conditions in the project agreement, but I intend to cover a few notable elements. The first is financing. Project Company shall be responsible for financing the project and intends to issue taxable bonds. Additionally, staff is recommending the inclusion of a city controlled contingency of $4.5 million for design related changes during construction and a risk related costs, which we discussed a little earlier. Also, the city, the port and the project company will contract with an independent building expert who shall ensure that the Civic Center is constructed consistent with approved design and construction documents and delivered at substantial completion with only punch list items outstanding. The project agreement also requires that the project company of the design builder and all subcontractors execute a project labor agreement and related to the civic project but not related to the private development project. Also related to hotel or hospitality uses on the private development sites, the project, company and successors and assigns shall execute a labor peace agreement with a local Long Beach union that represents hotel and hospitality employees. The primary reason for pursuing the Civic Center project is to reduce the city's exposure to liability from a significant seismic event and the related possibilities of injuries or death and the possible suspension of government services. So to address these concerns, Civic Center buildings are being designed to a performance specification that exceeds current building code standards and is equivalent to the gold standard of the resilience based Earthquake Design Initiative. Already, after a significant seismic event, which is approximately a 7.2 to 7.5 seismic event on the Richter scale, the buildings are designed to achieve the following few, if any, injuries. 50% confidence level of re occupancy within two weeks. 50% confidence level of full functionality within one month. 90% confidence level of full functionality within three months. And less than 5% financial loss when compared to the replacement value of the facility. This design specification is the leading edge of resilience based infrastructure and should ensure that city government can continue after an earthquake to provide US residents with assistance in rebuilding the city and for comparison purposes. A code compliant building has a 50% confidence level of full functionality in six months, with a potential financial loss of over 25% compared to the replacement value of the facility. Leadership in energy and environmental design. The project is required to achieve LEED Gold, but it is being designed to achieve LEED Platinum. The project agreement sets forth a number of steps that the project company is required to take in order to assure that the project achieves a minimum LEED Gold for new construction. The project company is fully experienced in achieving LEED certification for its new construction. Nonetheless, they are concerned that there may be issues beyond the project company's control that prevents it from securing a lead certification. In that regard, the project company does not want to be in default of the project agreement, so the city and the port have agreed to establish liquidated damages if the project company takes all reasonable steps to achieve LEED certification but is somehow prevented from receiving the lead certification. The liquidated damages amount are $1 million for City Hall and port headquarters. Separately, $1 million apiece and $500,000 for the new main library. As part of the achievement of LEED Gold Project includes a solar photovoltaic renewable energy system on the roofs of City Hall, new main library and port headquarters. It is expected that this PV system should generate up to 25% of the energy demand for the Civic Center, and this system will be jointly owned and maintained with the port. Operations and maintenance component of the project agreement is an important part of the determination of best value to the city. The cost of maintaining the structures over the 40 year term are built into the city service payment, whose annual cost is far below what would be needed to be invested in the current City Hall and main library. Additionally, the facility's management contractor, Johnson Controls INC or JCI, will be required to perform within established key performance indicators. They will implement a responsive service work order system and they shall be subject to penalties if qualified building systems are not available for use. The facilities management model is a fully integrated and cohesive model requiring all operations and maintenance elements to work in concert in order to be fully operational. As mentioned, the project company shall contract with JCI to provide all operations and maintenance in the new civic center, except for a movable furniture, fixtures and equipment and audiovisual equipment in the shared chambers. JCI will also be responsible for all capital investment during the 40 year term. The Capital Investment Program is designed to achieve a facility candidate condition index of 0.15 at the end of the term. This essentially reflects a building that is 84 of 85% of new condition. However, again, to reduce an ongoing finance contingency, JCI shall guarantee at the time of hand back in FCI of not more than 0.2, all which reflects a building condition of being 80% of replacement value or a good condition as reference. In 2013, the City Hall was at an FCI of 56%. The main library was at a FCI of 73%, indicating that both buildings should be replaced. JC. I shall implement a work service order system that requires them to respond to and complete work order requests within prescribed timelines according to the level of severity or pay a penalty as set forth in the project agreement. The response times ranged from 10 minutes to 24 hours, and completion times ranged from 2 hours to five business days again, depending upon the severity of the issue. The work order system is a highly functional, fully integrated and fully computerized system intended to ensure that facilities are well maintained, that the city's concerns are rapidly addressed, and that JCI complies with the performance indicators. Of particular interest is functional status of the city's elevators. The new city hall will include four passenger elevators and one service elevator. Studies on peak use have indicated that this number of elevators should adequately service the building. However, if elevators fail to function, wait times will significantly increase. And as a result, a separate penalty regime has been established for elevator failures. The penalties are intended to be a significant incentive to ensure that all elevators are working during business hours, with repairs and maintenance occurring during non-working hours. This type of penalty system for the elevators is a new platform in the industry and does not exist in a typical elevator maintenance contract. The project company is obligated to facilitate the relocation of city staff and port staff when their respective facilities are ready for occupancy. Certain liquidated damages apply if the project company fails to take prescribed steps that are intended to provide a smooth relocation process. Project Agreement provides for three general events of default. These are product company events of default, city events of default, which also include a termination for convenience and no fault events of default. Each event, a default if not cured, result in a termination payment by the city. In the event of a termination to a project company event of default, the project company would lose all of its equity and the lender would lose 24 20% of its outstanding debt. For a city event of default, the city would pay the project company the design builder's breakage cost, which is set forth in the design builder's contract and paid the expected rate of return of the project company's equity over the remaining period of the 40 year term, discounted at an annual rate for a no fault termination, such as a force majeure event. The city would pay the project company the design builder's breakage cost again and the project company would receive back its original equity amount, but it would not include the expected returns over the 40 year term. If this project agreement is not executed under the terms of the exclusive negotiation agreement, the project company would be paid $4 million. The city and port have been working closely and cooperatively on this project since 2013. One of the fundamental synergies achieved through joint development is shared space and shared facilities. These include shared chambers, shared meeting room, shared central utility plant and shared space in the port's parking facility and the city's Broadway garage. These shared uses the costs for construction of the cost for ongoing maintenance and capital replacement need to be carefully set forth in a memorandum of understanding that clearly inappropriately allocates these costs between Tidelands and any other funds. The project has long included the concept that the project company would be the recipient of any land access to the civic needs on which private development would occur. There are two private development sites. The first is third and Pacific at the southwest corner of third and Pacific. The site contains about 0.9 acres and is proposed to be entitled for up to 200 residential units, of which 10% will be restricted to moderate income tenants or buyers. The second type site is known as the Center BLOCK site, which is the property south of Broadway Garage between the prolongation of Cedar and Chestnut Avenues, essentially where City Hall sits today. The site is approximately three acres and is proposed to be entitled for up to 580 residential units, of which 10% will be restricted to moderate income tenants or buyers. The Center BLOCK is also proposed to be entitled for up to 32,000 square feet of retail space, 8000 square feet of restaurant space and 200 hotel rooms. Both properties will be conveyed to the project company without ongoing liability to the city relative to the condition of the property. The project company is also required to execute a labor peace agreement with a local union representing the hotel hospitality industry. So should the City Council elect to proceed with the proposed project. The project schedule should generally follow this slide with construction to begin in July 2016, after completion of demolition of the old courthouse building and occupancy of City Hall and main library and the port headquarters is scheduled to occur in mid 2019 with completion of Lincoln Park scheduled to occur in late 2020. It is further anticipated that this project will create temporary, permanent, indirect and induced jobs totaling 4764 for the Civic Project and 3268 for the Private Development Project. Over 8000 jobs will be generated as a result of this project. And so with that, I've concluded my report and I will laterals over to Mr. GROSS for discussion on financial structure and fiscal impact.
Speaker 13: Thank you, Mr. Conway. I'm going to I'll talk about the financial structure and fiscal impact and try to provide an overall picture how some of this stuff will be. Some of the materials will be covering what Mr. Conway has talked about, but I'll put it in an overall financial picture. I'll briefly cover the financial structure, the sources and uses of funds for the project, the annual service fee and other annual costs that the city will have budget impacts and then risks and uncertainties. This slide talks about the overall financial structure, essentially, as Mr. Conway talked about. We're talking about a public private partnership here, where the private company will design, build, finance and operate and maintain the civic center. That will be evidence through a contract called a project agreement, which Mr. Conway has talked about. We will be required to sell land to the port, sell land for private development, and the land sales will spur economic development and also provide funding for the project. In addition, the project agreement requires that the city will make upfront cash payments called service, and they help reduce the service fee and then make an annual service fee in return. As Mr. Conway said, we will get a civic center and PSP, the private company will operate and maintain it for 40 years.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 13: This slide talks about the project agreement, construction costs of almost $300 million. Most of the construction costs are directly for design and construction, but we'll also be paying off the remaining outstanding bonds on this building. And then we have transaction and financing costs and pre occupancy costs. The construction costs are being funded primarily by PSP, the private entity, either through borrowing or for or from equity. The city will be putting in some cash through some funds available surplus, some borrowing, and then we'll be contributing land for the project again, matching the amount being put in. That's why these numbers are in red, just to say they are matching the expenses. Thank you. The sources of the $10 million in Citi cash and borrowing are varied. One of the more interesting ones is that the project builder is actually paying permit fees, and we're going to turn around and use those permit fees to help pay down the project. Costs will be also be borrowing proceeds from a ten year bond issue and we'll also be drawing on funds available, meaning surplus from various city funds that can support this building total of $10.78 million. Let's talk a little bit about the bond proceeds. The bond proceeds that we're proposing for the civic center totaled to $8 million. On this slide, we only see 2.39 2.39 million of that 8 million is going to be used to help fund construction. The balance of 5.61 will be used to pay down some one time costs. The debt service for the Civic Center portion of this bond issue, which is another item on the agenda tonight, is not included in the annual costs for the Civic Center. That debt service is about $965,000 a year, but for only ten years, not 40 years. And it's being paid. That debt service will be paid from RDA related tax revenue associated with state action earlier this year to reimburse the city for loans made by the city to the RDA. The there is about $30 million that the project is going to receive from land sales. About 8 million is it is from land the city will sell to the port at fair market value. We're also selling the land at third and Pacific and we're selling the center block site, what's called the center block site, which is where we are right now for private development. These land sales are a key factor in reducing the overall costs, and they're also going to be a key factor in economic development for the city. They will reduce costs because they'll bring in tax revenue. We also have some one time costs not associated directly with the project agreement, but which the city will pay for directly. Those are some transition costs as we move from the Old City Hall to the new facilities and the new library. There's some technology and AV equipment costs that we'll be buying because the technology changes very rapidly. Some adviser costs and project oversight during construction. Where are we getting the money for those nine project agreement costs? 9.71 million. We are drawing down the remaining funds from the Civic Center funds available. That's the the fund that pays for the ongoing operation of maintenance of this building. And we have some money left that would have otherwise been used for maintenance. But we're going to be using it to propose and use it for the new civic center. We're going to be getting sales and use tax during the construction of this building from the construction materials on this building. So we're going to turn around and use that about $1 million to help pay for this building. And then, as I mentioned earlier, 5.61 million of the $8 million in bond funding will be used to pay for those costs. I've covered now all of the costs of the building. Now I'm going to talk about the annual costs that we're going to incur. The project agreement, as I mentioned earlier, requires that we pay an annual service fee. While there are no actual service fee payments until FY 20 fiscal year 2013 has shown that several years ago, because it is the base year for the Civic Center budget which Mr. Conway talked about and I'll be I'll sing a few slides from now. Our FY16 is shown on this slide because that is the base year under the project agreement for all project costs. So the hypothetical service fee in FY13 would be $14.71 million. If new tax revenue from the development were available, that would be reduced to 13.77 million. And that's what's shown on the slides. Skipping to FII 22. When we are in the building, the service fee would be 18.1 million and the service fee, if tax revenue were available , would be reduced to 16.93. And keep in mind that during that time the budget also increases. But we also have on this next slide some other annual costs, again, that Mr. Conway talked about, totaling about $3.27 million. Next slide. Now I'm going to talk about the budget, which is you've heard about $12.6 million. That is the number. But there were some technical adjustments that were made that from a budget viewpoint effectively reflects 12.44 million. So you're going to see 12.44 million in these slides. The equivalent numbers from FY 20 through 22 are shown 13.92 in FY 20, when first full year in the building going up to 14.71 million. In FY 22. What's important to note about these numbers is they represent an absolute no maintenance investment in this building, and that's not necessarily possible. It's not necessarily likely, but it is the budget that we talked about an effort by 13. And so it's being provided here for comparison purposes. This slide then puts together the service fee that we've talked about starting at 14.71 million an F y 13 compares it to the anticipated budget and gives you the variance between the service fee and the all funds budget. So for example, in FY 13 hypothetical year, you have a service fee of 14.71, a hypothetical budget of 12.44, which is the adjusted 12.6 with a $2.27 million variance skipping TFI 22. Those numbers would be $18 million for the service fee, subtracting 14.71 is the anticipated budget. That again is a no maintenance budget and you have a $3.38 million variance. And again, this is against a total maintenance budget. The next slide takes those numbers. The for example, the in the blue, the first column, the $2.27 million and F 13 adds to it the $3.27 million in other annual costs and gets an all funds anticipated budget impact in FY 13 of $5.53 million or 4.09 million for the General Fund. And for most of the rest of this presentation, I'm going to emphasize the General Fund, because that's the fund where citizens get services, and that's the fund that really impacts most of us. In Fy22, those numbers would be about $5.37 million general fund impact. But again, it would be reduced to about 4.2 million when we get development revenue on an ongoing basis. This slide, while it shows you the total budgetary impact, doesn't really represent what's going to be happening in the annual budget process. It probably overstates what the impact is, and I'm going to discuss that in this next slide on required annual funding. The budget impact presentation ends with this slide. And required R&D funding is the amount we need to add to the budget in any year to fund the new civic center above that required to for the current City Hall and Library. F y 19 is the first year we're going to be in the City Hall. It is a partial year. The budget impact on the general fund is $1.29 million using all the numbers that I've talked about. In FY 20, the first full year in the library, we expect to have another additional impact of $3.93 million. After that, there will be almost no impact on on the budgets other than the normal impact that even the Old City Hall would have with no maintenance. So the impacts are in FY 19 and FY 20. We have to we will have to come up with 1.29 million in Fy19 and then 3.93 million in FY 20. And after that, we don't expect any significant budget impact. Those. Those amounts will be funded and incorporated into the normal budget projections and process and will be built into the normal budget decisions. So that's the end of the section on budget impact. And I have two brief slides on risks and uncertainties, most of which Mr. Conway has talked about. And I'll just kind of briefly summarize them. The Lincoln Park Construction and the Old City Hall demolition are predicated on the sale of land. There is no guarantee for the sale of the land, but because the price of the land is currently higher than what we need, we do not anticipate a problem. There are also material penalties to ECP for not proceeding. We don't think that's a significant risk. The center block development timing and what it will consist of are uncertain. Interest rates could increase between now and financial close anticipated in late January. There could be some costs with regard to that. The costs you've seen tonight are our best estimates of costs, but actual costs for the other costs and for one time costs may change. The service fee that we've talked about is, however, fixed and certain once interest rates are set. And we have contingency funding. It's possible that we'll need more contingency funding than what is set aside. It's possible we'll have some left over. We just don't know for sure. The city is responsible for any major improvements to the existing garages on this last slide. We have the Broadway garage and the Lincoln Park Underground garage. They're over 30 years old. We will have maintenance costs for that that are not included in these numbers, long term maintenance costs. We would have those costs regardless of whether the civic center, new civic center is built or not. We are responsible for costs associated with earthquake damage for the new civic center. But this is a well-designed, earthquake, resilient structure. We are, we may be responsible for unusual losses and costs, and Mr. Conway has talked about that. We do have a termination payment of $4 million if the project does not proceed. And once we do reach financial close, it's probably not practical to think of of termination after that point. We are committed to moving forward with the project. And with that, I'm happy to turn the microphone over to City Manager West.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Amy, Mike and John and everybody, thank you for your patience. This is our last slide. I just want to summarize that staff strongly recommends proceeding with this project. We've negotiate an agreement that achieves the lowest cost for this P3 project. The costs are manageable. They're appropriate and fiscally prudent, especially when compared to the alternative. Hypothetically, if there were continued occupancy in the current city hall, the cost exceeds that provided in the P3 model. This project will result in a new city hall, a new port headquarters, a new library, a new park, residential, retail and hotel development, and an activated corridor with a private with private partners motivated to develop and manage those investments. With over 8000 jobs, while every deal has associated risks and potential risks have been weighed, waited and disclosed, and the benefits outweigh the costs. So, again, I just want to remind everyone, we're not here to get a pretty civic center or a city hall. We're here because we have to be here. We have no alternative. We're in a very dangerous building. And not only for the public, but the employees and anyone else who visits this facility or visits Lincoln Park or the foyer below the Civic Center could be at risk at a large earthquake event. Again, I thought we met the council's directions for the past two years and provided this project without any new taxes. I can't imagine. I don't know of any civic center project being built in California without new taxes. And so I congratulate the team for coming up with this fiscal scenario. And finally, before concluding this report, I have to emphasize this project could not have reached fruition without the tireless effort, passion and leadership from Vice Mayor Suja Lowenthal. Ever since the first 26 seismic report, she has been championing the effort dealing with this issue over the past ten years. Vice Mayor Lowenthal has hosted downtown visioning workshops too numerous to count and has spearheaded the downtown plan, which has cleared the way for this development. So thank you, Vice Mayor, for your leadership and getting us to this point tonight. This concludes the staff report. And again, thank you for your patience.
Speaker 1: Thank you. I'm going to make a couple of comments. And I know that we're going to have council, we're going to public comment. We're going to have council questions and comments. This is a big project. And so there's going to be and there should be discussion and questions about the project and input from the public. All that's very important when you have a project of this size and of this of this scope and of this importance. A couple a couple of comments I wanted to make, just generally, I think I don't want just to get lost in all this because there's a lot of report that we just heard. But at the end of the day, at least for me, it has been and will always be first and foremost. This is a project about ensuring the safety of the thousands of people that walk in and out of this building every single day. These are not just employees, but these are people that come in for services, to pay a phone, to pay a utility bill, to visit the clerk's office and so forth. And I think anyone that's taken a look at the studies, the earthquake studies, will come away with a clear understanding that we are in a situation that is unsafe and certainly long term not sustainable. And so that brings us to where we are today. I want to thank obviously everyone that's been involved in in this process, this as well. While this council has been looking at this for a year since our last vote, there's been a lot of other conversation that's happened even before this last year long process. And I want to just start by thanking Mayor Bob Foster, who began this process when he was mayor. It was a project that he spearheaded when he was mayor, as well as former council members that were also involved in getting us to this point. I just wanted to make sure that we mentioned mentioned them. It's really important that they that we recognize their hard work as well. I wanted to to say that I know that we we spent a lot of time. When you think about the Civic Center project, there's a lot of components to it. But I wanted to just reframe what the part of it that I'm the most excited about. And quite frankly, that's the library. And I don't think we talk enough about the library, but while I personally the city hall component I think is the least exciting part of this project, but the fact that we're going to get what I think is going to be the best library in the region is is quite special. This is going to be a library of the future that still respects the most important central part of a library, which is research and books and and to be able to build a structure. The library alone, I believe, Mr. Conaway, is a $70 million project. I think just the library. And so what we're building here is an an all new central center of education, not just for for downtown Long Beach, but really to be a beacon of learning for the entire city. And I want to because they haven't been thanked. And you want to thank all the librarians and the Library Services Department, friends of the Long Beach Library and the Library Foundation, who have been behind the scenes, incredibly involved in the development of the library component of this project. And so thank you. I know some of that you are here, but I want to make sure that we pointed that out. I think we like to immediately turn our eyes to the city hall structure, but I think the libraries is the most exciting part. Of course, in conjunction with the Great Park we're going to have and and everything else that is part of this this structure. I want to thank staff for coming up with a incredibly unique financing structure. You know, P3 is, by the way, is are are something that a lot of people are looking at right now and has have been done successfully, as we all know, most successfully just here across the street at the courthouse. And so the proposal that we have is to finance this essentially in the same model that we financed the courthouse building, and it's in this unique public private partnership in a way where we are paying barely, barely more than what we are paying today to operate the current structure that we are already in. And this would not be possible if it wasn't for this new creative opportunity where we're bringing in the power of the private sector to help finance this public project. And this just would not be possible without the private sector. There is no way that we could go to Long Beach. Voters and residents and ask them to go put out a, you know, multi-hundred million dollar bond to finance this project. There is no way we could afford to build this type of project and a new library and a new port headquarters and all the other the other components that are coming with this, with the structure. And so for all those that have been involved in the P3 process, particularly the experts at the courthouse that have served as both advisors and supporters of this project, I just want to thank you for for for bringing us to this point and to be able to do this project in the way that we're doing it. And just just to conclude, I think that this is a this is a big project. There is no question this is this is a project that is also, in my opinion, transformational and will. Reinforce, I think, the excitement that's happening across the city when it comes to building and thinking big, when it comes to development, the energy and the thousands and thousands of units that are currently being built in and around this project. Just across the street on ocean, I can count four different residential conversions that are happening from old commercial space that are developing or being built from the ground up, all beginning in 2016 because of the excitement around this project. Not to mention other projects that are happening on Pine and other places. And so I think people are are using this project as an anchor for future development and growth. So I just want to thank the staff. This has not been an easy process. There's a lot of information and I'm sure there'll be a lot of questions. But to Mr. Conway, our city attorney team, everyone over at Mr. West on down, I just thank you for bringing us to this point. And with that, I'm going to turn this over to the council who I know has comments and questions. I'm going to start this off with Vice Mayor Lowenthal.
Speaker 6: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I wanted to thank the staff for, I think, what was promised to be a 40 minute presentation. I don't even with Mr. Conway's auctioneer speed, speed talk, I think we had over an hour. So I want to thank the public for their patience as well. And we knew at several points you were still paying attention because you caught us on our slips as we were speeding through the presentation. But thank you to the staff, everyone that spoke today except for Mr. GROSS. But that's only because he chose to come to us much later to our city. But everyone has been a part of this process since day one, if not the entire ten years, a great majority of it. And there are those of you in the audience and and many staff members. But I will call out Mr. Craig Beck, who is also there as one of the guiding forces in the beginning when we started considering what our options were for our new civic center. So I'm truly appreciative of all the work that's taken place to this point in time. And Mr. City Manager, you're very generous and thoughtful with your comments. I realize when you speak and you talk about our decade of working at this together, that we have all aged quite a bit too. I had more here and others of you in the audience whom I won't name also had more hair. So. But it's well worth it. It is well worth it. I don't know that there is anything greater that we as a council, whether we were all constituted in this group from the beginning or not. But I don't know that there's anything greater that we can participate in than this effort to to give back civic center to our communities and our residents and our visitors. I want to thank. Plenary edge more time for their efforts to meet with the stakeholders around this project. I know as the staff was making its presentation, they went over the numerous meetings that were conducted well over 100 and counting, and that's significant. That is a significant public outreach effort. And the city staff and my Conway, Ms.. Amy Bodak in particular for the incredible amount of hours that have been poured into review of this project. When staff takes on a project, they are very good about managing our expectations. I don't know that we thought that we would work on this for ten years, but we had a Great Recession in the middle of it, and that's okay. Good things come to those that wait, and this has been a lesson in that effort. So when we consider all of this, all of the work that's gone into it, the community members for taking their time to really dream with us. This is not just a an imagination or an idea by the city council or the public servants in in this building. But really, it is community members coming, taking their time to just dream with us about what this civic center can be for the next century, if not more. And many of you heard me talk about the purpose of civic centers in the past and the great potential that they have. They have a great potential to achieve the human scale, purpose and goals that the center of democracy should have. We have not been that human scale or anywhere close to that proportion in a very long time. And it's not just our civic center or city hall, but many city halls throughout the nation have faced that struggle at one time. We know that civic institutions and the spaces around them where some of the most vital places in our cities and our property here, our civic center, has not been that in a very long time. Cities that engage in civic center redesigns and reintroductions to their communities. There's always a universal theme that's clear about them. They are cities that seek to turn their collection of somewhat foreboding, monolithic public buildings into lively centers. And I think that's what this city council and the members that were here before and the staff have tried to do in this decade is to really take this collection of foreboding , monolithic buildings. And make them into lively centers for a community. I've mentioned in the past that city halls, courthouses, police, fire headquarters, libraries and other civic institutions are the foundations of a civil society and the cornerstones of democracy together. At their very best, they have the potential to define a city and its communities identity. And that's what we do through pride, through opportunities for meaningful community engagement, meaningful interaction between residents, through the coming together in what can be a public living room. And so what we saw today in the nearly 100 slides is all of that coming to bear. And they also provide opportunities for a very diverse community to come together and to foster understanding. And so I want to congratulate our staff for the work that you've done, the stamina that it takes to see a project like this . To this point, we've come a long way in 12 months. I think we were here nearly exactly 12 months ago, and this is a quite a huge step forward, a big leap forward. And what we're poised here to do today, dear colleagues, is we are poised to approve buildings and public space that have the potential to once again anchor our communities to once again center the downtown. And what we don't know is that the investment that we make today, what the multiplier factor will be, we can imagine there are economists in the room, most likely, but I'm sure that those studies will be done very quickly. But I know, I know. And we have seen throughout not just our nation but really throughout the world, that when the public sector invests in a city and in the community, good money follows after that. So we're taking a leap forward really only to see what the boundless investment will be from the private sector. And so for all those reasons, I'm so grateful that our staff and Flannery Edge Moore held firm to the guiding principles that this council had laid out, that this council had adopted with the members that are no longer on the council as well. But this council together reaffirmed and re adopted, and I want to thank you for sticking to those. It has been a lengthy, lengthy process from its infancy nearly ten years ago. But I appreciate the evolution of our discussion. And frankly, as I've said before, we're all the better and in a better place because of it. Because we did wait. We had to wait. But I know that we're better off for it. A redeveloped civic center is a better investment for our taxpayers. Are mayor expressed his own comments to that effect. This is a better investment for us than our current civic center in terms of liability, ongoing infrastructure maintenance needs, economic development, water and energy savings, and reduction of offsite leases for city departments. In fact, the cost to bring this city hall and main library to current building code standards is greater than the cost to build new facilities that are environmentally superior, structurally, structurally resilient and functionally efficient. That's hard to imagine for most of us. It's still hard for me to imagine, even though I'm somewhat in that line of work, is how that that could be possible. But it is possible. And we've heard a great, somewhat lengthy presentation from our staff explaining why it costs us more to stay in this building. The most important for this council. It will be seismically safe. And I know that's important for our council because we feel a great responsibility to our city staff and their safety. And so the fact that it will be seismically safe for our employees, our staff members, our residents who work, the employees who work here or have business in City Hall, the residents that come here on a daily basis, we need to deliver a seismically safe building. The liability associated with the risk of our current city hall alone is immeasurable. We heard some of that from our team today, thanks to our downtown plan, and I'd like to be sure to acknowledge the debate. I know Mr. Craig cojones here with his staff. They were very instrumental in helping us with our downtown plan, the downtown visioning team that came together, the 12 members of this community that came together nearly ten years ago to lay out what a vision for the downtown will be. What we see today is their good work and their hope and their aspirations for our civic center come to bear. And so I want to thank everyone that was involved in bringing the downtown plan forward, the outward oriented layout, and the mixed use development that will reconnect the civic center with our residents, businesses and visitors in a way that's currently infeasible. That is thanks to the downtown plan that many of you participated in bringing forward. It will offer great access, greater access to decision makers and improve the economic viability of downtown. With the addition of employees from the Port of Long Beach Building located alongside City Hall. And there hasn't been that much focus about the efficiency of how public servants can work when we are all fairly close to one another. And so today, the way we work is not as efficient as possible. And I think with our new civic center and really recentering a lot of the functions that are at offsite leases will contribute to that efficiency. The city, the port and the project team have developed a project that transforms the downtown and will inject about $800 million in our local economy. It'll generate over 8000 jobs, as we've heard permanent, temporary, indirect and induced jobs. I like it when we can induce jobs. I think that's something all of us can get behind. And what's important for residents to keep in mind is that we are already paying about $12.6 million annually to maintain this seismically unstable building. And like many of you, I took note of the 17% increase in cost over the original estimate. But I think what we've heard tonight is, is something that is defensible and something that is reasonable, though I'm not surprised, given the news about asbestos above the parking lot, increases in labor. And I think Mr. Conway mentioned how much it costs us for every month that goes by the increase in material costs and project improvements. Another way to look at it is for $1.8 million more per year. We get a new civic center, a new main library and a new Lincoln Park. And perhaps we'll have our statue of Mr. Lincoln in a place where most of our visitors and residents can see it. I think right now it's a little bit of a struggle, and I believe it's a sound investment, and that's less than 3% of the general fund budget to eliminate our risk of liability and provide the city and the downtown with a vibrant, inviting and functioning civic center. We always refer to this current building as City Hall, and I appreciate that our staff has gotten accustomed to referring to this new project as a civic center because it does belong to the public and it is the center of democracy for the public. And so for us to refer to it as the center of government and its and our civic center for our community is something that I'm very proud of. So with that, Mr. City Manager, I have a couple of questions. I know you've gone through you and your staff have gone through a lot of this, but with the speed and everything, I've noted a couple of things. So if you'll bear with me, I'd like to just clarify a couple of things before I make a motion. And the first question is, in regard to security at City Hall and the library, I'd like to ask you if it's feasible to utilize our current city security officers to augment services provided by the project company and whether that's something we're able to amend tonight, if it's possible, under the project agreement.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Vice Mayor. Yes, that's possible. Through the meet and confer process with our labor organization that I am. We've been discussing security at City Hall and the concept of utilizing our current security officers in addition to our agreement with JCI. We feel very comfortable in retaining our current six officers, providing security at City Hall and a library to augment the base amount of security GCI will provide by reducing portions of JCI security scope and using our own City Hall security officers. The service fee payable under the project agreement will be reduced, but additional employee costs will be incurred. This will result in approximately $430,000 net increase in cost that would not be paid until occupancy in fiscal year 2020. Being the first full year, the council can make that change tonight if they wish, and we will adjust the project agreement accordingly. Specifically, we will adjust the proposal ordinance as well, which will show a net savings of $122,000 for the remaining services. So again, the answer is yes.
Speaker 6: Okay. I appreciate that. And I think and I want to thank you for that, Mr. West. I think that's a prudent course of action. Want one additional question that I have, and I think I heard it in the presentation. But just to reiterate, by moving forward with the change in security and with. With building maintenance conducted by JCI. Will And this is something that several of our council members have brought up before. But will any current City Hall employees lose their job?
Speaker 7: Vice Mayor and City Council We've committed to you as a city council.
Speaker 2: We we were.
Speaker 7: On record committing to that. We've committed that to our labor organization, the IAM. We've reiterated here in our presentation that no employee will lose their job or be reduced in hours, duties or compensation. So that's correct.
Speaker 6: Okay. I appreciate that. And I and I know it's redundant and we ask you time and time again, but this is a long project and I think you'll have to remind us also from time to time. So with that Clark clarification, I'd like to. Mr. Mayor, if it's appropriate, I'd like to move ahead with a motion. And my motion councilmembers is to adopt and approve items one through 17 as recommended by staff. Subject to the following. One that no agreements related to the project shall be executed prior to the effective date of Senate Bill 562. And that's the bill by Senator Lara, which is January one, 2016. Two that no agreements related to the project shall be executed if the city manager determines there has been a material change in circumstance related to the project which might adversely affect the city, in which event the city manager is directed to promptly return to this Council for further direction. And lastly, items five and. 14 and any other items are as necessary or amended so that city employees are primarily, but not exclusively responsible for providing security to the project and the city. Costs and savings included in the proposal ordinance are amended accordingly. And that's my emotion.
Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you. I think there's a second, which is Councilwoman Gonzalez. Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 3: Okay. Is everyone ready for my 45 minute presentation? Just kidding. I'm kidding. I'm just very excited to be here. As the vice mayor mentioned, I think all of us are very delighted to be at this stage of the project. And so I want to also thank our city staff as well for their very hard work, our city commissioners, our port staff and commissioners as well for working with us. Vice Mayor Lowenthal, of course, for her leadership throughout this whole process, our friends and business as well as the building trades and of course plenary edge more. But I also have to give a lot of gratitude to our community. I know many of them have also been in discussion about this so many, so many times. And to be able to be a part of a process that's really incredibly positive, including great partnerships, ideas for innovation, creativity and collaboration to collectively move this city forward . We're certainly doing a large part in that tonight and tonight. Together, we are making one of the most important decisions I know for myself as a council member, being in office now for about a year and a half, this is certainly one of the most important decisions I will have to make. But I'm personally proud of our city and how we've been able to slow this process down, make this project extremely inclusive, and incorporate ideas from each of our unique communities. It certainly was a mindful project as well, engaging discussions about park space, about homeless individuals who are here and how to handle how to best handle those situations . And from new developments sprouting up along downtown corridors that had long been vacant. I know the deal is here as well. I have to also extend my gratitude to them because I know they've been working very hard, but with vacancy rates that had gone up, you know, to be able to now have new new businesses coming in is really great and wonderful. And now we can revisit, of course, our branding and marketing as a city as well. And I think it's just an extremely important and powerful project that we are able to now vote on. I too have a few questions. I know the vice mayor was great in asking a lot of the questions related to costs, and I know that has been a question on many of our minds. I know it's it's kind of scarier on paper to see that. But when reading the information and when being presented with this, it's it's less scary. And so I just want to ask, as far as the general fund, how much will we be impacted? Percentage wise.
Speaker 7: This project will be less than 3% of the general fund.
Speaker 3: Okay. Less than 3%. And we are currently paying now how much to currently exist in our building.
Speaker 13: I'm sorry. We're paying. How much for what?
Speaker 3: To be here in our. In our. In our building currently.
Speaker 1: The current operational costs are.
Speaker 13: And operational cost is 12.6, including the leases.
Speaker 3: And then that's compared to the 13. Million. Correct that we would be.
Speaker 13: Compared to the 13.77.
Speaker 3: Yes, 13.17. Okay. So when I look at those, I certainly don't see a stark contrast. It's nothing. I think the return on investment that we're getting when it when we look at property values that will be coming about rising. As I mentioned, property values, new economic vitality, new tourism, and of course, a brand new, beautiful looking civic center. A few other questions I have, though, as well is we will have I know it's been discussed before. We will have gender neutral bathrooms.
Speaker 11: Yes, ma'am. We will. We will actually have a gender neutral bathroom accessible off of the lobby.
Speaker 3: Okay, great. And there's over 8000 jobs being created. Wonderful. Okay, well, those are all the questions that I have at this time. Again, I just want to reiterate how very impactful this is for many of us and thank city staff once again for all of their hard work in this whole process.
Speaker 1: And, Councilman, I want to just one thing. I think actually is the most important part of the discussion that you asked about. Mr. GROSS. You mentioned the current cost being 12 point. Would you say 12.4? I think it was right. Or six. It's 12.6 to the current cost, which is 12.6, which are paying right now, and the new costs, which is 13.7. I want to make sure that the one part that I don't want to get lost in what you presented earlier is what we're paying right now, 12.6 And we've been paying the 12.6 since 2005 six And so the actual cost that we should be paying every year is closer to 18, 19 million a year. That because we're not doing deferred maintenance, we're not investing in the building, the actual cost that we should be that we should be paying is dramatically higher than what we will be paying. And to me, that is the key piece of this of the conversation. I just wanted to highlight that. And with that, I'm sorry, Councilman, do you have any more additional questions? Okay. Thank you. Councilwoman Pryce, please.
Speaker 3: Thank you. I want to thank our city team for the presentation. And I do have a few questions moving forward. First of all, as a start, there's no doubt that this is going to be an excellent development. It's going to provide over 8000 jobs. It's going to be built with skilled labor, which will serve us well in the future in terms of the sustainability of the structure as we move into the future decades and the future generations. It's a well thought out project in terms of the design components, the the way that the different structures interact with one another and the opportunities for the public to engage in this space. And to also, of course, I share the mayor's excitement about the library and the opportunities to enhance our library system in the city by providing the solid, great foundation at the heart of the city. So no doubt all of that is is very positive. I do have a couple of questions that are really fiscal in nature. So perhaps they would be directed to John GROSS, although I defer to the city manager on the best staff member to help address them. The $940,000 in expected revenues that we have projected in in the financials. When do we expect that 940,000 to come to fruition? Is it when the development is completely. It's completely occupied including the center block structures that prior to that.
Speaker 13: The the. We will start receiving some property tax revenue actually as soon as the center block is sold, there will start. The third and Pacific is sold. And then when the center block is sold, we anticipate the third and Pacific to sell shortly so that it won't be $940,000, but there will start to be property tax revenue . The bulk of the revenue will increase as development occurs and the assessor assesses the project as a private development as it moves forward. Obviously that'll be after the city hall is demolished, but the 940,000 represents a steady state after development occurs and sales and property tax are coming in. And that that timing is as soon as development can occur after we demolish city hall. And maybe one more question. Third and Pacific will develop way before that.
Speaker 3: In terms of that that $940,000 figure, how did we arrive at that figure? Is that is that figure conservative in nature? Is it a best case scenario figure? What's our risk in making an assumption that 940,000 and expected revenues is going to be in our calculations?
Speaker 13: We are not sure exactly what the development is going to be. We did hire a development expert to review a low, most likely and high estimate, and the high estimate is more than double the $940,000. So we thought using the 940 as the most likely was a very reasonable methodology to use.
Speaker 3: Okay. We have talked a little bit about the cost to the city of maintaining the leases throughout the city for various departments. Can you please explain what the status of all those leases will be with the new Civic Center, perhaps, Mr. Conway.
Speaker 12: Councilmember Price. We brought in three or four leases. A couple of leases have also terminated over this period of time. I did mention in the presentation the two primary leases that remain offsite and the reasons why we want that. We recommend that they remain offsite. One, it's lease less expensive to lease space than it would be to build additional space in city hall to accommodate them. Plus, their parking demands would exceed the parking availability in our Broadway and Lincoln Park garage. And lastly, we believe the services that they provide are better provided in the community where their target population is located. So about 1.2 million or so in offsite leases that weren't brought in to the Civic Center.
Speaker 2: And are part of.
Speaker 12: John Gross's 3.27 in additional ongoing.
Speaker 2: Costs.
Speaker 3: Okay. So when we talk about a 15% increase in the annual payment, we're we're calculating in the leases that we're going to be maintaining offsite.
Speaker 13: That's correct. Okay.
Speaker 3: Mr. GROSS, you mentioned several times the financial close. What is that process for those of us who aren't in the industry?
Speaker 13: What happens at Financial Close, which is scheduled but could change near the end of January, is all of the documents, the project agreement that's before you tonight, the financial loan that C will be doing in order to finance this project, putting in the equity. All of that will be money, will change hands and will be turned over to a trustee and the legal documents will be signed and locked into place. So money will change hands and the contracts will sign and the project will be formally underway.
Speaker 3: Okay. And that's projected to be in January?
Speaker 13: Yes. Late January.
Speaker 3: I have a question. Probably best for the city attorney. We received I think everyone received an email this afternoon, late this afternoon from the State Lands Commission. Is there any concern on behalf of the city attorney in moving forward? Is there anything we need to do to augment the language of what we're approving tonight to make sure that we are complying with their requests?
Speaker 10: No, we I reviewed that letter. We're satisfied this is on here. We're satisfied that the flexibility is already provided in the motion before you right now. And we're committed to continue to work with the State Lands Commission, of course, between now and the time at which we execute the agreements to address their concerns. We're confident we can do that.
Speaker 2: Okay.
Speaker 3: For for Mr. GROSS, assuming that we move into this the process and and we go through that, the whole process, and the end of January, we go through the financial close is what is the status of our annual payments moving forward? Can they fluctuate? What types of situations would warrant a change in the annual payments? What can we expect as a council?
Speaker 13: The service fee, the payment to the private company will be locked as a financial close. And in general, I'll identify some exceptions. In general, that price will be known for the next 40 years. It will go up with inflation and a fixed growth in amount, generally under 2.4% a year. That's all been factored into the projections and numbers you've seen today. So those that number will be fixed. There are some exceptions, such as extremely unusual events that occur, relief events that could change that number. But in general, that number is is fixed.
Speaker 3: In terms of that number, I'm really focused on two particular years of significance, and that's 2019 and 2020, specifically 2020. And one while one may say, you know, it's shortsighted to just look at a year or two as members of the city council, we deal with short sighted because when we answer calls and emails from our constituents , it's about what's happening in their neighborhood on that day. So given the gap that we see in the general fund for those two years as a result of the increased payment, what expectations do you have or what discussions have you had with staff regarding the impact of that deficiency to our residents in terms of basic city surface services, police infrastructure, that kind of thing?
Speaker 13: Our approach and what we're recommending is that we build those amounts and I think you're referring to the extra 1.29 million and the extra three 3.9 million in FY 20 into the operating budget. We expect that we'll have to we will make those adjustments. The one the $3 million, even at the $3 million level, the FY 21 time adjustment, it represents just a little over 1% of the budget. It's it's it's not that it's not obviously it's not a trivial amount, but it's it's an adjustment that we've made before. We've had adjustments and where we've had to adjust $20 million in the budget, we've had adjustments of $7 million in a year. So this number, while it's certainly nothing to ignore and is and is significant, is not a number that is we're going to be able to handle that number.
Speaker 3: Well, and I understand that. But aren't we projecting a deficit in 2019 and 2020? In addition to this.
Speaker 13: We have projected deficit in F, y, 17 and 18, and we do not have a projection for FY 19 and 20 because it's too far out. We will do an F by 19 projection in March. We literally do not have one at this time. We're not going to do FY 20 simply because it's too far out to be reasonably accurate. We do have a situation where and we've talked to City Council about this before, that our pension costs are going up about four and a half million dollars a year and that will continue through f y 20. And we hope at that point it will level out. We'll be updating those projections. But that's that's the driver of our financial some of our financial issues. The key driver actually is is our pension cost. So that is an issue. We also expect debt service to drop in FY 20 by somewhere in the area of $3 million a year due to a natural decline. And that will certainly help offset cost increases in FY 20. Given the pattern that we have and again, we don't have a projection for FY 19 and 20, I wouldn't be surprised if we continue to have at least some level of shortfall in those two years. It might be better than where we are now and really we don't have those projections. So that's that's where I think we are.
Speaker 3: Okay. I say that because I have heard our city managers have probably a lot of people in this room when we've done the pension projections say winter is coming. And we've talked very often about now until 2020 in regards to our pension obligations. And so I just wasn't sure that we're all going forward knowing that in addition to our pension obligations, we're going to have a $3.93 million shortfall in 2020. And I want to make sure that we are committed to the taxpayers, as we have been from the start of this project, and saying that this project is not going to result in a reduction of services to them in terms of police protections and public works, the core services that we provide, parks, all of that. We've made that commitment from day one. And that's the message that I've shared, is that we're not going to be changing the level of service that they're going to get as a result of moving forward on this project of what, you know, what is our position on that, knowing that we can't anticipate what our budget is going to be in 2019, but we're anticipating some some pension obligations that are going to give us a deficit during that time period.
Speaker 13: I'm.
Speaker 2: Did you were.
Speaker 13: You looking for a response from staff on.
Speaker 3: That? Yeah. I mean, what's are we, are we looking at possibly cutting city services to make that happen?
Speaker 7: Mayor Councilmembers No, we don't believe we'll be looking at cutting city services. We have an excellent finance and we look at things with a3c and we'll be preparing for that and taking a look at other opportunities for revenue opportunities and other areas, how we do organizational efficiencies. And I think we've done a pretty good job facing some of the deficits that we faced during the past ten years. And as fine a point, I believe that this is rise's level of something that we'd be concerned about. It's service reductions.
Speaker 3: That's good to know. In terms of going back to the presentation that you guys provided. In terms of the 10% of the residential units being reserved for moderate income households, what is that? That figure has that figure of what that constitutes a moderate income been defined?
Speaker 11: It's about 120% of area median income. So for a family of four in Los Angeles County, it's somewhere around $60,000.
Speaker 3: Right. Our first payment. And I know we covered this will our first payment actually be in 2019 as a partial annual payment, or will it be in 2020? 2019 as a partial.
Speaker 13: Yes. We will be we anticipate moving in July 1st of 2019.
Speaker 3: Okay. In regards to page 79, the sources of the funding, the one times and you may have gone over this, but what is a park impact fee?
Speaker 11: So the city has several impact fees that are assessed against development projects and they pay for essentially improvements to facilities. We have traffic impact fees, we have PERC impact fees. There's a sewer connection fee or impact fee as well. And we also have a public safety impact fee. What we need to do as a city in which we do all the time is that there is a nexus between development and impacts to city services and city infrastructure. And so instead of, for example, a residential development being required to construct playground facilities, in this instance, there is a park impact fee that is associated with residential development. So for every unit of residential development, a fee is assessed based on that residential development. The impact fee goes into a special fund that is overseen by financial management but is managed by the Parks and Rec Department. And then they manage that those funds in accordance with acceptable practices and state law. In this instance, park impact fees can only be spent on new facilities. They cannot be spent on existing facilities. And so there are new components of Lincoln Park, which would which would be eligible for the use of the park impact funds.
Speaker 3: Okay, great. Thank you for that. The $4.5 million contingency is that for the city's portion or combined city and the port.
Speaker 10: That is just for the city.
Speaker 3: Great. Thank you. I have no further questions. I just want to reiterate, my my biggest concern going into this is. Hitting 2019 or 2020 and having to cut some core services. Police, fire. You know, some of the things that our residents rely on because the commitment that I've made, the legislative intent behind my vote in favor of this tonight is premised upon the fact that our residents are not going to suffer core services as a result of us building a new civic center. And that's that's my intent. And so if I'm wrong on that or if somebody anticipates that, I'm going to that that legislative intent is inaccurate, I really would appreciate that notification now because I could not support a project that would result in us having to cut services down the road to support, even if it's for one year, because that's that's an entire year that our residents depend on those services and we need to be increasing, not reducing those services. So thank you.
Speaker 7: Thank you, mayor councilmembers. I would like to point out, however, not to pursue this unless you're to do a ballot measure. We could virtually guarantee that we'd be having to reduce services to stay in this building. So we have an option to make. If the council wants to do a ballot measure to do a new city hall, we can guarantee no service reductions. But if we don't go forward tonight and stay in this building, we can guarantee service reductions.
Speaker 3: But we are anticipating no service reductions, is what I'm hearing. STAFF Absolutely. Yes, that's that's what I'm for tonight. Absolutely. I'm not yeah. I'm not talking about ballot measures. I'm not going to that dramatic, you know, place. I'm just saying we're what I'm hearing from staff is that we're not anticipating any service reduction.
Speaker 7: Given the plan that we're putting forth tonight. Absolutely true.
Speaker 3: Thank you.
Speaker 1: I just one thing I just want to add is I think Councilman Price makes some good points is just as a reminder, though, for everyone, the public, the council, every decision that we make has an impact on what will happen in 2020. And so if next month the Council approves a new policy on Policy X, that will have an impact if next year the Council approves policy. Why that could have an impact. So, you know, you know, obviously, I think staffs try to answer the question and I and I appreciate that. But just as a reminder, the council as well, we we every single Tuesday have the ability to dramatically impact the future of the deficit as well. Thank you. And I also have Council Member Richardson.
Speaker 5: Thanks. Before I get to my comments along that same vein, I want to just chime in on the way that this is being framed, because I think it's important that we're responsible in terms of providing the real picture to our residents. I don't think anybody I personally don't support cutting core services, and I don't think anybody on the council supports cutting core services. But, you know, any any decision we make, whether it's additional hours on a Sunday and a library to, you know, additional park rangers to all of those things have additional impacts in the future. So I want to make sure that, you know, we're talking about this decision today in the context of this budget and what we do in the future. As long as we're being reasonable in terms of the impact, I think that's something we can manage. I think we've gotten a reasonable understanding from the city manager on what the marginal impact is of the budget. And what I want to do right now is I want to ask what. Mr.. Mr.. West. The difference again between what we pay today and what we will pay is about how much annually.
Speaker 7: Mr. GROSS has a number we.
Speaker 13: And the key impact will be $3.93 million in FY20.
Speaker 5: Okay. So $3 million impact.
Speaker 13: Against against today's budget.
Speaker 2: Okay.
Speaker 5: And do we expect that to increase or decrease?
Speaker 13: After that, I think I think it would. The projections say that there will be no material change after that.
Speaker 5: And that's based on conservative estimates on what we're going to generate. Correct.
Speaker 13: Or based on what we think are the most likely estimates. Could be higher. Could be lower. But I think that's a reasonable estimate to make.
Speaker 5: And does that get us a fully paid for library, park and community center and civic center?
Speaker 13: Yes, it does.
Speaker 5: So the first thing I want to say is, you know this, when I came to the council, I paid it, paid some attention. But I thought that I personally thought that this is a you know, this is one of the largest decisions the city any city council has made in the history of the city. And so I think it's good that we took the time, hit the pause button, went back to the community, you know, community meetings in all parts of town, including North Long Beach, to talk about this in my particular community meeting. You know, there was one resident that brought up concerns, but there were really good questions and those were engaged, you know, those were engaged by the team. So I want to acknowledge city staff, the council, the development team for taking taking the time to go through this process so that I, as a council member and in my community, can warm up to this idea of doing something large and scary and complex. I get it. It could be it could be challenging. But I think it's important that we look at the whole picture, that there's this thing called risk and opportunity cost for not taking action. If we don't take action, it's on us should something happen. And the alternative would be to do something much more expensive on the ballot or find some other source of raising revenue and to speak in straight terms. I don't I just frankly don't think that that's an option. I think that what's interesting about this is that we're sending an interesting message to, you know, our community in terms of the approach in adding a historic loop and a cultural loop to make sure that everyone that, you know, everyone in our city feel some sort of way to connect with the building and see that they're interested in their history and their cultures are reflected into the design of the building. I think that says a lot that we made that effort to connect with them in the very architecture of the space. I think what's interesting also is that by taking, you know, a new approach in terms of the innovative way that we've financed this , I think that it really sends a message also to our development community and business and says that we're willing to to do something different and we're not stuck in the same old ways. And the fact that we're able to do that to achieve our goals as a city, if you indeed believe that having a new building, a new park, you know, great facilities that our city can be proud of are something that we value. Something our value also is the commitment to the workforce. So I've heard early on this was referred to as a a live work development or live work space. And I really see this as a work live space because frankly, the rank and file spend more time at City Hall than I do as a council member. And so I'm glad to see that efforts have been taken through the meeting confer process to make sure that our rank and file employees we're at the table have had a conversation about how we're going to approach things like security. So that's something that should be acknowledged. I also want to acknowledge I think it's important to note that, you know, Pkkp Whineray Edge Moore had a very successful jobs job fair last week and that we've had even more conversations about doing more of that kind of outreach , particularly in North Long Beach. That is something that I believe encourages the whole city to connect with this project. So I do support that. And so for me, with this vote, absolutely, this has major implications. I think this is one of those moments where, you know, you have to really dig down to your values on this vote and for worker safety sake, for the residents pocketbook sake, and for minimal impact on our budget, for our main library sake and the inspiration on the future for our Linkin Park sake. For those reasons, I'm going to vote in favor of this tonight. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilmember Durango.
Speaker 2: I like your analogy of a live, work, work, live and not the amount of time I spend to get to my work live type of guy. The amount of time I spend in City Hall. However, having said that, obviously there's a lot of concerns about this project. There's a lot of concerns about the current city hall that we reside in. I see this project as very promising. It's one that has a lot of moving parts to it that has a lot of potential. I think that the I think it's historic in many ways in the sense that this project has been able to bring labor and business together in support of this. The fact that we have a play that's going to be in place, that's going to focus on jobs for local residents, for Long Beach residents, is wonderful. I think that the potential growth for business in in regards to a commercial corridor that we're going to have here with this project as well is going to be very positive and it's going to make a difference for downtown. It's going to bring more, more people here. It's going to be the center of government. It's going to be the place where people are going to want to come if if not just to have a picnic in the park and visit Lincoln, but to come to the library and to pay their bills. So I think that's going to be a wonderful opportunity for people to come to downtown even more than they may do already. I think councilmembers Lowenthal and Gonzalez said it very eloquently in terms of what the impact is going to be on this project here. There is nothing that I've seen and heard that is negative on it, even to the point where they're raising concerns about the amount of additional funds that we're going to have in the future come 19, 20, 19 and 2020. I think that that is manageable. I think that it's something that our budget people have looked into. I trust their analysis. I'm not a financial person, but obviously, but I think that what they have said is worth is we're taking the risk we have. Everything that we do is risk. And it's been said, you know, the potential for change and risk is every Tuesday when we make a decision and we push this button. The also, I think I'm very confident and the city manager's comments that there will not be any jobs lost city jobs. In fact, I think it would provide a potential for growth. And the fact that there's going to be 8000 jobs added as a result of this pride not added, but a pool of people employed as a result of this project is phenomenal. So I'm looking forward to having something in place here tonight that we can move forward with. And let's get moving. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Councilmember. Councilwoman Mongo.
Speaker 0: I want to thank the many residents who have engaged in this process. I've really enjoyed working through and talking with the individuals who come down to City Hall from the fifth District. And I have a list of questions that were submitted by members of the community, most of which have already been answered tonight by my colleagues and or the staff. And so I also want to thank many members of the community who thought, as I thought and I know Councilmember Price had mentioned one of my questions from closed session that I think was so engaging when I discussed it with members of the community about this park fees. And those park fees often are confusing because they cannot be used to revitalize the parks that we already have. That is the way that those funds were designated. And so while we would love to be able to access those funds for the parks that we already have, many of you know, the fifth District is in dire need , as is the rest of the city, of updating and improving our parks. We are moving in that direction outside of the park fees that are designated for a new park area only. I know there's been some constituents that have reached out to our office about the seemingly rush to act on the project. I think that city manager Pat West and Economic Development Director Mike Conway really laid out the process and how it started in 2007. And as my council colleague Richardson said, we've really taken a hit the pause button and reviewed and gone out into the community and engaged in that process. And I think that the 26 community meetings and three council study sessions, along with the nine district based meetings, was a aggressive and very appropriate engagement. And I think that that in addition to all of us as a council, working hard to include it in our weekly, monthly or quarterly newsletters, each district's different has really gotten the information out. I know that the components of City Hall are are quite large. It's important, as the mayor mentioned, to talk about the World Class Library that will be right here in Long Beach and the preservation of our history, along with the port headquarters and city hall and so much other important space in the redevelopment of Lincoln Park and the opportunity to bring mixed use housing downtown. I think the most important thing for me was when I was briefed that if we do not act today and move forward in this direction and we instead choose to stay in city hall, services would be cut and we are already facing potential cuts regarding our deficits ahead that are caused by the pension. And so for me, this public private partnership is the opportunity to ensure that those services are not cut because of the deficiencies of the prior decisions related to this city hall as built and voted on by our predecessors. That got us here. There is a quick couple of questions that had not been answered that I think the community would like to hear. And if I missed it when I took a quick bathroom break, please let me know that I did miss it. Why was the city? What was. Let me start with this one. Why was it in the city's interest to support Senate Bill 562 that was passed this year, allowing the city to execute the financial agreement for the new civic center lasting up to 50 years to.
Speaker 10: I apologize. I just returned. Did you say why was it in the city's interest to do that?
Speaker 0: So I know that we had originally talked about a 30 year plan, then we moved to a 40 year plan. When we went forward and supported the legislation, we supported a 50 year option. Can you talk a little bit about that and what that means to us as a city and where we ended up landing on that
Speaker 2: ? Sure.
Speaker 10: We thought that it was very likely that the structures that were being proposed about a year ago were legal, but it had not been done before. It was kind of a matter of first impression, and we didn't want to take the risk that there would be some sort of a challenge. So we sought the legislation. It passed, I think, unanimously, and we included, you know, I can't recall now whether we included a 50 year term or 40. I think we may have.
Speaker 2: Was it.
Speaker 1: Okay, Mr. Murdoch, do you want to just chime in on the details of that and kind of move up.
Speaker 10: To 50 to provide some flexibility, but we did not end up pursuing.
Speaker 2: That. Yes, that's correct.
Speaker 0: And why did we choose the 40 when we could have put it out over a longer period?
Speaker 10: Well, I can punt this to Mr. GROSS, but I believe that it's cheaper to to borrow over a shorter term.
Speaker 0: I believe he did say that in a closed session. I just wanted to make sure that it was out there in the public record.
Speaker 2: And I'm there in council, if I can add to that. In our RFP and RFQ, we had originally planned on a 40 year. And so, you know, that was really the direction from the council was the 40 year so that we endeavor to meet that target.
Speaker 0: I think that when discussing the long term maintenance and the viability and the condition that the building will be handed off to us in, I think 40 makes a lot of sense and so I'm supportive of that as well. There was some confusion in some of the discussion we had with a few community members related to how we future based the 20 $13. So the specific question would be why has the staff goal to achieve the annual cost of 12.6 million in the 20 $13 raised all the way up to the 2015 into 17 and $20 of 14.48 million.
Speaker 13: We use 20 $13 because those are the dollars when we went to council and council set the goals. That's why we use 2013. We report 20 $16 because the legal documents are based on 2016. That also happens to be in current prices. And then we reported other prices in their dollars like FY 2021 and 22, because those are when we actually make the payments. And we thought that city council would want to see what the payments were in those years.
Speaker 0: I appreciate that very much. And how does the 1.88 million additional, the 15% increase in the annual service costs impact future budget processes? How is that worked into it and accounted for?
Speaker 13: We have we have we FBI 13. That number 1.88 is an FBI 13 number. The actual numbers that we'll have to incorporate into the budget start an FBI 19. That's the 1.29 million and the 3.3 3.93 million in FY 20. And so that would be the respective numbers that actually get incorporated into the budget. And as I said, we'll just incorporate that into the regular budget process and into our projections. You'll be starting to see that in the projections and we'll work that out over the next few years.
Speaker 0: And then I really got several emails related to this question, and then I had a discussion with some of the city staff about the Taj Mahal city halls of Orange County that have completely gone out of control with their budget costs and the demands of those councilmembers. I think that here we are talking about a civic center, which is much more of a plan to ensure the fiscal stability of the city. But I think it's important to ask this question and have it answered is if the reason for the cost increases was a result of due diligence and realization of necessary asbestos mitigation, structural support deficiencies and new design features leading to changes in the project scope and the relocation costs and escalation costs. How can we be sure that that does not happen again? And and what does that mean?
Speaker 12: At this point in time? We've identified the risks that the city is exposed to, which is differing site conditions, regulated site conditions. We've got numbers that bracket around those exposures and we have some contingencies that the project company is accepting as well with those contingencies in place. Then project company takes all the additional risk relative to some of the design changes and some of the the change orders that occur in construction, the risk related to differing site conditions and regulated site conditions. If they exceed a certain number, then the city has the opportunity of terminating the agreement and paying a termination fee. That will always be an option that the city can consider if indeed it's facing some significant cost. But again, those costs that the city is assuming that I discussed in this presentation are considered to be relatively low and that it was more prudent for the city to accept a potential one time costs associated with those risks rather than financing over 40 years of contingency.
Speaker 2: And Mr. Mayor, if I can add to that as well, what you see in that, how this differs from some of those other projects that you talked about, is in that traditional model, which the other cities have used, it really is. The city is making the decisions and the city accepts all the risk, as Mr. Conway said, of change orders, of cost, escalation, of, you know, those are all things that the city, through its management, would have to accept in this agreement, which is completely different. Those risks are really, except for the ones explained tonight, are really on their set. They're defined and they're at the risk of the project company. So we do not expect to see, you know, change orders that, you know, unless the city makes specific, conscious decisions. And we've set aside a small amount of contingency for that. But it should be very different from what you've seen in other cities that are publicly managed and built.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And the initial project schedule contemplates that occupancy readiness for City Hall, the port and the new main library will be simultaneous. And then those transition costs are built in as kind of a bulk rate when moving people moving them all at once. Will there be an impact to our costs if that is not achieved? And how is that burdened by the team?
Speaker 12: Will there not be an impact if what happens? I missed it.
Speaker 0: If if all three buildings aren't ready at the same time as they're scheduled to be, where we would all move approximately at the same time of June 2019, and we have to do a phased in move in. Would those cost, as you mentioned before, be burdened by the developer?
Speaker 12: Our payment, our service fee, our annual service fee will be reduced by a certain percentage if buildings are not available.
Speaker 0: That's exactly what my next question was. And how will that impact the service fee? Thank you. And. The Exclusive Negotiation agreement and terms and conditions sheet and the global agreement. When and how will that be made public and how can we ensure that it's transparent and provided to the constituents in a way that doesn't hurt our negotiating standpoint, but gets out at the soon as possible moment?
Speaker 12: All documents are currently available at Long Beach. Civics are civics Entercom In-a term sheet and project agreement, formally known as.
Speaker 2: A global excellent agreement.
Speaker 0: I know they're in my next newsletter and I think Councilman Gonzalez emailed a note in her newsletter earlier this week. So you're a little bit ahead of us, but absolutely. I guess I'll end I have three more questions that I may or may not ask. I think a few other councilmembers have the same question because I know you are CC by the same constituents, but I just want to say that I'm really proud of the work that we have seen our partners do already in terms of negotiating and finding a place where we can meet common ground and it's best for the residents. I was thoroughly impressed with the job fair this weekend and the number of constituents that came. I think that it's great when our local residents are hired. It really reduces a lot of issues, especially most importantly, the unemployment rate here. It reduces if they get those jobs in the city, the environmental impacts of commuting to work and all of those types of things. And I also want to our also look forward to seeing I know that local businesses being on these teams was a big part of that. And I know that there are some conditions that allow for rebidding out business partners on this plan. But I hope that local businesses will be in the final plan because I know that many local businesses were on both teams at the beginning, and I hope that our partners hear the firm message that we expect to see local businesses as their partners when this is completed. So more on that to come. Thank you and I look forward to hearing public comment.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Council Member Supernova.
Speaker 2: Thank you. And speaking of public comment, I would certainly like to hold off on some of my questions and comments until we do hear from the public. That being said, I do have one question that has come up as recently as today, and that is what would it hurt to wait another 90 days? Like, we haven't done enough due diligence so either. Mr. CONWAY. Mr. GROSS, can you delineate some of those items, either construction costs, locking in those or whatever?
Speaker 12: We have our current estimate of delay cost due to escalation of both labor and materials is $600,000 a month for the city, $600,000 a month for the port. So about $1.2 million for the project delay per month.
Speaker 2: Okay. Thank you. Another question I've gotten is the amount we still owe on this building. I think it's 17 million and some change. Where does that go? Does that get rolled into the new project and etc.?
Speaker 13: The the project includes about $21 million. If I have the number right to pay off the debt, $17.6 million to pay off the debt on the current building that will be included in the and the financing of this project.
Speaker 2: Okay. And then just on a personal note, because I'm new to the council, I've only been here eight months. I've been asked, did I have time to do the due diligence? And so I just like to thank staff for bringing me up to speed on this. We certainly have done the due diligence. I believe that my staff and I have really researched this and asked every single question that's been framed here tonight and then some. So thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilmember. Councilman Austin.
Speaker 4: Thank you. And I want to thank my colleagues for the thoughtful questions. Hopefully, I won't have too many to to follow up, and I am looking forward to hearing from the public. I do want to thank our staff, city management, for their all hands on deck approach to dealing with this to solve this very important issue. I think it shows the the talent that we have, the professionalism of our our staff, and they've done their due diligence and done a good job of keeping this council and public informed throughout the process. I want to thank our partners plenary edge more for their public process that I think was very, very engaging and transparent. Questions were asked along the way, but also they were open to ideas from from the public, public and of course, our public who participated in the forums and learn more about this and have been informed throughout the way to help shape the the ideas and the concept for the new civic center. I want to thank the building trades for for their vigilance and in this process as well. Certainly they have an interest in putting our residents to work in the local hire agreement. And the project labor agreement is something that I'm particularly proud of. This is obviously a major undertaking that I don't take lightly. City Hall is for for all of Long Beach, all of its residents, its visitors. It's not a district specific undertaking in any way. And this is a decision that and ultimately will will transform our downtown, put thousands of people to work and make for safer work and business space. When you look at All Things Considered here and there were a lot of numbers put forth and there was a lot of careful analysis here. It appears to me that it's it's cost neutral when you look at the risk associated with keeping a seismically unsafe building. However, there are risk and I want to ask some questions about those risk. I think the success of this, ultimately the success of this project is going to require significant oversight and management and great management from from talented staff with the long term interest here of our city. And. There were a couple of there was an area of the staff report that that that jumped out at me and maybe you can help me get some clarity on it. And that was regarding the three interest text that was wasn't too clear on terms of what our exposure really is and who would be responsible for that , how much it is or may be. Um, can you help clarify that?
Speaker 12: Absolutely. So the possessor interest tax is applied when there is a private interest in public property in depending upon the financing methodology, there could have been construed by the county assessor an interest by a plenary edge more in the leasehold estate. And because at one time we were contemplating a land lease in a lease back in our financing structure, and so staff was a little nervous that there could be a determination by the county assessor that possessor interest would apply at the current financing structure is a taxable bond. What is being provided to the city as a service payment over 40 years outside counsel has reviewed the status of that financing structure and does not believe that possessor interest will be applied. So we don't believe there is much risk associated with that. If at some point possessor interest is applied for some reason and and it essentially remains applied and we haven't challenged it, the city would then be obligated to pay that possessor interest. Under our current structure. The city would receive back 21% of that possession interest into their general fund, so that even if there is possessor interest applied , the costs associated with that would be abated somewhat to about 70% of the total possessor.
Speaker 4: So. So with that, I mean, we you said we you he got direction from outside counsel. Was the assessor's office actually consulted?
Speaker 12: We actually met with the assessor's office and their chief appraiser and and others, I guess in the assessor's office, they were, let's say, somewhat coy in whether or not possessor interest would apply and the process by which they would do that calculation. But that meeting was taking place at the time that we were facing or considering a lease and lease back of city facilities. That's clearly not our structure, our financing structure at this point. So we don't see much likelihood of the application of possession or interest.
Speaker 4: In terms of a assessed value of the property. I mean, do we have any kind of ballpark on what that would be?
Speaker 12: Well, no, I guess is the short answer. I think our best application of what might be a valuation of the property would be the cost of construction. Being a city facility, there is not a revenue stream associated with it that's comparable to the office marketplace, which would be a more traditional approach to value. So there's there's not a clear way for us to identify what the value would be other than the cost to construct.
Speaker 4: Well, I think everything is pretty much been been laid out for us except that unknown variable with it is kind of kind of leaves me very concerned. I think, you know, if there were some sort of scale, you know, if it's $10 million, it's $5 million. And what what is the possessor interest tax on it? On $1,000,000? Do you know or would you know?
Speaker 12: I don't know if. Yeah, it's probably 11.1 1.25% of that would be just like a property tax. Okay. And you can because that's your interest has a sliding scale as well. So it would be up to 1.1 or 1.25%.
Speaker 4: Okay. So I guess my next question is what sort of guarantees, if any? And I think I know the answer to the question, but does the council have that these costs will continue to increase? From what we know today.
Speaker 13: The, the, the annual cost. I think that's what you're asking. Council member are you not? The annual cost, once we hit financial close is set by a formula. It will not change. It will go up with more or less with inflation or something equivalent to inflation. And those are the numbers we gave you. There are other other annual costs that we talked about, the 3.27 million. There's no reason to believe that those are going to go up at a different rate than what we've projected there. They've been stable for years, so we're pretty confident that we have those costs correct where there are uncertainties. We've mentioned them and Mr. Conway has talked about them. But where we don't have uncertainty is what the cost will be. The service fee cost that's going to be pretty locked in.
Speaker 4: Okay. And I think lastly, I'd like to learn a little bit more about the $4.5 million contingency cost for design that's being included in the financing of the project. Is there any other option other than just financing this project? I mean, year after year we deal with one time revenues and obviously we appropriate those in our budget process. But but is there a way for us to to get away from financing that that component of this.
Speaker 13: That financed that $4.5 million because we're not paying for it in upfront cash? What I believe you're saying is that there is a financing cost to that $4.5 million, and you are correct, that is the case. But we have looked at a number of ways to minimize the cost. We are contributing quite a bit of money, $10.78 million to reduce the contract construction cost. Already we're putting 9.7 in for one one time costs. And unless we can identify. Another $4.5 million up. We think we have the most inexpensive way overall for this project is to include it in in the financing costs.
Speaker 4: Okay. That's all for now. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Before I turn to Councilman Andrews and I think, you know, Mr. Connor, I think you and Mr. GROSS said and answered the questions on the on the statutory interest tax questions correctly. I'll just let them the council members know that I've been in pretty close contact with the county assessor, and so we've had multiple discussions on this topic. And I would just concur with staff that I think everyone's feeling like that's going in the right direction. Obviously there's no closer to that at this at this point. But in just the conversations that I've had with him directly and that staff's had to staff, I think that that's there. There's good progress being made there. Councilmember Andrews.
Speaker 2: Yes. And thank you, Mayor. I think sometimes it's pretty good to wait to be the last one to speak on asylum, because the fact that you get a chance to hear what are you your colleagues are speaking about? And I think they answered all the questions that I was sitting here listening to. But most of all, when I think of this, I want to, first of all, thank Mr. Conway and Amy Bolduc and also The Edward Edge, more civic partners for their hard work and its incredible, you know, project. You know, sure, it's a huge project for the city of Long Beach, and I think I'm very excited about it. But I think most of all, when I think about this, when you came to my district and you gave us, you know, oversight of what we're going to build and how it's going to be built. And most of all, you talked about jobs and if any. But you know me, my whole thing is about jobs because I know the importance of jobs. But Jessica, like me and you sat down with us and told us about 8000 jobs that could change the whole complexity, you know, of this individual that live in the sixth District. But not only that, but I think for the city of Long Beach, because everyone at this point is trying to figure out if we build this project, will we have the jobs that you spoke about? And from what I'm here and what I'm listening to, this is what you guys have promised and this is what will be. Because the theme of my parade this year called Empowerment of Hope, and this has given individuals some hope because the fact that I definitely believe that what you've said you will do and by doing that, it's going to make a city that I think everybody is always very excited about. But I'm really kind of excited to hear what the public is going to speak on because every question I think that they'll be talking about has been answered up here in the diocese and for city manager and all the rest of the individuals. I want to thank all of you for playing such a large role in a big part in this. And I hope everything goes well and I will be truly supporting this item.
Speaker 1: Thank you. With that, I'm going to turn this over now. Public comment on this hearing. So please come forward. And make sure you say your name for the record, of course, as we always do.
Speaker 2: Oh.
Speaker 1: Please begin.
Speaker 9: Good evening. I am Francis. Emily Dawson Harrison Oversight in District one. And I wrote the majority of my comments and I have given it to all of you. And I've been listening to everything. And I wanted to say that Tom and Vice Mayor Sergio lOth. I actually served on Cape Cod when this matter was being brought forward, and ten years is a lot of time to invest into working on a project. So I commend you for your fortitude and your patience and your perseverance. And each and every one of you and I have 3 minutes to talk, some to try to stay focused and give you the main points that I felt this past year. New technologies and innovations hit the market in artificial intelligence, robotics, augmented reality and 3D printing spaces that could pave the way for a major shift in society today and tomorrow. Steve Long Beach Proposed Plan New Civic Center project will be awesome. While strongly reflecting the city's present and future needs, the city of Long Beach is known for its accessibility, for its inclusion, and for its cultural diversity. Now focusing on inclusion, I think the time has come for us to move forward and be more inclusive. And then the points that I have four or five mentioned about having companions saving and this hospital in the city council chambers, the mayor asking for a seat similar to the kind that are in the auditorium to be moved down so persons can have their companion, the caretaker, sit beside them. These seats are so can be used by persons that use cane crutches and walkers. Making chairs are more comfortable and respect them are sturdy. Also in regards to the library is just so exciting about the library. It has an informational center for people with disabilities. Not every city has such a center and you based and the center helps persons with therapy. It helps persons. Quite a number of people disabled cannot afford to buy a computer and persons that are homeless. They'll go into the library. They can communicate with family. They cannot afford a telephone. So now in terms of the library, it is and it's my understanding that there's no plan to have a not tourism. The reason for this is the chorus. Well, I can accept that as that. The reason not to have an auditorium. But however it needs to be a backup plan. The backup plan is the fact that perhaps the city council chambers can be used by the library. And if that's the case, I think that the library should have first rights for the city council chambers for usage, and I feel also there should be no cost. And then I also want to share about the Lincoln Park in a playground and that I felt that the playground needs to be, of course, of be, you know , first seat designed. It'll be a day compliant. But I'm asking that it also be inclusive. And then the thing you'll see something. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Francisco rep at times.
Speaker 9: I'll try to you'll see some things that can be used to help autistics and Down's syndrome and like a talking to.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry Francis. Time seems all up anyway. Thank you very much.
Speaker 2: You.
Speaker 1: Absolutely.
Speaker 9: It.
Speaker 2: Crisis.
Speaker 1: And we have your note, Frances, so we'll take a look at that. Thank you.
Speaker 2: Good evening, Mayor and members of city council. My name is Randy Gordon and I'm president and CEO of the Long Beach Area Chamber of Commerce. I want to compliment staff for the great, thorough and very professional and well done presentation tonight. On behalf of the Chamber, we support the development of a new civic center in order to replace existing city hall and main library structures. It's been it's been almost eight years since both structures were deemed systematically deficient. Included in this new development will encompass the 16 Acres campus, a new city hall and port buildings and main library . We'll really develop this whole area and it's exciting, exciting project that our city has for our downtown. This is made evident by the downtown visioning process that was led by Mayor Long Vice Mayor, my vice mayor Lowenthal. A new civic center complex that will allow more modern amenities and efficient work place for staff. It's only the start of what should be a very beneficial for residents and business community to remain productive when conducting business in the new city hall. Taking this into account along with obvious safety aspects, this is the right decision for council to move forward at the right time. Plenary Action. Mary Edge. Moore Civic Leadership Partnership. The group who has been chosen. We have confidence in them and they will do a great job. Coupled with this 8000 or 8000 of, I should say, jobs, direct and indirect jobs being created. It's a win win for the business community and also for the city. While some have cited revised cost associated with the project as a potential issue, staff has conducted robust public outreach to the community, citing reasons for some of these new cost. Moving this project forward is the right direction for our city and our community. The chamber stands ready to assist the city and the downtown community in order to ensure that this project is one that's envied throughout our great state and our country. As our mayor likes to say, we're the only city other than San Diego and San Francisco on the waterfront. And this will give our community something to be very proud of, that we can show off our downtown for many years to come. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Randy, very much. Next speaker, please. High level business and labor camp together, andI do that more often.
Speaker 2: Tom Beck. Good evening, Mayor and fellow council city staff in public. That's here today. I'm here tonight to talk about, you know, the the jobs that's been, you know, touted tonight. And, you know, and I understand that, you know, you have two factors here when it comes to public infrastructure that will work, that will create so many jobs and then private infrastructure that will create so many jobs. I understand that the building trades have negotiated a project labor agreement on the public infrastructure. But my concern and our concern is that we feel that private development has not come to agreement under a play. I understand that, you know, there's no there's no project that's actually in front of you today. It's only it's only a proposal. But we like to we like to see the developer and the building trades come together on a on a private agreement. Building trades has always negotiated private development agreements, like in downtown Los Angeles. Many, many of those projects have private development plays. So we like to see that, you know, moving forward. And, you know, let's let's talk about the port, the jobs that will be created out of this. Not just estimate jobs that they will be created. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Tommy. Next speaker.
Speaker 2: Yes. Good evening. I'm Wally Baker with Jobs First Alliance. I want to start off by thanking the staff. This is not an easy task. And you've stayed right there. And I think the proposal is really excellent. You've thought of all the angles and just generally it's an excellent package. I do want to say something about plays and small business. The SBA sets a small business at 500 regular employees, which to me sounds pretty good sized, but that's considered a small business, and the play that you have on the public side is going to do a lot of good things for small business. But in the case of women, all of them will be paid the same as men. If you're an electrician, you're an electrician. Doesn't matter if you're a man or you're a woman. But the play makes that happen because everybody has a certain qualification. And certainly the qualifications and training that's provided is great because that means a small business doesn't go out and have to pay and organize all that. They can just acquire the labor that's already been trained and it guarantees them that their labor cost will be the same as a huge construction companies labor costs. So you don't have any battles over or using labor wages and benefits as a instrument of of reducing your costs, because everybody has to pay that cost. It also provides these local small micro-business with the ability to hire a certain number of veterans, train a certain number of veterans, train a number of local folks, which, again, they would really have a difficult time doing on their own. But through the play process that workforce provided, those objectives are achieved as well. And of course, the no strike clause, which you saw in the long term airport construction a couple of years ago, that is included in the play. That's very important. So I just want to conclude by saying, you know, this is a very good project. We hope you move forward on it tonight and you will have the support of everyone going forward. And we look forward to working together. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Good evening, Mayor. Council members.
Speaker 12: And.
Speaker 2: Staff. I'm Ron Miller, executive secretary of the L.A. Orange County Building.
Speaker 12: Construction.
Speaker 2: Trades Council. And I'm very proud of the partnership that we formed with Plenary Edge Moore Group. And they've picked a great contractor with Clark Construction. We've done many jobs all over the country with them. They're top rated. They've did some good jobs right in your own city. And I got to say that the staff sure has done their due diligence on this. This is one of the most transparent projects that I've ever been involved in, over 100 community meetings. That's like unheard of. So there shouldn't be anybody in the room that doesn't know about this project if they've been to one of the community meetings. So this is a good project. We've negotiated a good fair project labor agreement that mirrors a lot of what we have with your city project, labor agreement as far as the local hire. I was glad to see many of you come out for the job fair the other day was a great.
Speaker 12: Success from everything.
Speaker 2: That I've heard. And we're really looking forward to putting folks from the community, the local community, to work because they spend their dollars in your city, which helps your economy. So let's move this thing forward tonight and get some shovels in the ground. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Ron. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Good evening. My name is Richard Suarez. I represent the I am. And what we've heard a lot of discussion tonight about this project. I just want to clear something up. In no way, shape or form. My comments here today are to stop the project. I just want to redirect some of the discussion and bring it forward towards the legal perspective. The AM understands that the Council is considering a resolution this evening that would authorize the city to contract out what is performed by IAM represented employees. The city has failed to clearly define the work covered by the project agreement, but contracting out covers at least building maintenance, custodial security and refuge work performed by a and represented employees. At this time, I'd like to also bring to the attention that while everybody's known about this, we have asked to meet and confer over this issue . And since October we were granted a meeting seven days ago. Specifically, the member requires the city to negotiate the decision to contract bargaining unit work as well as the effects of the contracting out. The AM in the city have not completed bargaining over the decision to contract work out just this morning excuse me just this morning the city's attorney confirmed that the Iam confirmed to the and that the parties are not at impasse in negotiations because the IAM in the city have not completed bargaining over the contracting out. The council cannot authorize the city manager to execute the project. The agreement as it relates to contracting out of IAM bargaining work. If the City Council approves the contracting out of bargaining work this evening, the city will have will have in essence violated the duty to bargain. The state agency that enforces the MBA, the Public Employment Relations Board, would order the city to rescind the project agreement and start from square one. It is extremely disappointing that I have come up here this evening and deliver these news the city manager is well aware of. This city is violating the MBA. In fact, this is exactly what happened in 2009 when the city unlawfully furloughed iam employees before complete completing bargaining. All the IAM is requesting is that the city fulfill its duty to bargain in good faith. Tonight's agenda as it relates to contracting out should be tabled. The Council can only consider authorizing contracting out once the Iam in the city have exhausted the bargaining process. This is not asking for much. It is only asking that the city follow the law. The Iam desires to continue to bargain and once work wants to work collaboratively with the city to meet its labor needs for the new city project. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Good evening, Mayor Garcia's city council staff and guests. My name is Rick Foss. I'm with the sheet metal workers, local one of five. I'm a business representative and I represent 6000 members in the Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside Counties as long as well as Canino and mono. Tonight, I want to commend the the council. I want to commend the staff. It was a very thorough report, very transparent. And as we learned tonight, eight, nine, ten years in the making with Miss Lowenthal here. I want to keep this short and sweet. I think we all know what's going to happen tonight. You're going to hear a lot of things. This is ten years in the in the process. Proceed for tonight, vote yes and move forward. Let's get this shovels in the ground. Let's get the construction started. Let's get some of your constituents into the apprenticeship programs and start the career paths. Thank you for allowing me this time. Have a merry Christmas and happy holidays.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Larry Clark as the address I sent you all an email outlining essence number one. I think you should wait 90 days. The feds will be in here, I think, by the 1st of May, 1st of January or shortly thereafter. And you'll get a sense of when the new management structure will be in place. I would suggest possibly by the Ides of March. Number two, I have not had a chance to look into all of the financial aspects, and that's really not my biggest forte. But I rely heavily on and I have found to be very credible, as do a number of other people. The analysis of Terry Jensen, and I'm sure you've read that and this guy, he has underscored a number of major issues and major problems. Number three, I fully support a library. But there's no need to have the library attached to the city hall. I'm reminded that four or five times a week, every time I go down to Los Angeles, and it's not because my great uncle designed that main library. The fact is, a nice library can stand on its own. And I would suggest a good place for this one is in the location where the L.A. study has their arts school. I enter into a paradigm with them. What else here? Port offices and the City Hall Council offices need not be downtown. They can. You guys can be set up in cubicles in an airport hangar in the center of the city, making it more accessible to more people. Period. A nice advantage. Even though you will not have corner offices or paneled offices you will have. We will not have the expense or hassles of elevators. And I think the last point if this is still on. Now, I forget the last point is, but I think the the important thing is to go back and do the analysis and follow the follow the suggestions of Terry Jones. I know that final point was it was pointed out that there were some issues that were overlooked. They all. We got to come back and ask for more money. Take the business approach. If the person responsible for that, that was the contractor or the person that is in charge that you're working with, tell him he needs the cost or he can walk one or the other, period. That's an A. That is a lesson that I learned when I used to work for for a number of years from Roy Ash and Tex Thornton and one of their innovations. They had a project somebody had a project going with building a big hotel, nice and fancy. They forgot a little item like the plumbing or both. Roy Ash and Tex Thornton told them, Sorry, it cost havoc.
Speaker 1: Yourself. Thank you, Mr. Goodhew. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Good evening, Mayor Garcia and City Council. My name is Brian Russell and reside in a third district. And my purpose of coming here tonight is to one compliment, city councilman and all the great staff for their analysis. But very narrowly. I'm representing the Seaspray Gardens Office Building right across the street at Chestnut End and third and ah ah, Broadway, rather. And our focus is making sure during the construction period that there's a plan in place for any mitigation of traffic impediment of getting the ingress and egress out of the building, costs related to construction, dirt, noise, things like that. So hopefully there's a plan for all the properties of private property surrounding the project. And, and it's a terrific project. I don't want to repeat so many things have been said today, but it's a terrific project. I'm here as a person speaking in favor of that. We just want to make sure that that building and the surrounding private property owners and and tenants are considered during the construction process. So thank you very much. Take care and appreciate all your good work. Bye bye.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: My name is David Donovan. Honor those who put their lives on the line for our country. Please join the Parks and Recreation and Planning Commission in support restoring the Civil War cannon to Lincoln Park. Place the cannon in front of Lincoln. Historically, that was the configuration of the statue and the cannon. That's what the Union Civil War veterans wanted in 1915. As before, the cannon in front of Lincoln was streamlined and give visual direction to the monument, giving the overall design visual impact good landscape architecture. As opposed to a weak design that has a cannon next to or behind the statue. There is a cannon in Bluff Park that won't appear in Ocean, a gift from the citizens of Valparaiso, Chile. So the idea of displaying a cannon in a present day Long Beach park is well established in front of the statue. The cannon will be again in total context with the monument's chiseled rivals, names of battles and union generals and the Great Emancipator. My family will donate $500 for this historic project. I will be happy to work with Partners of Parks in the Long Beach Navy Memorial Historical Association. Thank you very much.
Speaker 1: And, sir, thank you for your consistent advocacy for for returning this the cannon to its location. And I know that we're working on this issue. We have all the information and know that staff also has an agreement in ensuring that we get the the memorial, the cannon, the statue. All right. So thank you. You've been great on this.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 1: Absolutely. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Good evening. Mayor Garcia, Vice Mayor Lowenthal, City Council members. My name is Margaret Smith. I reside in the third district and my address is on file. I am the past president and current board member and Vice President of Public Affairs for the Long Beach Public Library Foundation. As an independent nonprofit, the foundation has provided over $20 million in support to our public library in the past eight years, and we have been actively involved in this civic center discussion from the very beginning, over three years ago. We are extremely grateful to city staff, to the plenary team and to the City Council for your respectful approach to the library concerns, and especially to you, Mayor Garcia, for your commitment to an amazing new main library. But we have two major concerns about the design of that library. This project has a limited budget. Will the funds that are allocated to main library be enough to create this majestic, iconic, welcoming structure? Our city deserves the preliminary design is not that it is safe, it is plain and it is uninspiring. But it is not just about the size of the box and what's outside. We are more concerned about what will be inside. Main Library features, functions, flexibility. We've studied the current plans, voiced our concerns to plenary about specific elements such as technology. What will it be and who will pay for it? The city or plenary plenaries answer, which we understand is that that will be decided over the next five months in the design development phase. But with today's discussion about increased project costs, we are even more concerned about the quality of the design of the interior of main library and on the ability of the city to fund future library services. But our second concern tonight is about community outreach. Plenary has done an amazing job so far, but now as we entered this design development phase, it is even more important that the community be able to weigh in on the specific plans before they are finalized and at the November 9th meeting of the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission agreed with us and made continued robust community outreach a condition for their approval. So we asked the Council tonight to require that plenary address these two issues the interior design of main library and community outreach. Plenaries an impressive team. But Long Beach has dealt with impressive teams before. We have not always gotten what was promised. As library advocates, we look forward to continuing our active role in this process. And we thank you for your commitment to making this an amazing civic center.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: When it's not this number is concerned. And, you know, you see it, of course, you know, and a little Hilton Aquinas with other Long Beach. I mean, you'll be working a lot with other lobbyists in at least three to a number of courtroom. In St Kilda. They always hold this year less because loyalty is virtue. Gives to this akin long tunnel national. Pollo Loco retro trabajadores or mas windchill on four. The NBN is the core of the puzzle overall. Mozart futuro para no sociedad nuestros familias which I.
Speaker 3: Will translate quickly. Good evening. My name is Hazel Andino. I am a cook here at the Hilton Long Beach Hotel. I have lived here. I live in the fourth district here in Long Beach. I am here today to tell you that I am pleased that you all have chosen to do the right thing in Long Beach. This agreement of labor peace gives our city and our families a better future. Thank you.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 0: Good evening, Mayor and council members. My name is Lorena Lopez Masumi. I am an organization director with the Hotel and Restaurant Employees Union. Our office in Long Beach is located at 525 East Seventh Street, Long Beach. And I'm here to inform you that we signed an agreement, Kartika Quality Agreement with plenary edge more with this on the provision on Labor peace and this cartoon neutrality agreement ensures that a low risk investment, it prevents the risk of labor strikes in boycotts affecting the revenues that the city will earn and it ensures that good jobs are created in the city of Long Beach. So I ask you to move forward on this project. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Good evening. Mayor Garcia.
Speaker 8: Vice Mayor Lowenthal, City Council, thank you so much for this time.
Speaker 2: My name is Toliver Morris. I am president of William Morris Commercial in downtown Long Beach. I am also on the board of downtown Long.
Speaker 8: Beach Associates.
Speaker 2: And served as chair elect. Excuse me. I can never think of the word and I used to represent them as chair of their Economic Development Committee. So I'm coming here tonight to speak from an economic development perspective. As I said, I'm a commercial real estate broker. I represent about a million square feet of space in our downtown. I've sold or leased about a million square feet of space in downtown. And we've seen a tremendous amount of investment in downtown, as you guys have seen over the course of the last few years, over $1,000,000,000 worth of investment, private investment coming into our downtown. But we have yet to see is the new investment that's coming. And a lot of that is predicated on the Civic Center. I sold Landmark Square a couple of summers ago for $135 million. I can tell you that one of the big pieces of information that helped to spur that sale was that the Civic Center was going to be developed. I represent Ocean West, who just bought 100 Broadway for about 35 million bucks. They spent to spend a whole bunch of money there, a multi-million dollars. A big part of their decision to buy down here was the Civic Center. So we talked about 8000 jobs being created by the Civic Center. I think there'll be way more jobs created by development that happens in and around the civic center because it's here because of what you build. So that's something we can't quantify. The tax dollars that come from that are going to be fantastic as well. We're seeing all sorts of new interest and activity, enthusiasm for the city. We are arriving. We have not arrived. And so this civic center is a big piece of that. And I just want to thank you guys for your efforts in that. Thanks so much.
Speaker 1: Thank you to our next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Hi. My name Alison King. And I'm the co-chair of the Historic Preservation Committee for the First Congregational Church of Long Beach, right across the street. And I personally live in the third district. Many members of my congregation were present at the Planning Commission in order to hear about the plans set for the three the apartment building that's set to be built on the corner of Third Street and Broadway. And I'm very discouraged to hear very little dialog about what's going to be placed there and how it will impact the surrounding historic structures, including the church and the. WILMORE The First Congregational Church has. Fragile stained glass and very fragile terracotta that is going to be impacted by a very abrasions. I don't know the condition of the Woolmer, but I'm sure they have similar issues with their historic terracotta. We don't know how that's going to be mitigated. We've asked for additional vibrational equipment to be placed on the corners of third and cedar for the Wilma and for the church. But we've heard nothing. The Planning Commission, when they did approve the site plan, asked for continued correspondence between the church and plan outreach more. And we have heard nothing in the past 30 days about how they plan to address our vibrational concerns and our concerns about what's going to be placed in that lot. So I hope for further discussion to be ordered for plenary more and I look forward to continuing to discuss what's going to be placed on that lot and how it impacts the historic structures surrounding it. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Good evening, Gary Shelton's my name. I live a block from where I'm standing at this moment to expand a little bit on what Allison King just mentioned. The nexus between this project and the project at Broad Broadway and Pacific Avenue is that the storm drain runs underneath there, and it runs underneath both the city block and the private development block. The city, in its wisdom, to enhance the value of the property of the city block, which is called the Third and Pacific BLOCK, has designated about $1.9 million, I believe, to share in the cost with the private developer of the other block in relocating that storm drain. That work is underway right now and is being financed with part of that, I believe, ten or $11 million bond issue. And so there's also on your item number eight tonight in this item is to authorize the conveyance agreement on that property. And that's an $8 million value, as explained by the staff, which was also explaining that the fair market value was $8 million on the item nine piece. But he didn't mention fair market value on the Broadway excuse me, on the third street corner. So I would have that question. Does that $8 million include the enhancement that that the bond is going to be paying for? I wanted to remark on number two as well, and that's that in the course of the environmental impact, the supplementary environmental impact, the due to public comment, the initial air was amended to acknowledge the fact that there is a homeless population and that that's going to need to be I would say that that's going to need to be dealt with in some way or another and may in fact, be a cost factor in the new civic center. On item number three, I want to make it clear that the site plan approval that you're doing tonight is only on the city owned blocks and not on the other private development blocks. It's not clear in the backup material that you're only doing approval on the site plan on about half of the entire Civic Center project. And then finally, I would ask about the question of how the $11 million of increased cost due to the removal of the asbestos film underneath Lincoln Park was somehow unknown when we actually knew about that about ten years ago when we were looking at redesigning Lincoln Park, and that's why it wasn't done at that time. So it's a it's a surprise to me why. That's a surprise to you. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Nick Speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Hi. Good evening, Mayor and Council Members Tom Sullivan, District five. I just have a couple of points, mainly surrounding some of the financing. It seems to me that 17 million that we have left on our debt will be paid for in a matter of two years based on our current payments of about 12. 4.6. It would, I think, be in our interest if we could roll that into a future benefit. Number one, paying for our labor negotiations that are coming up in about two years, potentially putting more services back into. Back into the city. I don't mean to diminish the importance of this project. It is a significant project that will put people to work and will put the city on the map in many ways. The importance of deferring I think is a is is wont to be considered. My other point is on the interest rates were a lot of the numbers, I believe, and I didn't quite hear this. A lot of the numbers, I believe, were based on current interest rates. It's my understanding that the loans as we move forward.
Speaker 12: Will be based on an adjustable.
Speaker 2: Rate, on a on an annual basis. Invariably, that's going to increase our costs on this project in the long term. That's all I have to say. Thank you very much.
Speaker 1: Happy holidays. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Ray Gavlak, eighth district. Thank you. Council members and mayor. You know, I'm as disturbed today, tonight as I was in 2006 when Mayor Foster and Councilwoman Lowenthal brought this to our attention and wanted to have this discussion. While during that period of time, during a nine year period of time, we made $200 million worth of cuts. Those cuts were not simply jobs. They were services to the community. And now here we're talking about I mean, the numbers were all over the board, and I'm certainly going to make comments on some of them. But I'm also very concerned about people referring to this, about the safety aspect. If we had felt that this building was in any way putting anybody in harm, we would have vacated it in 2006. We certainly wouldn't continue to run business as it is today. And also, I want to make sure that everybody is really clear that this was not just simply myself, but there were a number of council members that felt exactly the same way. Your predecessors. It was not the time to talk about putting ourselves in further debt. If we had made investments in this building all along, maybe we wouldn't have the problems that we have today. Those were ongoing. And as Mr. West said, you know, it should be $18 million as opposed to the 12.6. The other question that I have or the concern I have is when actually Councilwoman Pryce brought up, can we promise no city city cuts? And Mr. West, you said you you didn't think that there would be any cuts, but you could find other efficiencies. We already know from the numbers that were thrown out there that there is going to be tremendous debt. We've got the millions of dollars excuse me. There's so many numbers. We have the pension costs of four and a half million dollars through 2020. We have the FBI. 22 for this project will be $21.8 million in debt. I think that we need more full disclosure than what we have today, and it needs to be better understood by each and every one of you. This council will turn over five times by the time this building comes back to the city. And I think that's being a bit irresponsible. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Good evening, Mayor Garcia, Vice Mayor Lowenthal Falls Council members, city staff Michel.
Speaker 9: Molina, managing.
Speaker 8: Partner of Newark's downtown business owner and property owner, resident of both the first and third District. Now, as the chair of the downtown Long Beach Associates, we want to come here tonight and strongly support the city staff's recommendation for this modern and innovative civic center project. We honor the process started by Vice Mayor Lowenthal and hard work by city staff and this development team. The LBA has been proud to have participated and often shared in the facilitation of over 100 community meetings. The project under consideration reflects many of those community. Driven ideas such as safe and inviting, flexible public spaces that accommodate fairs, festivals, events, and create a sense of place through entertainment and events, including music, theater, art, farmer's markets and festivals. A state of an art state of the art main library and facilities that engage and bring both innovation and information to our city. Pieces of architecture, urban design and history that Long Beach can be proud of while continually harkening to its main purpose to civically engaged via a well-planned design. And lastly, a were a park once strategy that will reduce dependance on cars through easy transit access and biking amenities. To really? Really. You could tell. It's like to reiterate. The last paragraph. Sorry. I lost track of myself right there. Sent to you by our executive director, Craig Cogen, in his letter today. As the proposed development moves forward, the debate will continue to work with plenary urge, more civic partners and the city in making the new Long Beach Civic Center. A world class base for our community. The redevelopment of the Civic Center poses a unique, once in a lifetime opportunity to reimagine this space in the heart of our revitalized downtown an inviting, well-planned civic core integrated into the existing downtown fabric. Could lead to increased civic engagement, greater accessibility to open space, added vibrancy through added residential units and retail, and much more. We enthusiastically support making it a reality.
Speaker 9: Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. And before we go to the next speaker, these are our last three speakers. So Mr. Goodling is loud. There are last four speakers. Go ahead.
Speaker 2: I'll be quick, Mr. Mayor. Council people. My name is Jane Templin, long time member, resident of District two and involved in this.
Speaker 9: For the past ten years as an interested.
Speaker 2: Resident. Many areas interested in the.
Speaker 9: Opportunity of jobs, career paths.
Speaker 2: For our residents are youth bringing out.
Speaker 9: More opportunities.
Speaker 2: Trying to see our city as moving into the future. My grandkids are going to be probably coming.
Speaker 9: Back and living in the.
Speaker 2: House once we're gone. So it's an ongoing something we can pass on. It's an excitement. This project is quite.
Speaker 9: Wonderful and I want to thank you all for the opportunity to be part of it and to.
Speaker 2: See those shovels in the dirt and boots on the ground.
Speaker 9: I mean, I wish you a merry Christmas.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: A cut to the short of it. It's late. My name is Gary Cook. I represent 2000 plumbers in the area. I want to thank you, Mayor. Council members staff for such great teamwork work, making a transparent process for everyone to see. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you.
Speaker 2: Mayor Council City Management. On behalf of the CVB, we would just like to say. Ten years ago we remembered when Sue just started this process and it was a downtown visioning. And it's exciting to see ten years later a project before us that actually is going to continue to enhance the development downtown. The conventions and the convention planners that come into our city and the visitors that come into our city every week to take a look at us to book their conventions here. I hear one of two things every time. Boy, has this city changed. Or Gee, I never knew. It doesn't matter, but I hear one of the two and this project will be definitely again excavating one of those two statements. We also believe it will continue to help us to book additional conventions, which overnight visitors and conventions drive 300 miles into our local economy. Anyway, thank you for a wonderful project and we look forward to sharing it and selling it. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. In our last comment the evening.
Speaker 4: Hi. Good evening. Tom Stout live in a third district co-founder lobbies taxpayer association. I just have some real reservations on, you know, many of the things that past councils have done that turned out badly and that it's going to probably happen again, but not for maybe 30 to 40 years. You know, you talk about the P3 project with a courthouse, that courthouse nearly bankrupted. The court system in the state of California. It's the most expensive courthouse ever built. They even the state estimates the P3 cost an extra $160 million to the taxpayers. That's a lot of money. And then you have Bill five, six two. Why was that brought forward by Laura and with the new U.N. and. O'DONNELL You know, they're basically her lackeys up there. The numbers obviously didn't work out for the the project. So by allowing you to indebt taxpayers for an additional ten or 15 years, I'm sure the numbers did work out. You know, is this place in as good a shape as it should be? No deferred maintenance. I mean, the problem is it cost too much money to run this city. 90% of the the cost of running the city is is compensation. It's not going to go down. And they brought up the fact that pensions. Pensions are going to go up about $4 million a year. Mr. GROSS stated that pensions will reach at the end of that by 2021, about $135 million. You know, I would say that's probably going to be low because there will be raises coming before that time and there will be raises during the whole tenure of this this building that we're going to have 40 years. I know I won't be here. The vast majority of you people won't be here. So the only thing I got to say is, you know, a lot of bad decisions have been made in the past and you guys will be gone and the taxpayers and the residents will be stuck with a lot of a lot of bills . And hopefully what you're saying is true because so many things you've said haven't been in the past. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. When I'm gone out of office, I certainly will continue to be a taxpayer and a resident of Long Beach. So let me go ahead and go back to the council and questions. I have a couple clarification and then I want to one one which I'm actually going to let the city attorney do because think it's important that the city attorney respond to one of the comments made by one of the speakers about the negotiation part and that Mr. Suarez made. So did you want to comment on that before I go to these other items real quick, Mr.. City Attorney.
Speaker 10: Certainly, Mr. Mayor, more comfortable with the council moving forward with the motion that has before it tonight, as amended by Councilwoman Lowenthal. And we remain committed to continuing the confer process with the AMP.
Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you very much. One thing I want to just say to the library supporters and others that they're curious about and concerned about the process for moving forward. So the way this project is designed by its very nature is it's done in these kind of specified chunks and timelines. And so as we conclude this part of the process tonight, there is absolutely additional process and there's absolutely will be additional process that we will commit to when it particularly when it comes to the library as we develop it. I mean, that is the whether it's the interior or the exterior that is all still being obviously discussed in the future will continue to have an open process. And same goes for the private piece. I think a couple of folks mentioned the private development. We are still probably a couple of years away from the many decisions that this council will have to make over the private development piece. Every every piece of this project that that it's private, there will be interaction with the city on how it's developed, what's developed, how it looks, etc., etc.. And so I just want to make sure that that was mentioned as well. And then also I know that there's been discussions already as far as ensuring that anything that we do, that we're working with our neighbors, including First Congregational, who is one of our key neighbors around the project. And so, Mr. West, just let's just make sure that that continues. And I know I will say to plenary adding more whose here plenary they very fantastic partner and so I there has never been an ask of plenary that's been made of the city that they have come back and said absolutely not. In fact every time we've asked plenary no actually have 50 more meetings or no go out to this community or do these meetings in Spanish and come committee or change this or give us a better deal on this project. Plenary has come back to the table every single time and provided us with a partnership, and I want to thank you for that. And so for for the questions that are out there and process moving forward, I'm pretty confident in this team. They're they're they're an All-Star team. And and I want to thank you for that. So let me go back to a couple of final closing comments here, and then we're going to go to a vote. Councilman Gonzales.
Speaker 3: Yes. Thank you, Mayor. I want to thank everyone for their comments. Really, really great. I think everyone, for the most part, seems very ready for this project to move forward. I myself am, as I had previously mentioned, a few quick comments and then a couple of questions on the third and Cedar for First Congregational Church. I remember talking speaking with them about it just real briefly, but where are we at? Do do we have another meeting set up with them in terms of impacts to them with noise and any disturbances that they may?
Speaker 11: So we are talking to the contractor who is doing the work right now. Plenary Edge. Moore is not a party to the agreements because they have not yet been approved, so they are not participants right now in the Third and Pacific Project. We have had the contractor make a visit to the Congregational Church and we'll follow up to make sure that those discussions are occurring. I do want to point out, though, that the downtown plan and the downtown plan are did anticipate that construction activities associated with construction could generate ground generated vibrations. And that was disclosed as part of the downtown plan earlier, as a significant and unavoidable impact. That impact does carry forward. There are mitigation measures associated with that, that we will make sure that both the third specific project and the Civic Center project comply with.
Speaker 3: Okay. Thank you. And I know since we're on historical and I forgot to forgotten to ask this question before for this city I'm sorry, for the courthouse and other historic mitigation measures. What are we doing specifically? I know there has been some talk about expanding the historical record, keeping at the library as part of mitigation. Would that be possible or potentially?
Speaker 11: There is. There are some requirements in the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report that's before you for consideration tonight that do require documentation, standard documentation of the courthouse, the main library and city hall to occur before any demolition occurs of those buildings. There is also a requirement that there be an assessment of potential historic artifacts, both in the courthouse, within the city, the library, and then also within the port's archives to see if those document, those artifacts could be publicly displayed, either through the cultural and history loop or through installation at the library or even, you know, some of our other cultural resources in the city, like the Long Beach Museum of Art or some of our other buildings. So those are requirements of the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report that would attempt to mitigate the loss of these buildings. But they are still considered a significant impact. And as part of your action tonight, you would be asked to adopt a statement of of overriding considerations, recognizing that.
Speaker 3: Okay. Thank you. And I appreciate the information in that. We're still staying on this. And then another quick question is how many local firms are working with culinary edge? More at this time.
Speaker 0: Maybe that's. At least three.
Speaker 11: Mr. Whereof.
Speaker 1: And Mr. Conway.
Speaker 12: I don't have an exact number. I know we've got three.
Speaker 2: Or four firms that are.
Speaker 4: Partnership, but.
Speaker 12: Kelly Sutherland McCloud sitting in the audience today is one of.
Speaker 11: Them. Todd Bennett, Landscape Architecture and then Cordero Consulting.
Speaker 2: Cordero Consulting.
Speaker 11: So we knew of at least three in the audience.
Speaker 3: Okay, great. Curious question. And and then lastly, I wanted to just say, I again, just reiterate my great pleasure with plenary more and all of their hard work with our building trades as well as just our community at large. And so I know that they potentially could be open to play on private development, but that's certainly for for us to discuss at a later time. But I just, again, want to thank you all for all of your hard work in all of this. And I look forward to voting and hoping that my colleagues will support that as well.
Speaker 1: Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 0: I think that perhaps Councilman Gonzalez and I were under the same understanding that there are still negotiations going on with some of the small businesses that were in the original deal. And those cannot go forward until this is finalized. Is that correct? Because I was understanding. They're still bidding out certain. Community partners. So the people who you mentioned in the audience, not all of them are assured of partnerships.
Speaker 11: So the ones that we mentioned are actually sub consultants to the development team. They're on contract and have been. So any any bidding that the development team is doing is not within our purview, that that is something that they're working on themselves.
Speaker 0: But there are no requirements that if they're in the original plan, it listed on local businesses. What happens if they decide not to work with one of their subcontractors or local consultants or any of those and they trade out? It doesn't actually have to come back to city council, is that correct?
Speaker 12: No, it wouldn't.
Speaker 0: And so what? How do we ensure we keep those jobs here in Long Beach?
Speaker 11: The the firms that are currently under contract with the firm, with the development partner, are under contract for the duration. They are required to participate in the process by virtue of what their tasks are. They will be involved throughout the process.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 1: And Vice Marie Lowenthal.
Speaker 2: To close.
Speaker 6: Thank you, Councilmember Mongo, when you said those jobs, did you mean the those specific consultant jobs or the 8000 jobs.
Speaker 0: The jobs underneath the consultant job? So what I'm understanding is at least there's a large firm in my district that was mentioned in the original proposal, and I wasn't a part of the team that decided which firm was chosen, but I was really pleased that plenty more was chosen because a major employer in my district was a part of that team. And so my understanding is that they are not permanently chosen on the team, that there are still negotiations that are going to be continuing and that there's risk that those jobs could be Orange County jobs in the future. And so I don't know what assurances we have. I just want to make sure that a best put effort is made to both protect the taxpayers and the costs. And I appreciate that that would rip it out. But knowing too, that not only are the lowest costs, not always the best, sometimes bringing in people from the outside causes reduction in income to our employees, reduction and increase in pollution and traffic for people from Orange County driving up and such things like that. So I'm just looking forward to ensuring that the Long Beach businesses that are on the teams are secure and if not, if they choose to go with another option that other Long Beach businesses get that first option.
Speaker 6: So and thank you. Thank you for that clarification. I understand what exactly you meant and are talking about. And it is very important, I think if I can ask us to recall our history with Plenary and Clark Construction and their job at bringing the courthouse forward, just their history alone would inform us that that that would definitely take place. I'm also very confident that they are also looking out for our taxpayer's best interests. And so they'll probably want to assure that anyone that's on the team is competitive in pricing. So that's that's a key part and I don't want us to overlook that. And so I think those decisions probably are made with that. So thank you. Thank you for raising that issue. I just wanted to thank everyone that came forward and spoke. And many of you have been following this process for quite some time. It is late of all the deferred maintenance, I have to say, Mr. West, I wish you had invested in a heater. I look out at the audience. I look out at the audience. Everyone's got their coats on. They've been here for hours. Usually people take their coats off. So I'm sorry for that. We did not invest in a heater, but hopefully the efficiency of the new buildings, the new public buildings will will not have to have heaters. So I am looking forward to that. Mr. Goodling, Steve Goodling was here. He was one of our original 12 downtown visioning team members. And thank you for your continued vision. And I, I know that you do the best you can to sell our downtown and our city for conventions and visitors. And sometimes you work magic, and this time the public can invest and be sure that you're not always having to work the magic and to the library. Margaret, thank you for being here. And I know Sarah was here earlier and probably still is, but my eyesight gets very poor toward the end of the night, so everyone just looks happy in a right now. But I wanted to I wanted to thank you because it took a lot of faith, a leap of faith to have confidence in this process, whether it was in 2006 or any year after that year, all of the library advocates were concerned that the library would get left behind because of technology and because of all the reasons why libraries may seem unnecessary. And we made a promise to you. Several of us are still here. And and I want to thank you for your trust and for allowing us to fulfill that promise. We, too, want a majestic public library. We value the touch and feel experience of books and electronic resources, but really that touch and feel experience. And so we look forward to that as being a part of the public asset that this team will bring forward. And I think they understand that as well. They're very aware of the significance of main library. There have been many attempts to move it elsewhere throughout the years, but I am delighted that it is staying here right where it belongs. And to the comment about developers making promises and not delivering that is a key reason why I ran for council. I lived across the street from a project that was overpromised and under-delivered. But I can attest that since my service here and the service of others that have been here for the last ten years, that has not happened because we have learned our lessons. And when I look at the courthouse. That is a prime example of a team that did not overpromise and underdeveloped. I'm very happy for the community and the residents here, and I'm delighted that the courthouse was kept here in the downtown because of all of the jobs that would have left and all of the businesses that would have left that purposely co-locate because of the courthouse location. And so thank you for that. And I have faith that once again, we will have a team that is delivering exactly what the community coalesced to inform the project and what they wanted to see come forward. And finally to Jane, she is very modest, but I will tell you, she is our own Rosie the Riveter. She is an electrician. If I'm not mistaken, part of the IBEW. And she is living proof that women do not need to make $0.80 on every dollar. And so thank you for that. Yes, you're a second district resident, but you represent so much more than that. And I hope that this project will do you proud. With that, Mr. Mayor, I am looking forward to our vote.
Speaker 1: Thank you. And thank you all again for your comments. We have a motion and a second by Vice Mayor Lowenthal and Councilwoman Gonzalez. Members, please go out and cast your vote.
Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much. And. Thank you all. Just also, before we we have two votes additionally on this. They're not directly the Civic Center, but they're tied in to it. So I just want to make sure that we vote on those. Real quick, before we recess, we go to the rest of the meeting. So hearing number two, if I can just read hearing number two, please, which is tied into this. | Ordinance | Recommendation to declare ordinance making findings and determinations regarding contracting for work usually performed by City employees and authorizing City Manager to enter a contract with Plenary Edgemoor Civic Partners, LLC, for custodial, maintenance and security services, read and adopted as read. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12152015_15-1305 | Speaker 1: Real quick, before we recess, we go to the rest of the meeting. So hearing number two, if I can just read hearing number two, please, which is tied into this.
Speaker 0: Report from financial management hearing to consider the issuance of the Finance Authority of Long Beach lease revenue bonds and to adopt a resolution approving the proceedings by the FASB to finance the hazardous materials abatement and demolition of the former County of Los Angeles courthouse, a storm drain relocation project and a portion of the cost of the Civic Center project. District two.
Speaker 1: Thank you. There's a motion and a second. Mr. Modica, did you want to make some comments on this?
Speaker 2: Actually. We'll have John Grose explain this item.
Speaker 13: Mayor and members of city council. This is a as was said. Receive documentation. Conclude the hearing. Conduct the hearing included. Adopt a resolution to issue bonds through our new financing authority. Those bonds would be issued in this year. There'd be an appropriation for 400,000 to pay the debt service this year. The purpose of these bonds not to exceed 14.5 million is for the abatement, asbestos abatement and demolition of the courthouse for the relocation of the storm drain at Broadway and Pacific that we've talked about today, and the $8 million of costs and construction expenses related to this civic center. That's the end of my report.
Speaker 1: Terrific. Was there any public comment on this item saying nonmembers, please go ahead and cast your votes to close the hearing. There is a motion in a second.
Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Thank you. And then the final piece of this vote is item 16. Also related to the Civic. We got a motion and a second. Do you want to read? Madam Clerk, the item. | Resolution | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record and conclude the hearing regarding the issuance of the Finance Authority of Long Beach (FALB) Lease Revenue Bonds, adopt resolution approving the proceedings by the FALB for the issuance of 2016 Lease Revenue Bonds Series A in a total amount not to exceed $14,500,000, to finance the hazardous materials abatement and demolition of the former County of Los Angeles Courthouse, a storm drain relocation project, and a portion of the costs of the Civic Center project, and approving related documents and actions;
Increase appropriation in the General Fund (GF) in the Citywide Activities Department (XC) in the amount of $400,000, offset by residual property taxes to transfer into the Debt Service Fund; and
Increase appropriation in the Debt Service Fund (DS 600) in the Citywide Activities Department (XC) in the amount of $400,000, offset by revenue from the General Fund to pay the debt service. (District 2) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12152015_15-1309 | Speaker 1: Thank you. And then the final piece of this vote is item 16. Also related to the Civic. We got a motion and a second. Do you want to read? Madam Clerk, the item.
Speaker 0: A report from Economic and Property Development and Financial Management recommendation to amend Contract with Environmental Construction Group to increase the scope of work, to include the demolition of the Old County Courthouse and to increase the contract amount by 1.5 million district to great.
Speaker 1: I have a motion and a second is or any public comment on this item. Mr. Goodhew.
Speaker 2: Refresh my memory and what is the reason for the increase? Why do we have to go back and get more money? Does anybody know? Well.
Speaker 1: Mr. Graves, you know, this is a person where you ask the counsel questions so you can make questions or comments. And we're going to have.
Speaker 2: You explain why we're just handing this out. I mean, without any public discussion, you just you. Standing. It's like standing out in the street corner handing out the money. This is the point Terry Jensen made. If the guy made a mistake. And step up to it and say he made a mistake and he eats the cost. That's part of your job. That's called responsibility, period.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Mr. Walker. Any comment on this?
Speaker 2: Yes, sir. This is a plan cost, and this is amending the contract for the demolition of the courthouse.
Speaker 1: Thank you. And you see no other comment or question. You have the motion on the floor. Please cast your vote.
Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you. That. That concludes our Civic Center. Multiyear discussion and voting process. I want to thank all of you for being here. We're going to take a recess here for probably about 5 minutes or so to people, let people stretch and use the restroom, and we will be back for the rest of our agenda. Thank you. Okay. We are going to get this meeting back started. If I can do a roll call, please.
Speaker 2: Oh, it is for Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 0: Vice Mayor Lowenthal. Councilwoman Price. Councilmember Superman.
Speaker 2: Here.
Speaker 0: Councilwoman Mongo. Councilman Andrews. Councilmember Otunga. Councilman Austin. Councilmember Richardson. Mayor Garcia.
Speaker 1: I'm here thinking we're going to hear the the pre-bid item first, as requested by Councilman Richardson. The one thing we're going to do without objection, unless there's any objection, is the infrastructure study session is actually important and it's 10 p.m. and there's actually a real presentation attached to it. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager to amend Contract No. 34080 with Environmental Construction Group, Inc., of Signal Hill, CA, to increase the scope of work to include the demolition of the old County Courthouse building and to increase the contract amount by $1,559,000, for a revised contract amount of $5,987,000, and authorize a 20 percent contingency in the amount of $1,197,400, for a total contract amount not to exceed $7,184,400;
Increase appropriations in the General Fund (GF) in the Citywide Activities Department (XC) by $2,756,400 for a transfer to the Capital Projects Fund (CP) in the Public Works Department (PW); and
Increase appropriations in the Capital Projects Funds (CP) in the Public Works Department (PW) by $2,756,400, for a total project cost of $7,184,400, offset by currently appropriated Fiscal Year 2016 (FY 16) one-time General Fund strategic investments, and the remainder from bond proceeds. (District 2) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12152015_15-1295 | Speaker 1: I'm here thinking we're going to hear the the pre-bid item first, as requested by Councilman Richardson. The one thing we're going to do without objection, unless there's any objection, is the infrastructure study session is actually important and it's 10 p.m. and there's actually a real presentation attached to it. And I think most folks I'm hearing on the break are a little fried there. So we're going to move that presentation to next week. We have a very short council meeting next week. It'll still be very short council meeting and that will be on on the 22nd next week. So without objection, we're going to move the infrastructure needs assessment to the 22nd. With that, I want to go ahead and Madam.
Speaker 2: Clerk and Mr. Mayor, if we can make a motion at the appropriate time in a motion to continue that, yeah.
Speaker 1: I'm going to I'm going to call the can get got a motion. I got a motion in a second. Any public comment on the item. Let me now and please cast your vote. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 0: Councilmember Richardson.
Speaker 2: As much as I wanted to have that.
Speaker 0: Motion carries a.
Speaker 1: Thank you motion carries to.
Speaker 2: Next.
Speaker 5: Week. We just voted on the wrong thing.
Speaker 1: I didn't see who was up there.
Speaker 2: So I know it was it was it.
Speaker 1: Was okay because I did it by voice and so we're okay. Mr.. I think. City Attorney. Motion to continue. So we're good. So now we have an item on the item for I believe, which is the recommendation to approve the transfer of that that we're doing. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to conduct a study session to receive and discuss the City’s capital investment needs for transportation infrastructure and City facilities. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12152015_15-1310 | Speaker 1: Was okay because I did it by voice and so we're okay. Mr.. I think. City Attorney. Motion to continue. So we're good. So now we have an item on the item for I believe, which is the recommendation to approve the transfer of that that we're doing. Madam Clerk one I'll let you read it, since I'm not the clerk.
Speaker 0: Communication from Councilmember Richardson. Recommendation to approve the transfer of the main Council District's fiscal year 2016. One time infrastructure funds in the amount of $45,000 to the Uptown Property and Business Improvement District.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilor Richardson.
Speaker 5: Thanks, Mr. Mayor. I just want to just note that this action, you know, great progress happening in the the business district, but as a part of projects that progress, sometimes there's growing pains and our bid will have to move out of a city owned facility. And I want to make sure that we help to help with the transition and maintain a focus on the programs that they're really gaining momentum for. So I'm ponying up some of our ninth District infrastructure funds to help support this effort, and I encourage my colleagues to support it. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. There's a motion and a second count summary. Ranga actually can summarize and speak to the second, please.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I'm just going to speak in support of the motion. And I'm sure since those ninth District infrastructure dollars are going toward this move, that the new bid office will be in the ninth District.
Speaker 1: Okay. Councilman, your.
Speaker 2: Anger just gets a point of order. I mean, I didn't we approved the consent calendar earlier, but we did not pull the same amount. So we voted on it twice. I don't think this item on the agenda was moved. It was.
Speaker 13: Just it is moved to.
Speaker 2: The regular agenda item I have it under. Could sit on my desk. Okay. Okay.
Speaker 1: Great. Any public comment on this item? Ryan Smoller. You know, I'll.
Speaker 2: Make this rare. Um. Oh, my phone rotated. Thank you, city council for hearing this item tonight. My name is Ryan Smaller, and I am the creative consultant and interim executive director for the Uptown Property and Community Association. Our organization is a property based improvement district in North Long Beach, and we're very excited about the economic development proposal before you tonight. The establishment of a vibrant business corridor in North Long Beach that connects the creative energy of businesses, residents and our community partners is a cornerstone of Councilmember Rex Richardson's Uptown Renaissance plan, and tonight's appropriation secures uptown with critical assets. We need to accomplish our mission and expand our partnerships. Thank you for your consideration. I'm very excited and passionate about where Uptown is headed, and I appreciate you for helping us get there. Thank you.
Speaker 1: See no other public comment. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 6: Price.
Speaker 0: Price. Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Thank you. And considering we just finished our hearings, I didn't realize that we still had four members of public comment that was going to go right after the hearings. And so they're still here because we did the rest of them early on. Is Francis Emily Dawson Harris still here? She. She spoke already. Navara Soto. Mr. Good, who is here. So Mr. Good to come forward.
Speaker 2: We'll be very brief. On the last night in the. Although it was on the agenda there. Let me contribute. I found something in the floor for the ninth district. Is an additional dime. You can put in a phone. Somebody left it there. Just two points or one point I want to. I'm very serious when I say and you'll get the you'll be served with a notice relative to that in. Probably the third week in January, you'll have an invitation to sit down with with the feds. At the end result is, I think by by March 15th, the city will be facing a situation where it will need a new chief executive officer. I. And as well as the state of California will need two other high ranking officials. The details of that will be coming forward. As I think you might appreciate, the U.S. Department of Justice and FBI have a considerable amount on their hands now. But I think they've recognized that the the dangers of leaving, having uncut, unchecked corruption is something that just cannot be allowed to continue. So that will be addressed. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next up is Elizabeth Wise. She's here. Okay. CNN Then let me go back. Madam Court to the agenda, please. Regular agenda. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to approve the transfer of the Ninth Council District's Fiscal Year 2016 one-time infrastructure funds in the amount of $45,000 to the Uptown Property and Business Improvement District (PBID) to support a business and creative consultant to work on key strategic initiatives and assistance with PBID office relocation; and
Increase appropriations in the General Fund (GF) in the Economic and Property Development Department (EP) by $45,000 from City Council non-recurring funds. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12152015_15-1248 | Speaker 0: Item 14 Communication from Councilman Austin, Chair of the State Legislation Committee. Recommendation to approve. Recommendation to for approval of the 2016 State Legislative Agenda as recommended by the State Legislation Committee.
Speaker 1: Council Member Austin.
Speaker 4: Thank you. I'd like to turn it over to Diana Tang for a staff report.
Speaker 3: Chair, Mayor, members.
Speaker 0: Of the City Council try and keep this brief.
Speaker 6: As similar to the Federal.
Speaker 0: Legislative Committee meeting we had earlier today. The state legislative committee met earlier this month to discuss staff's recommended changes for the 2016 state legislative agenda. All city departments did have a chance to review the agenda. And I'll just go.
Speaker 3: Very briefly through each of the.
Speaker 0: Five sections of the agenda and share a couple changes with you, as well as mention the committee's recommendations for this. Under economic development, we were able to remove some of the 2015 focus statements as they were achieved. We'd like to thank Senator Laura for for authoring and helping us secure enactment of SB 562 for the Civic Center and also for all of his work in the state. Delegations work with the city on redevelopment decision work with the State Department finance that will continue into FY 16 and through the next legislative year. And so that is reflected in the agenda for next year. Under public safety, we did make a couple of changes. I'd like to highlight one in particular with support or sponsoring legislation that provides funding for multisector, collaborative approaches to violence prevention and public safety, recognizing the continuum of services that are responsible for public safety under education. We made a couple of changes to reflect the city's safe Long Beach plan, as well as community schools. This is an idea that the city will be meeting with the school district on to discuss how community schools may or may not be able to help. Allow me to provide services to some of the the residents in our most impacted neighborhoods that could benefit from afterschool programs and sustainable, livable cities. We made a couple of changes that are related to to simply cleaning up the agenda. For example, the pilot needle exchange program, which the city had previously supported, is now a permanent program. And so we are cleaning that up. And last but not least, in the local control section, the only change that staff had to make was to amend the focus statements to mention safe one beach in lieu of violence prevention, as we are trying to promote a more positive dialog on this on this topic. And with that, I'll turn it back over to the chair to mentioned two changes that were adopted by the committee.
Speaker 4: Thank you. And let me just say that it has been a great honor to serve as chair of the State Lands Committee for the last year, year and a half. And I want to thank my colleagues who served on the committee, Councilmembers Dee Andrews and Lena Gonzalez, for their support and input in helping to craft this. I want to obviously thank staff for their great work, Diana and. Our new intern who's done a great job. Michael. Yes, Michael. He's done a great job. And I think this agenda is it's comprehensive and it really meets the values of our city and where we're going and the direction we're going in. I know, Councilman, you may have some comments, but I do want to add an amendment to to this. Under local control item 60. I'd like to and offer an amendment to item 60 so that it reads. There.
Speaker 0: I'm sorry. I was having trouble hearing.
Speaker 4: Item six under local control.
Speaker 9: Okay.
Speaker 4: I'd like to offer an amendment that reads Monitor or sponsor state legislation that proposes to change the structure of state and regional boards, which Long Beach's represent it and maximize the city's representation. And the reason that I am adding that is because obviously I think it's important for Long Beach to have a voice in regional governance on all boards and commissions, including the Air Quality Resources Management District, the the MTA and other regional boards. And as it stands right now, I don't think we we have the state legislation and the governance of those agencies that necessarily recognize the the the regional significance of Long Beach as a city. And so our members, I would love for you to support that that amendment. And if I can get a second on that, that would be great. I think I do. And also. Yeah, that's it. So I would ask that the, the council support this state legenda it is like I said, been. Well-thought out. It's comprehensive and I think it represents the values of the city. I would love to hear your comments as well.
Speaker 1: Councilwoman. Well, actually, Councilman Gonzales was the second in the motion to let me go to her first.
Speaker 3: I just wanted to say thank you for all of your hard work. Diana, I know it's a state and federal judge. I know it's a lot to take on. And so I want to thank you for that. As well as Michael, our management assistant. And so I have just been on the state ledger for just the two times that I've been there. And it's been very concise and very organized. And, you know, my my comments are just very broad in that sense. But I'll certainly support your your amendment. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilman Price.
Speaker 3: Thank you. I, too, want to thank staff for the presentation and who prepared that precis.
Speaker 0: That was a joint effort between Michael and I.
Speaker 3: That was fantastic. I'm trying to train our divas to start using Presley in the courtroom. So it's a it's a very exciting new development for us. I was very happy to see you guys. So thank you for that. Totally off topic. But I wanted to. One of the issues that is an issue in the city and specifically in my district right now, a very hot button issue is visual blight from wires that are left by cable companies. So with the assistance of Diana, I would like to make an amendment to tonight's agenda item. We do have some existing language specifically, quote, support legislative efforts to ensure that the city has local nuisance abatement controls over the visual blight that is created by excessive deployment of cable and telecommunication wires and related facilities. Similar to that language, I'd like to include an additional item that will enable our city staff to pursue changes to the California Public Utilities Commission, regulations that would allow the city to abate visual blight from cable television service wires that are in public view. When the wires and related equipment are not actually being used for the intended purpose, the item could read. And I'm open to suggestions from my colleagues. But this was created with Diana's help from the staff side to support legislation or request an amendment to California Public Utilities Commission rules and regulations to ensure that the city has the authority to abate visual.
Speaker 0: Blight that is created by.
Speaker 3: Cable television, service wires and related equipment that are in place and open to public view when these wires and related equipment are not actually being used for their intended purpose. So that would be my my recommendation in my amendment. We have found that a lot of these wires are just left behind by the companies just in case they need to use them at some future time. And that has really created a quality of life issue for some of the residents. So thank.
Speaker 0: You.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Councilman Alston, did you want to respond to the additions? Possibly.
Speaker 4: I'm just curious. And I would ask staffs with assistance where I mean, it's a it's a pretty detailed request trying to figure out where this falls into our. Our agenda. You know, there are subsections.
Speaker 0: Sure. So, Councilmember, that's the language to support legislation. I'm sorry. It's under local control. Item 40. 48 items to support legislative efforts to ensure that the city has local nuisance abatement control over the visual blight that is created by excessive deployment of cable and communication wires and related facilities is already in our agenda under local control of item 48, and it is something that we do work on annually, I would say, in the last couple of.
Speaker 3: Years at least. I believe.
Speaker 0: What Councilwoman.
Speaker 3: Price is asking for is that in.
Speaker 0: Addition to the state legislative route, that we also.
Speaker 6: Pursue this through the.
Speaker 0: California Public Utilities Commission.
Speaker 4: Okay. Does that need to necessarily be specified in the agenda here or can. Do we actually? Do we actually go and advocate or or have a venue to to work through the PUC? Is that done through the legislature or directly to the PUC?
Speaker 0: We can go directly to the APC.
Speaker 4: So. Councilmember Price. I mean, is it does it necessarily have to? I mean, I think we we we get it. And we I think well, we're committed to working in that direction with with staff. But I think most of what you already want is actually here.
Speaker 3: And I understand that. And I could see how you'd conclude that. But we've talked extensively with the city attorney about this, and we believe that this strategically, it's best for us to be able to approach this particular issue from multiple routes. And this allows us to have a more direct involvement in the actual specific regulations, because the other the existing clause doesn't specifically talk about what happens with the with the wires and equipment that are not being used for their intended purpose.
Speaker 4: You know, I think it's a rather benign request. I will accept friendly to to to do that to move the agenda. And we'll work with our state legislators to make sure that we convey your your concerns.
Speaker 3: Yeah. And the other thing might be, I don't know if the city attorney's office maybe wants to give a little bit more insight into what the request, because that was a recommendation that was made to our office because we've been working on this issue. So I don't know if they have a recommendation as to why they thought it would be inappropriate amendment for this evening.
Speaker 2: Mayor members of the council, we offered this as a possible solution in dealing with an attempt to deal with some of the visual blight. We've been referred to the CP you see in some of the regulations. If you call in a complaint under the CP, you see current regulations, they have up to five years the cable companies to respond to your complaint. And when we were asking them to seek rule changes, we were asking them maybe we could get some authority through the state pledge committee so that we can clarify that we could be asking for assistance in updating some of those rules.
Speaker 4: Okay. Well, the the amendment is accepted as a friendly and. Mr. Mayor?
Speaker 1: No. Perfect. I think we'll work on incorporating that into the state committee. Any public comment on the state large committee? Casey nine members, please go and cast your votes to adopt this. And I want to do I do want to thank the committee for their hard work in this. It's a lot of work.
Speaker 0: Council member, Supernova Mungo. Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Next item. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to respectfully request City Council approval of the 2016 State Legislative Agenda as recommended by the State Legislation Committee. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12152015_15-1307 | Speaker 0: Motion carries number 18 report from public work and.
Speaker 6: It's very late. I'm sorry, it's Tony, not Ramone. Thank you.
Speaker 1: I was like, Who's Ramone? But I didn't say anything.
Speaker 6: I have no idea. They have the same last name. They need to work on different things.
Speaker 0: Next report from Report from Public Works and Financial Management. Recommendation to award 12 contracts for as needed professional engineering services in an aggregate amount not to exceed $36 million citywide.
Speaker 1: Thank you. There's a motion and a second is any public comment on this? Mr. Goodhew.
Speaker 2: I wondered when the MQ MQ rather issued the alert last Thursday afternoon. This really strains your factory senses. This is. Highly irresponsible. We're talking about $36 million. Now had we had a council and a management. Who would be able to ride and stand side by side with Caesar's wife. This would not be a problem. But this is essentially. Like giving a teenager $36 million and sending them into the mall. Let them shop. There should be specific strings attached to this. Otherwise what we're faced with and what you're faced with. Is some mental twit from the 14th floor. Going off on their own on a project. With a bankroll of. A portion of $36 million. That's dereliction of duty on your part. And it's malfeasance on the part of the managers. City manager. Maybe he thinks Euro nine stool pigeons. I don't know and don't know any better. But you need to rethink this period. Because it does not speak well for you. And this is one of the reasons. One of the reasons. Well, you'll be getting that visit in January. And one of the reasons why. And underscoring the imperatives. Of having a new mayor. And some new fellow travelers who are. Within this city. This is not a way this is not a good sound way to run a government, period. If you want if you want to spend $36 million, then lay it out. And like Martin Luther King nailed it to the door and say, this is the project we want. This is what it's going to cost us. That's the way a responsible council acts.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Period. Next item, please. We need a we voted.
Speaker 2: Let's let's vote. Let's vote, period. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Madam Clerk. Period. Can we please get the next item? Councilman.
Speaker 0: Councilman. Period. Councilman Austin. Cost Councilman Austin. Motion carries. Item 19 Communication from City Attorney Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code Creating a new preferential parking district 80 Red and adopted as Red District five. | Contract | Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFQ PW15-102 and award contracts to Anchor QEA, LLC, of Huntington Beach, CA; Geosyntec Consultants, Inc., of Huntington Beach, CA; Harris & Associates, of Irvine, CA; HDR Engineering, Inc., of Long Beach, CA; Kleinfelder, Inc., of Long Beach, CA; Koa Consulting, Inc., of Huntington Beach, CA; KOA Corporation, of Gardena, CA; Moffatt & Nichol, of Long Beach, CA; Nabih Youssef & Associates, of Los Angeles, CA; Psomas, of Los Angeles, CA; RBF Consulting, A Michael Baker International Company, of Irvine, CA; and Tetra Tech, Inc., of Long Beach, CA, for as-needed Professional Engineering Services, in an aggregate amount not to exceed $36,000,000, 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 necessary amendments relative to extending the term, adjusting the individual contract amounts within the aggregate amount, amending the Scope of Work, and/or adjusting the fee schedule of hourly rates for inflation. (Cityw | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12082015_15-1272 | Speaker 0: So now we're back to the airport.
Speaker 7: I think we're going to go there.
Speaker 0: So let's do the airport.
Speaker 7: So again, let me reintroduce the airport. Executive Director Bryant Francis.
Speaker 0: And let's just start from the top, please.
Speaker 8: Yes, sir. Once again, good evening, Mayor Garcia, members of council and everyone in attendance this evening. Thank you for the opportunity to discuss the airports noise budget performance. This is a critical issue for the airport and for the city. The annual review of our noise performance is required by the noise ordinance. It is something that we do in the fourth quarter of each calendar year. As you are aware, our noise ordinance is one of few in the nation grandfathered under the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990. It is a balance between airline and community interests. It provides unparalleled protection for our community and its residents. One of the strengths of the ordinance is that it accounts for changes in the industry, such as the use of quieter aircraft while holding the noise levels to maximum limits. Because of the ordinance, we are able to ensure that our noise levels do not increase. The best way to ensure that we are able to keep the ordinance in place is to abide by it. This is something that we at the airport, along with our city attorney and city prosecutor, worked very hard to do. The ordinance requires that we allow a minimum of 41 air carrier flights per day. It also requires that we evaluate the noise levels annually to ensure we are below the noise budget specified by the ordinance and to determine if additional flight slots must be added. There are 18 noise monitors located around Long Beach Airport. The noise levels that we will discuss this evening are based on actual noise data from our airport noise and operations monitoring system or enemies. This is a multimillion dollar noise monitoring and flight tracking system that correlates noise levels with aircraft operations. Noise monitors are associated with each of our three runways. We have six regulatory noise monitors as depicted in orange on the screen. These monitors are the violation monitors. The ordinance establishes maximum noise levels for individual aircraft at each of these monitors. These monitors are important as they serve as the basis for our monetary fines. The noise limits are based on 1989 1990 noise levels and have never been modified. We are not proposing to modify them tonight. Noise levels will be retained at 1989. 90 levels. Noise monitors nine and ten as depicted in red. Are at either end of our primary runway, runway one, two, three zero, and they are our noise budget monitors. In addition to maximum noise levels for each aircraft, the ordinance establishes cumulative noise budgets for these monitors. In addition to monitoring the maximum noise levels, we monitor total noise exposure, which is all noise throughout the year at these locations. The ordinance specifies total noise, exposure limits or noise budgets for five aircraft categories, including air carriers, which is the focus of tonight's discussion. Remote monitoring terminal or empty nine is located north of the airport and is our primary monitor for departure operations. Our M10 is located south of the airport and is our primary monitor for aircraft arrivals each year during the fourth quarter. We evaluate the total annual noise exposure at these locations. The noise ordinance establishes a minimum floor of 41 air carrier flights. As mentioned earlier, under the ordinance, air carriers are encouraged to operate at the lowest possible noise levels. This encouragement is provided by requiring an increase in the number of flight slots. If the air carrier category operates below the established noise budget and there is room in the budget to provide a cushion against exceeding that budget. Following these steps is critical to protecting the budget based on long term noise monitoring data. We know that aircraft have gotten quieter over time. This graph depicts historical aircraft noise levels measured at RS 89, which again is a monitor which measures departing aircraft. Some of these aircraft are no longer operating at the airport. The aircraft in the upper portion of the graph, which are the Boeing 727, the very first aircraft, the DC nine and the MD 80 represent older aircraft and engine technologies. The lower portion of the graph depicts new, quieter engine technologies. These newer aircraft represent the vast majority of today's airline fleet. The reduced noise levels and change in the airline fleet is what has prompted me to take this action tonight. Based on our consultant's analysis of the noise data and projection of future flight activity, their recommendation, along with an independent peer review of the data and conclusions, is that we must add nine slots. This graph depicts the historical annual measured noise levels at RS 89. Since 2003, the highest levels reflect periods when older technology aircraft were operating at the airport, as shown in the graph. With the exception of 2011, when we experienced a period of significant operations of older technology, MD 80 aircraft. The airport has been operating significantly below the established noise budget. This graph depicts similar data for our M10. We do not see the prominent spikes in the data that we saw for our mt9. This is because our m t ten is primarily an arrival noise monitor and a rival. Noise levels are typically quieter and more consistent than departure noise levels. Our noise ordinance includes an incentive for the airlines to operate quietly. This incentive is the requirement for the airport to add air carrier flights if the noise goals are met. These noise goals are based on data obtained from the 1980 990 time period. We believe that we are the only city air airport able to ensure that our noise levels do not increase based on the data and the provisions of the ordinance. We must add flights. Next question is how many flights must be added? As mentioned previously, all 41 area air carrier slots are currently allocated. However, air carriers are operating approximately 31 flights per day on average. We need to account for this unused allocation in the noise budget. Otherwise, we run the risk of exceeding the budget. If the airlines were to begin flying a larger portion of their allocated slots. Currently our carriers are flying 74% of the available slots. That is part of why our noise levels are low. The long term ten year average utilization of slots is 84%. The maximum slot utilization is 93%. And I should note that this occurred one time only for one quarter in the summer of 2005. The maximum utilization in any 12 month period is 90%, which was calendar year 2009. And the maximum utilization in a noise year, which is October through September, was 87%, which was from October 28 through September 2009. In order to determine the number of additional slots that should be added, we need to account for the slots that are not currently utilized to be conservative. Our consultant calculated what the noise levels would be if the air carriers operated 95% of their available slots, which is above the level we have ever experienced at the airport. The noise levels based on 95% utilization of all available slots are shown in yellow for the period 2010 to 2015. As you can see, even if all the current flights flew at 95%, that's across all 41 minimum allocated slots. Because the planes are operating so much quieter, there is still significant capacity in the noise budget. And this is the same data for R.A. ten, which is an a noise monitor. This data serves as the baseline for determining how much room is available in the noise budget. Our consultant used a mix of common aircraft types to determine the noise levels from additional slots. These aircraft for the Boeing 737 700, Boeing 737 800, and the Boeing 757. They assumed four Boeing 737 700 aircraft for Boeing 737 800 aircraft and one Boeing 757 aircraft. These aircraft are conservatively representative of the airlines fleets today, as the slots may be flown by quieter aircraft such as the Airbus 320. As shown in this slide, four are empty. Nine. Even with the additional slots and all slots flown at 95% utilization. The airport would be below the 1989 1990 noise levels. These projections are very conservative, as the consultant used the louder of the representative aircraft flown at utilization rate that is higher than we have ever seen at the airport to ensure we do not exceed our budgets. This is the same data for R.A. ten. The data for R.A. ten is a little tighter than for R.A. nine, which is because, as aircraft have gotten quieter, this noise monitor becomes our limiting noise monitor. Again, the maximum slot utilization over the last 20 years is 93%, which occurred one time in summer of 2005. And this very conservative model of 95% utilization of all 41 minimum slots and 95% utilization of the nine new supplemental slots. We anticipate being near the allowable limit at our empty ten. We will watch this closely as required by the ordinance. The additional slots are valid for a period of one year and if we see the 1989 1990 noise levels that either are empty nine or are empty ten, the available slots will be reduced as the ordinance requires active management. To summarize, this action is required by the noise ordinance. The conclusions and recommendations are based on long term data from aircraft operations at our airport. The F-15 analysis conducted by Landrum and Brown was peer reviewed by Harris, Miller, Miller and Hansen, both highly reputable firms in airport and aircraft noise analysis. The results of the peer review were consistent with the original analysis and support Landrum and Brown's findings. This action is required in an effort to preserve and protect the noise ordinance. The ordinance cannot be adhered to. In part, we must abide by it in full in order to continue to enjoy its benefits. As a result, we must add nine flight slots. As next steps. There's an established procedure for awarding the slots. We will notify all carriers, U.S. based carriers of slot availability. Those carriers interested in additional flying or new flying will submit that interest to the airport. And slots will be awarded based on an established protocol per the allocation resolution. And we have 30 days to allocate the slots at that time. Vince M.E., our long time consultant for noise analysis, is regrettably unable to join us tonight. However, Cristian Valdez is here with a statement to read on Mr. Masters behalf. He's a member of Mr. Mystery's team, and I'd like to invite him to the podium at this time.
Speaker 6: Good evening. Mayor and council members. My name is Christian Valdez with Landrum Brown Acoustical Consultants to Long Beach Airport. I have a statement prepared by Vince Mastery, the primary acoustical consultant for the airport who couldn't be here tonight. You know, I read the statement to you now. My name is Vince Master. I'm a licensed professional engineer in the state of California, and I have over 40 years of aviation noise experience. I have an advanced degree in engineering and have authored numerous peer reviewed journal journal articles. I'm sorry I'm on the East Coast at the present time and cannot be here in person. Christian Valdez of my staff is here to represent Landrum and Brown and read this statement. I've been working closely with Long Beach Airport on issues relating to the air and air carrier noise budget since 1999. Based on my analysis and review of noise data for October 1st, 2014 through September 30th, 2015, I have determined that the airport is currently operating below the noise budget for air carriers. The ability, the availability of capacity within the noise budget at the airports at the airport is likely due to a change in aircraft fleet mix. Specifically in the past, two aircraft have tended to dominate the noise budget calculations at the airport because of their high noise levels on departure. These are the Boeing 7 to 7 historically used for cargo flights and the McDonnell Douglas, MD 80. The Boeing 7 to 7 has been decreasing in use and is now essentially gone from the US fleet, although still in use in some charter operations. And the MD 80, while still in some airline fleet, is also decreasing in use by U.S. airlines. The number of additional flights at the airports at the airport must allocate to operate within the established noise budget is dependent on the number of new flights, the aircraft type and the time of day of the operations. Since evening and night operations are heavily penalized in the noise budget, using data that reflects the current operations and fleet mix at the airport. The estimated number of flights that could be added has been presented to you and is the subject of your discussions. While these estimates are valid for the typical operator at Long Beach, any proposed new operations that are requested through the allocation process would have to be reviewed for the aircraft type and type of operations. Time of operation. For example, if a new operator were to reintroduce the MD 80, the number of slots available, available drops dramatically. We are prepared to evaluate any proposed new operations to determine whether the initiation of service utilizing those flights would lead the air carriers, air carriers as a group to maintain compliance with the noise levels established in the baseline noise budget. The noise ordinance at Long Beach Airport carefully balances the environmental interest of the community while providing capacity increases at the airport. Although most airports are limited to their ability to control aircraft under the 1990 Airport Noise Capacity Act and Grandfather Clause permits the airport to continue to limit hours of operation, single event noise and control over noise overall noise through a noise budget provided that the airport complies with Anka and its FAA grant assurances, including increasing the number of flights to the extent possible while maintaining the noise budget at the airport. Essentially, then the airport must allocate flights above the 41 flight limit. If the airport determines that the initiation of those flights would not lead. Two, the air carriers exceeding the noise levels established in the noise budget. We have made our estimates and the additional capacity that is available with these important issues is in mind. That's the end of the statement. Thank you.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Mr. Bass.
Speaker 0: Before I turn this over to begin with questions, I know that our city attorney and just so that people are aware, this process in large part was also led through our city attorney's office in making determinations and working with our city manager. So, Mr. Parkin, if you want, I know you're going to weigh in on a few things.
Speaker 7: Mayor. Thank you. Mayor Members of City Council. That's correct. Mike Mays and myself and our office have worked closely with the airport on this issue. Mike's been involved with it for 20 years and is very familiar with the ordinance and its requirements. We also requested and staff agreed on the peer review of the initial studies and data, and we stand ready to answer any of your questions.
Speaker 0: Okay. Great. Thank you for turning this over now to council for four questions. Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 10: Yes, I appreciate the presentation. And most specifically, I appreciate. Slide ten and Slide 11, which we discussed at our prior briefing, that of how helpful that would be to understand and visualize the noise and what that looks like. Many have heard me say that the process where people get to come forward and speak for 3 minutes, we don't get to engage in a dialog and a lot of times there are questions that don't get to be answered. So I sent out a request of my constituents 12 12,000 emails and received back a multitude of questions which we've consolidated that I'd like to make sure that are answered in the public forum. So if the city staff are available to answer these, I'm the first question was and I can give the percentage of the answer that I know off the top of my head, and then maybe we can work together to answer some of them. How many of the minimum 41 air carrier slots and 25 commuter slots are being used on a regular basis? Who are the slots allocated to and how much are they utilized? Specifically, I know that we've discussed that the current slot allocation is 32 to JetBlue, five to American, two to Delta, one to FedEx and one to UPS.
Speaker 8: That is correct.
Speaker 10: Can you answer the the question related to regular basis usage right now?
Speaker 8: Yes. For the most recent 12 month period, JetBlue was at approximately 70% utilization. Both of the air cargo carriers, FedEx and UPS were right at 70% as well. Delta, with its air carrier slots, was in the low 90% range, as was American slash U.S. Airways. And in the commuter category, there are three of 25 total slots currently allocated all to Delta, and they are utilizing those that are approximately 65%.
Speaker 10: Thank you. Why is it necessary to increase the number of air carrier slots to 50? If only 30.4 of them are being utilized on an average basis.
Speaker 13: I can try to answer that question. First of all, even though that the utilization is actually lower than historically or historic averages, that's not what we look at when we look at to add supplemental slots. Basically, we look simply at the noise budget. All of the carriers that Brian mentioned, even though they are flying at different levels, are all flying legally within the terms of our ordinance and its companion flight allocation resolution. So we simply look at the budget themselves. And as the presentation demonstrated, this addition of nine slots was actually modeled by our noise consultants, as if all of the carriers, all 41 of them at the airport or all 41 slots were being flown at a 95% level, which.
Speaker 10: I think you also said was higher than any year. But 19 or 25.
Speaker 13: Historically, the 18 year averages 84% among all 41 slots. So we really look at the budget itself and not the. I was going to say underutilization of the slots because they are being utilized in accordance with the ordinance in the resolution.
Speaker 10: And is this an implied or explicit requirement of the noise ordinance?
Speaker 13: The requirement to add additional slot? Yes, sir. It is an explicit requirement of the ordinance.
Speaker 10: And what's the airport director's role?
Speaker 13: So it's somewhat unique in this particular ordinance, which, as was mentioned in the presentation, was adopted in 1995 after 12 years of litigation in federal court, and basically the consent of the air carriers that were suing the city at the time, together with the federal judge and the FAA.
Speaker 11: For good.
Speaker 13: I forgot the question. I'm sorry.
Speaker 10: The airport directors role versus the city over mayor.
Speaker 13: The airport directors role is called out in the ordinance as the airport director rather than city council or the city manager. That makes a determination on whether or not additional slots can be added. I'm sorry.
Speaker 10: No problem. And who can apply for those nine slots?
Speaker 13: So, as Mr. Francis indicated, any certificated, certificated air carrier could apply for those slots, whether they're an incumbent carrier existing at air airport now or a carrier that's. No, not at our airport.
Speaker 10: Some of these questions were submitted before the the constituents were able to see the presentation. But I think that it's important that they have the answers so that when they do come up to make their three minute speech in case they missed that part of the presentation. So I appreciate you still answering them. Must a certain number of outside carriers that are not at the airport or any requirement of current tenants apply for the noise ordinance to be preserved? Or is it open to all.
Speaker 13: The city's obligation? The airport's obligation is to make the flight slots available for allocation. If, hypothetically, no one were to apply for those nine slot supplemental slots, the city would be fully compliant with Anka and its ordinance, and there would be no violation that the FAA would recognize. We just have to make them available.
Speaker 10: And if the deadline passed and no one had applied, would we need to extend the deadline and leave it open in case someone asked or would be open at a year later?
Speaker 13: They would be open until the next budget year and we would look at this and go through this exercise again next October, essentially.
Speaker 10: Will JetBlue be able to apply for any of the new slots, given that they're not utilizing their current allocated slots.
Speaker 13: As they indicated? JetBlue, as with all of the other carriers, are currently utilizing their slots in accordance with our current regulations are a flight allocation resolution in the ordinance. So the city does not have an ability to discriminate against any particular carrier in the allocation of the supplemental slots. So yes, JetBlue, as with all our other incumbent carriers, could apply for slots.
Speaker 10: And once those slots are allocated, are there conditions of which those slots could be removed or revoked?
Speaker 13: Yes. Again, that's within the purview of the airport director. And what would happen if we allocated the nine supplemental slots at the end of one year or 12 months of operation? We would look at the noise budget again and if the noise budget had been exceeded due to the adding of those nine slots, one or more slots would be automatically removed. And the way it works in the ordinance is we would actually eliminate the noisiest slots first until we came below the budget.
Speaker 10: So not in the order they were awarded, but noisiest first. And are there conditions by which a slot could be revoked mid-year?
Speaker 13: There's really no provision in the ordinance for a midyear revocation.
Speaker 10: What if they violated curfew hours at the airport?
Speaker 13: All of the supplemental slots are subject to all of the other existing airport noise, rule and regulations, so they would have to comply with the curfew, the departure and landing, the departure and landing times just like any other carrier. And if they failed to do that, they would be subject to administrative penalties or criminal prosecution.
Speaker 10: I know you addressed this, but just to be clear and make it a specific question, when the additional thoughts are added, should JetBlue begin to utilize all of their currently unused slots? What would happen if all the noise exceeds the ordinance limit midyear?
Speaker 13: So we would still look at it at the end of next fiscal year for revocation. But as I indicated with JetBlue, the way it was modeled it suppose that JetBlue was already flying at 95% of their rate. Even if JetBlue were to fly at 100% of their rate, which I believe historically no air carriers ever done at the airport. There would still be room in the budget. So really, it is more dependent on the fleet mix. If someone were to come in with an outdated MD 80 or 77, that would be the thing that would more likely put it over the budget.
Speaker 10: And I know you answered that we would not be out of compliance if no one applied. And what effects will the FAA changes to flight paths on Southern California airports under the next gen program have on our noise budget?
Speaker 14: Yes. We've looked closely at the proposed NextGen procedures for Long Beach Airport. There are no changes to the procedures within our noise monitors, so we anticipate no change at all. Given implementation of the FAA, NextGen.
Speaker 10: And is the airport director planning to utilize two five right. With more commercial landings in addition to the current general aviation group?
Speaker 8: I know we are not the primary runaway. Runaway 1230 is utilized for. For all of our air carrier operations, unless it is unavailable for a brief period of time. At that time, runway seven left to five right is the backup runway. I should also point out that runway one, two, three, zero. There are no plans to have any extensive rehabilitation or construction of work going on with that runway over the next several years. So aside from very brief periods, we would not utilize any runway other than the primary for the air carrier operations.
Speaker 10: Does this study have anything to do with JetBlue's request that Long Beach add federal customs or an FAA facility for international flights?
Speaker 8: No, it does not is completely unrelated.
Speaker 13: And I could add on to that. Some of the council members that have been here a while will remember that this scenario of adding additional slots was actually studied in the airport area that dealt with the rehabilitation or the expansion of the airport terminals. So this was well in advance of JetBlue's request for the federal inspection station, and it was also analyzed in the original air, which was passed in 1980 or certified in 1986, and a subsequent negative declaration that studied the addition of supplemental slots, which was done in 1980, 1995.
Speaker 10: And is this at all related to the ACI and a conference that was held here in Long Beach related to aircrafts this year?
Speaker 8: No, it is not.
Speaker 10: And again, I appreciate you answering the questions despite your presentation, making some of these, because these were sent in in advance. Does the city's noise ordinance have any discussion about helicopter noise?
Speaker 14: No. The the noise ordinance establishes limits at the noise monitors which are associated with our runways. If the helicopters are operating to or from those runways, they are subject to the ordinance. We do not have any noise monitors in our primary helicopter quarters, however.
Speaker 10: And does the addition of nine new slots in any way impact other aircraft carrier usage categories? I think you talked about that already, and that was an explicit no. And what are the lost revenues from commercial airlines who left the airport and or underutilization over the last two years? What are the lost revenues? In the past. Public passenger flights, fliers.
Speaker 8: So we've taken a look at this since my arrival, and we've determined that the revenues are off by approximately $2 million in each of the last three fiscal years, and that is due almost exclusively to a reduction in flying, which leads to fewer passengers going through the terminal facility and all of the other revenue generating functions have . It has a ripple effect, in essence. So it's approximately $2 million annually.
Speaker 10: And have any of the potential, um, interested in any potential of the airlines that are interested in the slots reached out to express their explicit interest or do we have any written correspondence?
Speaker 8: I have met through the course of attending various industry events this year. I have I've been informed by various carriers that there is interest, general interest. But clearly at that time that was a discussion over which there was there was no slot allocation available, no slots available for allocation. So that would need to be revisited once the period for air carrier interest is is opened.
Speaker 10: I want to thank the members of the community who consolidated questions with us and made answering these questions possible. I wish I could have gotten back to everyone via phone call or email. As everyone is aware, we have a lot of items on the agenda. I think we took 30 phone calls today, and so I appreciate those of you who submitted in advance. I appreciate those of you who have come to any other community meeting and waited afterward to talk with me without interrupting the the cause of the community watch meeting or other matters that we had at the time. And I look forward to hearing my colleagues and the public before making additional comments. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 11: Thank you. And I want to thank my colleague, Councilmember Mongo, for asking many of the same questions that they actually have. And they were submitted to my office as well from many members of the public as I communicated to my constituents. I'm not thrilled about this news and potential action of awarding new slots at our airport. And not thrilled is an understatement. But I see this as more of an administrative and legal action as opposed to a policy decision by the by the council. That's that's very clear in the process and the ordinance. I do have several questions still, and I would just ask that the council and the public indulge us so we can get these questions out and answered so that people walk away from here with greater clarity. And so for the benefit from for everyone here, I'm going to ask, I think, an obvious question. Can you please provide an explanation in layman's terms about the differences between last year and this year, where yesterday the noise ordinance or noise study did not warrant additional flights? And this year we are now supposed to add nine new flights. I was reading a an op ed by by an airline executives last year on December of 2014. And he made mention to the fact that we were under well, under the noise allowable noise limit here in Long Beach. And so it was clear we were there that last year. Why different this year?
Speaker 8: Yes. Councilman Alston, for roughly the last three years there has been room available in the noise budget, in the air carrier noise budget. However, in the period as recently as late 2011 or early 2012, the airport still had activity by an operator that utilized the MD 80 aircraft, which was by far the the noisiest aircraft among the air carrier operations in Long Beach. So when it was determined that there was some room available with the FBI 12 analysis and there was still some room with the next year's analysis, it needed to be determined that there was a trend in place instead of in the very first year that there was a bit of room available . That room was immediately filled with new flying and then the potential would be there for it to go right back over because that operator had vacated the market. But they certainly could have reentered with the new slots that had would have become available had there been new slots allocated in prior years. And so there was a, I think, a real hesitation because of that aircraft type still being very prevalent with various air carriers being actively flown. As the years have passed, that aircraft is being retired at rapid rates, especially by American Airlines, which was formerly the largest operator of the MD 80, with over 400 aircraft in their fleet of the MD 80 type. But also, we have now established a trend. We have seen that there have been several periods where there is room available and the budget and the amount of available room has grown. And so we at a point now where it is time to to act to fill the available noise budget with these nine supplemental slots.
Speaker 11: So in short, the MDA shows what airline utilized the MDA.
Speaker 8: That was Allegiant.
Speaker 11: And is Allegiant still operating at the airport?
Speaker 8: They're still operating, but not at the airport, not at Long Beach at the present time.
Speaker 11: Okay. So they they are they are no longer operating.
Speaker 8: Correct. And one one great change about Allegiant. If they were to submit interest to return to the airport when they operated here in 2011, the only aircraft type they had in their fleet was the MD 80. Today they have a fleet of 25. In addition to the MD 80, they have a fleet of 25 A319 and A320 aircraft. The A320 we're very familiar with as that is what JetBlue flies here exclusively. So Allegiant has an option for an aircraft to put into this market that they did not have in 2011.
Speaker 11: Thank you, sir. So I'd like to, too, I'm going to jump around here with the additional nine flight slots. Certainly, I don't know much about airport operations. I would defer to you, Mr. Francis, but how does that impact and correlate with the FAA and other stakeholders that that that are necessary for airport operations? The 30 day window is the FAA prepared with air traffic controllers and TSA to handle.
Speaker 9: Nine more slots.
Speaker 11: So to speak. And how does that work?
Speaker 8: Well, I would I.
Speaker 11: Would say being consulted with in any way.
Speaker 8: They've not been consulted with. But I do not foresee any problem whatsoever in there being an ability to handle a an increase in the amount of aircraft activity by the FAA through the air traffic control system, nor on the ground with the TSA and the the passenger side of of the operation.
Speaker 11: Okay. And so your memo indicates that the slots will be awarded awarded in 30 days or within 30 days of becoming available. Can you describe that process and include when that 30 day clock starts to tick?
Speaker 8: Yes, sir. We'll have Mr. Mays respond to that question.
Speaker 13: Councilman Austin, the airport has a flight allocation protocol in place in the way it would work is that we would set an application time period of 30 days. Let's say hypothetically, it was January 1st. We would open up an application period. We would literally send a letter to each of our incumbent carriers at the airport indicating that there were nine slots available. We would also, as Mr. Francis indicated, send a letter, similar letters to all carriers that fly in the United States that may not be at our airport indicating that slots are available. At the conclusion of that period, we would see how many applications that we would have, and there could be a number of different scenarios if we had no applications at all because their one year supplemental slots, nothing would be allocated and we just move forward with what we have at the airport. If we had more than nine requests for slots or say two carriers each wanted six slots, we would basically go through a lottery process and it's set up to in essence favor slightly a non incumbents at the airport. So if you had an incumbent at the airport and none incumbent at the airport vying for slots, the non-incumbent would first be allocated to slots as opposed to the one slot that would be allocated to the incumbent at the airport. And so we would go through that allocation lottery process. They would have to submit to the airport what we call slot bonds that would guarantee the fact that they were actually going to utilize the slots. They would then have to demonstrate to us that they would advertise the slots as being ready for use within 90 days. They would actually have to, in order to retain the slot, have them up and running within a six month period.
Speaker 11: Okay. Thank you. So how does the appeal process impact the 30 day window?
Speaker 13: So the the appeal period would not allocate would not impact the 30 day window at all. The ordinance is clear that we have to do the allocation. So we would proceed in parallel, in essence. And the appeal period really wasn't discussed much here tonight. But basically the other thing I left out of the allocation protocol, in addition to sending notification to the air carriers, will also advertise in the newspaper the fact that we have slots available and set up a period of time in which people can appeal. It's a three tier appeal process. Basically the they could appeal directly to the airport director or the airport manager that subsequently could be appealed to the city manager of the city manager's designee and ultimately to the city council. But in a situation like this, what I liken to it's not like a C where it would come to the Council with much discretion in order not to allocate the nine slots. Basically someone would have to come forward with information that proved quite clearly that the calculations made by the various acoustical engineers who have presented the studies to the city council and the airport director were somehow incorrect. And that's precisely why we requested that at the beginning there would be peer review of our. Mr. Mestre, who's been there since 1999, his work. So in essence, we would proceed in parallel.
Speaker 11: So, Mr. Mayes, when was the last time we actually allocated new slots in the airport?
Speaker 13: So we literally have never allocated new slots under the ordinance that was adopted in 1995.
Speaker 11: Okay. That was a trick question.
Speaker 13: Okay.
Speaker 11: In your next steps, you say we're going to award the slots based on an established protocol and the protocol. How can we have a protocol if we've never done it before?
Speaker 13: That's what we've been working on. So we have put together we use the ordinance as a framework for developing the protocol. And so for the last couple of weeks, when we knew that this was going to come before the City Council, we have developed the protocol and our office did send each of the council members a copy of the protocol as an off agenda item earlier last week. So we have a very extensive protocol that lays out quite clearly, clearly what the airport air carriers must do if they want to apply. They have to first indicate to us they have the financial wherewithal to provide a slot bond. They have to indicate to us clearly what type of aircraft they intend to bring into the airport if they were allocated slots. They have to demonstrate that they are certificated by the FAA as a air carrier, air carrier and a few other things. So all of that is laid out in the protocol. It's about a five page protocol.
Speaker 11: Okay. So I think this this will address some of the concerns that I've heard from many of my residents. Currently, the Airport Advisory Commission receives a monthly activity and noise violation reports, and those reports are made available online. However, the findings of the annual noise budget study are not easily accessible as far as I know. And until this year that we have not been made publicly known, I think there's been part of it that's been part of the problem with this announcement about additional flight slots that the public do not have a real context to work from. And in the interest of transparency, can the airport staff make the annual noise study publicly available, such as through a report to the Airport Advisory Commission and posted on the airport website similar to the noise violation and activity reports. I know we are doing a lot of work and trying to and maybe our I-Team is paying attention here, but trying to create open data. And is that something that we can look at doing? Because I think that is part of what we we fell short.
Speaker 8: Yes, sir. Councilman Ross, we certainly can accomplish that.
Speaker 11: Okay. I think that was been that's been answered. And this question is for the street, for a city attorney. Is it your legal opinion that the airport noise ordinance requires the city to add these additional flights that slots based on the noise data available?
Speaker 7: Yes, that is correct.
Speaker 11: And what could potentially happen if the city did not make these additional slots available.
Speaker 7: That the failure to comply with the noise ordinance is is obviously the greatest risk to the FAA taking action against the city and either revoking the grandfather status. In addition, failure to allocate and follow the ordinance is going to implicate the grants, the FAA grants that the airport and the grant assurances. So over the years the city has received the FAA, the airport has received grant money. And in it, it requires that we comply with the terms of our anchor and the city's ordinance. And so that could implicate funding opportunities for the city and the city would maybe not be able to obtain those moneys.
Speaker 11: I think one issue that that concerns many, many people across the city is the fact that potentially our slots, airport slots are being gamed to a degree. And I think it would it would help. The question that I have is, is what what can the council do to prevent slot squadding, whether these are the new slots or the existing slots?
Speaker 7: Well, I'll ask Mike to jump in here, too. But I think that, as Mr. Maes pointed out, the slot squatting as described is in compliance with the city's slot resolution requirement and determines the rules on how the airlines must use their slots in order not to lose them or to maintain them. And that, as far as I know, that particular section of that resolution has not been changed since adopted in 1995. And Mike, if you want to add.
Speaker 13: We could look the council could look at potentially altering that. But that would take, I would think, a lot of discussion on the council to do that, because, in essence, if you did alter that resolution, you would in essence, be requiring air carriers to fly more frequently than sometimes they currently do. And so that would be a policy decision for the city council. I don't think you would get any pushback from the Federal Aviation Administration because they, quite frankly, like to see more planes in the air, but that the way it is structured now is based on when the resolution was passed, I think they tried to create a balance between the interests of the public and the preservation of their peace and quiet in their neighborhoods versus the rights of the air carriers to fly. So they came up with that scenario, which allows an air carrier to fly, as you've heard tonight, maybe as low as 64% of their actual slots, or 70% depending on the carrier . So but that is something that on a going forward basis, if the council wanted to look at that or wanted, we certainly could do that.
Speaker 11: Well, thank you. And I appreciate the the very straightforward answers to the questions. This is a difficult position, particularly for for me and the residents who I represent. This is, for the most part, not been seen as welcome news. But we all each and every one of these council members have pledged to do all we can to to maintain our noise ordinance. Noise ordinance. I'm going to be looking at all the alternatives and options available to ensure that the quality of life film in our neighborhoods is protected. And then we strike that balance because we do have an airport. We and we do have an obligation in that regard as well. I recognize that. I'm looking forward to hearing from the rest of my colleagues in the public. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember I'm sorry, Councilmember Ringo.
Speaker 12: Thank you. Jesus. The discussion has already taken so long. I lost track of where we're at. But. But bear with me. If. If I. My question is, get a little redundant. Because, like I say, that there's some points of clarification even in some of those that we've already discussed that that I didn't hear. And perhaps I want a little bit better clarification on those. But I have to agree with my colleague, Councilmember Austin, with the in regard to a surprise, especially when it comes down to timing. Timing is everything when it comes to issues like this. Here we are in the midst of a study to look at a customs facility and then we get a report that says we have to add nine additional flights. The timing on that couldn't have been worse or better in that regard because we're looking at the impacts of what a customs facility will do to our airport. At the same time, we're being told that we have to add nine flights because planes are getting quieter. So it doesn't it doesn't really make sense. And there's anything that a local official, especially me, that I don't like, is surprises. And frankly, this came as a surprise to us, and it it really threw us back in regards to what we're going to be dealing with in the next few months as the Customs facility study comes forward. So one of the things that I think that's out there that wasn't very clear and I think that needs a better clarification for the community because there's this misunderstanding or disconnect with the noise ordinance and what that means with the amount and the number of flights. A lot of people confused. The noise ordinance has been one set and the flights being another. In other words, that the 41 flights that we have is the maximum when in reality it's the minimum. So we have to look at and we're talking about as planes are getting quieter, that provides the opportunity for the airport or for us as a city to increase the number of flights. So I think that that needs to be made very clear to those who are most of all engaged in this in this discussion, but those who are affected by it as well. We need to understand that where we're at right now in terms of this mandate, if you will call it a mandate. Apparently, that's what we're at. To airline flights it go up to 50 is something that's a major concern. Having said all that, is there a limit? As planes get quieter, as as we add these nine flights, more planes will be quieter. Is there a maximum? We know the 41 is a minimum. Is there a maximum number of flights that we can realistically add over the next year or two years, whatever, whatever length of time it takes?
Speaker 13: The ordinance itself doesn't set forth a maximum, it leaves it open ended. But as a practical matter, there would be a maximum because it's still ultimately tied to the noise budget that was established in 1989, 1990. I don't know what the exact number would be as a maximum. As I indicated when we looked at this issue in the airport expansion E.R. in 2006, when the acoustical analysts looked at it, they projected maybe 11, but it could go a little bit higher than that. It just depends really on how quiet the aircraft get. And you know what? Our fleet mix is out of the airport.
Speaker 12: Now, in the previous questioning, there was a discussion about the the types of planes that are currently coming in or are in use at the Long Beach Airport. What was specifically mentioned about the the MD 80 versus the A320, which is the quieter plane and I'm looking at page four of the of the presentation where the MD 80 and the B737 Dash 400 is a borderline when you start with the 80. With the B737, they started getting quieter and we go all the way down to the A320. Would there be a prerequisite, if you will, a requirement for any airline that would be considering having some flights added to Long Beach as a destination or departure point to use the acquired planes?
Speaker 6: We can't recall.
Speaker 12: When can we do it? Can we legally do that?
Speaker 13: That's a good question there. We can't legally discriminate against any carrier that's certificated by the FAA as being able to carry passengers or cargo. But what we can do, and it was indicated in the presentation, if hypothetically when we advertise for the nine supplemental slots, one carrier came in and said, I want all nine slots. And by the way, I'm going to fly all MD eighties. We would have our acoustical engineer look at that scenario and based on what he has told us thus far, we would be able to ratchet down the number of slots that would be allocated to bring us within the budget. We don't anticipate that happening because there aren't that many MDs out there actually being flown by major air carriers. But we would ratchet down the number if the louder planes applied.
Speaker 12: Now there was a reference made to Allegiant that did that one time fly a Long Beach and fly in the eighties. Apparently, they still have some in their in their in their inventory of planes. And, of course, that would be welcome back. But if could we tell them. Yeah, but not with your MD 80.
Speaker 8: So, Councilman, you're wrong. The answer is that we we could not require them to operate the MD 80 or anything other than in the 80 or to prohibit the MD 80 from coming into the market. But as I mentioned. Allegiant now has other aircraft types in their fleets, which one of which we are very familiar with the A320, and they also have several A319 aircraft. They have 25 of those aircraft in their fleet today. They have already executed agreements to purchase an additional 25 of those A319 A320 aircraft, which will join their fleet over the next two years. So they will have approximately 50 A319 and A320 aircraft in the fleet, which will be equal to or greater than the number of MD 80 is that they're operating by the end of 2017. So clearly that's an airline that has evolved, that has taken on an aircraft type that is much more environmentally friendly. And I would fully expect that if Allegiant did state interest in returning to the market, that they would state that service would be operated by one of their Airbus aircraft.
Speaker 12: But at the present time, we don't exactly know. If we put those nine slots out there, that they will be. That they will be accepted. Do are there. Has there been any interest up to this point expressed by any of the airlines in saying, yeah, we'd like to look into those 9 to 9 or to our core services?
Speaker 8: When we open up the allocation period, which is a 30 day window, that will be the opportunity for the airlines to submit interest in writing. And at that time, they would have to also indicate what aircraft type they intend to utilize for those slots in the market.
Speaker 12: And just for purposes of argument, let's say that all nine slots are not are not filled. Are we still how would we be out of compliance? We did not feel all nine flights. All nine slots.
Speaker 8: No. We would not be out of compliance if there were any slots remaining within those that were made available for allocation, they would remain available for the remainder of the existing 12 month period, which would run through September 30th. And then we would conduct this annual analysis again to determine whether those slots would remain available based upon the cumulative noise levels as a result of the 516 analysis.
Speaker 12: Okay. One more line of questioning. There was a discussion also about the closing down of some of the runways for maintenance purposes. Is a noise ordinance suspended during that period of time? And is is it generally is a jet part of general information to the airlines that there's a runway? There's got to be no doubt that a runway is closed. There has to be that kangaroo for you can't fly into a runway and. In repair. But. But tell him mostly about the noise ordinance. It is suspended during that period of time. Well, how does that work?
Speaker 8: Yes, sir. We will have Mr. Ron Reeves, our noise and environmental officer, respond to that question.
Speaker 14: Yes. Councilman, the the airlines are made aware of runway closures through a procedure called no towns notices to airmen. And our operations department distributes these to the the FAA. And that that does go to to all the airlines. During the period. When we do have runway closures, the requirements or the noise levels associated with the runways are exempt. For example, during the nighttime hours, runway 1230 is the only runway that's in use if it is closed for maintenance. On those rare instances, runway two five right may be used. We do not have noise levels applicable to air carriers for runway 25. Right. However, these these occurrences are very rare.
Speaker 6: Okay.
Speaker 12: Now, there was also discussion about the appeal process. Does that start immediately or is there does the appeal start after the ninth slots are announced as being made available?
Speaker 13: Because when you arrange it, that's part of the airport's allocation protocol. And basically, we would set a time period in which the appeal period would run and it would be initially a 15 day appeal period, and we would make that known to both the air carriers and the public. So if anyone did want to appeal it, if they felt that the noise studies were somehow incorrect, they could definitely bring that to the airport directors attention.
Speaker 12: Now, that would be for the whole budget of nine, nine flights.
Speaker 13: We would do it. We would do it at one time. We would make an announcement that there were nine supplemental slots available. And we would also indicate to the public and the air carriers what the time period would be and how to file an appeal.
Speaker 12: Okay. Well, thank you for your responses. I know it takes a lot of patience. We have a lot of questions and sometimes they get redundant. But yeah, I'm definitely very concerned about the the afternoon surprise, if you will, on this issue. And of course, you know, we are looking at a community that is very concerned about what this additional pattern for the airport, what that would bring to the to the noise ordinance and its compatibility and its ability to stay within within the limits. We understand that it's quieter planes are made available, that there's probably going to be an opportunity to increase flights. But we want to make sure that it's done in a in a strategic and in a very responsible manner for our community so that their quality of life is not that much affected. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman Pryce.
Speaker 5: Thank you. I do have a couple of questions that Councilwoman Mongeau brought up earlier regarding helicopter noise. I know that's not directly related to this adding of the new slots, but how does helicopter noise impact the noise bucket and what control, if any, does the city have in regards to that?
Speaker 14: Helicopter noise when it is associated with our typical flight paths along the runway over the noise monitors is included in our general aviation noise bucket. So that to say that helicopters are excluded is not entirely correct. However, air helicopters typically use our helicopter corridors rather than the runways.
Speaker 5: Okay. And do you think that additional airplane traffic could impact the request that helicopters fly at a higher altitude, as has been discussed?
Speaker 14: This request will not impact helicopter altitudes. It will not in any way change our fixed wing traffic patterns or the ability to modify those patterns in the future.
Speaker 5: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Council members who were not.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Mayor Garcia. Before I start, just like to acknowledge some of our airport advisory commissioners in the audience tonight. Thank you for being here. My first question is regarding. I'll just follow up on on a point that councilmember you're on a brought up about allegiant and flying an older louder aircraft. My briefing my very first briefing. I think, Mr. Francis, you told me that if there were a violation, we were talking about hypotheticals here. If there were a violator in of that nature, they would be the first to be booted out. Can you explain that a little bit? That is correct. If at the end of the 12 month noise year and the preceding noise analysis was conducted and it determined that we, in fact, had gone above the noise budget limit, then we would take a look at the additional flying that was made available through this allocation of slots . And in essence, the operator with the noisiest aircraft would be the first one that we would contact to reduce the number of slots available. So that is correct, Councilman. Okay. Thank you. Then I have a question about noise monitors. So I think they should probably be directed to Ron Reeves. We list monitors on nine and ten and ten is in the fourth Council District. If there are will, we know there are other monitors that don't function all the time. For instance, there's one in the art craft manor neighborhood on Quincy Avenue between BURNETT and Vernon Mysteries. How does that affect this calculation?
Speaker 14: The other monitors do not directly affect these calculations other than noise. Data from those other monitors is used to verify the noise levels at nine and ten.
Speaker 8: Okay. Thank you. Also customary raga. How do we characterize the phone call from the city manager? But it was a Saturday afternoon phone call. Okay. Afternoon. Surprise. Thank you. Upon getting that phone call, I actually requested and got a meeting in less than 18 hours. So Director Francis, Assistant City Attorney Mays and actually city attorney Charles Parkin and I met in city attorney's office on Sunday morning at 10 a.m.. So I was probably the first councilmember to be briefed. I'm not sure if anyone got there earlier than I, but I think that's how it worked out.
Speaker 6: At that.
Speaker 8: Time. Mr. Francis, explain to me then exactly what he's saying tonight, that all of the slots were calculated on a on a noise value. That and I'll just ask. Nothing changed in between that point and tonight. No, sir. Okay. So I'd like to ask a question just about the Landrum report and just one sentence. I'm not understanding how this sentence comports with what we're seeing tonight, and that is the first part of the sentence. I am fine with the reason the budget numbers are well below the permitted levels is due to the reduction the number of noisier aircraft. Now, here's the part that I question and the fact that the airport operated well below the permitted number of daily air carrier flights. That seems to be kind of the opposite of what we're saying here. So you figured that out. You had the lander report before we met that very first day. So how does how does this make sense to you? Ask Mr. Reese to respond to that, please.
Speaker 14: Yes, Councilman. Super not the. I understand from what is indicated in the report that the reason our existing noise levels are as low as they are is because of the fleet mix, the quieter aircraft types, as well as the low number of flights. That's in response to our current noise levels. Our future noise levels, though, were calculated based on a 95% utilization of all slots, which Director Francis has indicated is very conservative.
Speaker 8: Okay. Then that is the explanation. It's not semantics. It's just that we're talking about two different topics. Is it does that comport with the way you're saying it? The well is not factored into that sentence, is the theoretical calculation if every slot were filled.
Speaker 14: That's my understanding. Caltech.
Speaker 8: Okay, great. Thank you. That's all I have. Thanks.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember Richardson.
Speaker 9: Thank you. My comments will be brief. Director Francis, question Does the ordinance prevent you from consulting with the airport convention commission or the city council prior to making this decision?
Speaker 8: I will ask Mr. Mays to respond to that, please.
Speaker 13: It certainly wouldn't prevent the airport director from doing a study session such as we're doing tonight or with the Airport Advisory Commission. But the airport ordinance makes it very clear that is the decision of the airport director to make based on consultation with this noise consultants.
Speaker 9: Right. I would have to just say that, you know something is this major? In the time I've served, in the short time I've served on the council or have worked on the 14th floor, I mean, it's a pretty major decision. And again, to get to have no don't no notice and get a call on a Saturday, it seems. It was a bit shocking for that to happen. I would say if the ordinance doesn't if it does not jeopardize our ordinance to be to air on the side of inclusion or transparency. My guidance here would be we should air on that side. Moving forward, we all have airport commissioners and, you know, I have an airport commissioner that you know, I have an airport commissioner in District nine that's, you know, pretty engaged. And he actually submits a report to the city council after every single meeting. And and I checked with him to say, did you know that this decision was going to come? He said, I've seen the numbers. I'm not surprised. But not even we were notified that we were heading in that direction. So I would just offer and hopefully it's received, I would just offer that we can go. It goes a long way to the community to bring the council along through this process. Thank you.
Speaker 8: Customer? Richardson If I might, I just wanted to say thank you for those comments, but also to state the fact that this process moved along from the latter part of October through the latter part of November, and not until just literally a couple of days before you were contacted did we have the final information. We brought the city manager into the understanding of the situation, and he very soon thereafter made the mayor and council aware of that. So I just wanted you to know that it was not something that was delayed or that we we did not share with the commissioners or the council with that knowledge well in advance. We actually went through the process just over the last several excuse me, several weeks.
Speaker 9: Thank thank you. I would say and I'm glad that the city manager did respond and call when he did. I think it would be good that if you knew that this study was going to come back in advance, if the council knew, hey, potentially in December, there will be a study, we will have the final results. We do this every year. And based on those results, we may or may not make a decision that that notification would have gone a long way. But I do appreciate the diligent dilutions matter.
Speaker 0: Thank you. With that, we're going to turn this over to public comment. So if you have any public comment, please come forward on this item and make sure you introduce yourself and your address, please.
Speaker 6: Oh.
Speaker 0: And just as a reminder, this is a study session. This is not in a. There's not an agenda item attached to this. Please begin.
Speaker 6: Yes. Because of my name's Larry Boland. Address on file. I was a member of the Portland Five-O study 25 years ago. And I'd like to tell you that this item was never, ever discussed. Those of us who were there, it had so many come up and said, you know, down in the future when we finally quiet this airport down and get rid of the noise pollution. If we don't if we get too quiet, we're going to add some pollution back into the equation. It's just ridiculous. Let me tell you. We were not interested in what the noise bucket was. The noise bucket does not wake people up in the morning. The noise bucket doesn't pour noise. Pollution into our schools affect our property values. The noise bucket is simply something that the government came up with. What we feel as human beings is the noise event. And by the way, folks, you kept talking about 41 flights and nobody brought up the fact that a flight is an arrival and a departure. 81 flights, 81 noise events, rather. That's what we listen to. Nobody here tonight even said that nine is not nine flights is nine flights, but it's not 18 noise events. And JetBlue sitting on ten. Well, we had nine. Come on, guys. What's going on here? And nobody would ever have thought that where we have a single event noise level of around 100 DB, which was S.E.A.L. Single event noise of level. That was 25 years ago. That's how old that noise level that we're using today is. It's antiquated. It's obsolete. For us to right now, the JetBlue A320 leaves at about 83 DB. Do you know what that level is it at 100? Every three decibels is 100% increase. The noise levels that we have set now were 600%. That noise level 600% above what the JetBlue does. But at the time, we made it with all the seven 2017 dedication of DC night, it was right at where it was bought, where it was. In other words, it wasn't 600% away. It was right near where the level was. Why haven't we been reducing it so we can enjoy the technological advances that have come from the quieter airplanes? By the way, we also didn't talk about the noise that is not counted at the airport, the thrust reverse noise, the helicopter noise, the engine run up noise. The private.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Time's up.
Speaker 6: Okay. I'm sorry. No problem. But I just am flabbergasted at this. This event. And we never heard it. This was never brought before the Portland Five-O study. Thank you, sir. That I recall. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Next speaker, please.
Speaker 7: Joe Sopko hushed two neighborhoods. First, Mr. Mayor.
Speaker 9: City Council members and staff. I.
Speaker 7: I really appreciate all the questions that the City Council brought up. Thank you for doing that, asking those questions. You know, it's obvious to Mr. Francis that the neighborhoods are sensitive about the number of flights, the noise it makes when they're woken up at night. We're sensitive to that. And to drop this on us, on you at a Saturday afternoon. Reflects. On how Mr. Francis treats us.
Speaker 9: Now we're you're.
Speaker 7: You're talking about an appeal process. Is there an appeal process to relieve Mr. Francis of his job? Mr. Francis, since he's come into office, we've all gone up and introduced ourselves and. And it's obvious that he sees US neighborhood representatives as the enemy. And that's what we get from him. I want you to know that. So if he is to represent the airport, represent you, he's doing a very poor job. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: My name is Barbara showing. 4120 Locust Avenue. And I was a member of the hash one committee years ago and I was glad that the question of international flights came up. I know it's not on the agenda tonight. It's on the agenda next week. But my question is, would international so these new nine flights could be domestic or they could be international? And what about private international flights that might come in and use the same runway? How would all that additional sound be calculated?
Speaker 0: So what we're going to do is we're going to make a note of that question and we're going to ask it right after one of the customers will ask that right after the public comment.
Speaker 5: Okay. And one other one other question, and that is when. And I remember the noise footprints of the very, very noisy planes. So now the Douglas Boeing is not sending any more big planes out.
Speaker 3: And I presume that they also impacted the noise calculation question mark.
Speaker 5: Maybe you could answer that as well.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 7: Good evening. I'm David Raichlen at 4300 Cerritos Avenue. And Mr. Mayor.
Speaker 3: Council members.
Speaker 6: Staff, thank you so much for.
Speaker 7: Letting us speak.
Speaker 6: I'm a.
Speaker 3: Medical doctor.
Speaker 6: And I.
Speaker 7: Also work in the entertainment industry.
Speaker 6: And we mix audio.
Speaker 7: For motion pictures and for home use.
Speaker 6: At 85 decibels. So we don't let things.
Speaker 3: Get louder than.
Speaker 7: That certain operators might. What that means is that if you look at the noise level of a single event of 95 decibels, it means that you can't hear what we're mixing. And this is for movies and TV shows.
Speaker 6: That have.
Speaker 3: Explosions.
Speaker 7: And loud arguments. Those become inaudible when those events happen.
Speaker 6: So that gives you a sense of how.
Speaker 7: Loud it still is, even though there's been progress made. Also, since I work on this, it's not just the inconvenience of having.
Speaker 6: Things rendered inaudible. It's also.
Speaker 7: That.
Speaker 3: I have to stop work. We can't have.
Speaker 7: Conversations. Each of these events are disruptive. Also, as a physician, I can tell you that stress comes not.
Speaker 3: From single events unless they're truly extreme, but from the repetition.
Speaker 6: So the more.
Speaker 7: Loud events we have, the more stressful it becomes. So adding these slots and keeping it under the noise bucket misses the point. And the Court of Appeals understood this.
Speaker 14: When they said.
Speaker 6: That the annoyance factor.
Speaker 7: Was more important than the total amount of noise.
Speaker 3: Uh, I'm also really concerned that our standard goes back. So far in time that.
Speaker 6: It no longer represents the the world that we actually live in. Yes, technology.
Speaker 7: Has improved, but the purpose of that technology, of having less noise.
Speaker 3: Isn't to allow us.
Speaker 7: To have more noise. Things were made quieter.
Speaker 6: Because that was the goal, to make things quieter. So there's clearly something wrong with a law that says that we have to make the problem.
Speaker 3: Worse because technology.
Speaker 6: Has gotten better. This does not.
Speaker 3: Compute. Okay. Now.
Speaker 6: One other point that I think it's important to to think about is the way that the noise.
Speaker 3: Levels are measured is at two points. Statistically, that's not a real good sample.
Speaker 6: We'd like to get more than that than two.
Speaker 3: Points to measure.
Speaker 6: And especially because the way sound travels can.
Speaker 7: Vary so much with.
Speaker 3: Temperature.
Speaker 7: And other.
Speaker 6: Environmental conditions. So thank you and good evening.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much, sir. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Hi. My name is Laurie Smith.
Speaker 10: I live in the third district.
Speaker 5: I'm a new resident of Bluff Park neighborhood. And I started looking at this when I moved in and about two years ago. Today, I guess we're we're discussing the noise budget analysis and the goal of the Long Beach Airport noise ordinance is to ensure that incompatible residential land use in the vicinity of the airport are not exposed to aircraft noise levels greater than 65 C an L and there's no noise monitors located along the main helicopter routes. This means that the noise ordinance is flawed if it's based on cumulative numbers. I posit that the reason our noise levels are so low is because we are not responsibly nor accurately recording all of Long Beach aircraft noise events, specifically helicopter corridors. So I know that you've been talking a lot about daily commercial flights coming in, but I'm talking about what Long Beach residents are experiencing besides major commercial flights. I'm taking a look at an analysis of helicopter operations that were done by the Long Beach Airport. They did a short term study and it involved two two helicopter overflights at 500 feet, which is what we experience on a daily basis. And these were taken at Man Elementary School. The sound exposure level was 82 DBA and 83 DBA. And I think the gentleman just before me was talking about a jet taking off at the airport at 85. So if you guys are okay with having that go over elementary schools on a daily basis, that's great. Also, this is one of the world's busiest airports in terms of general aviation activity, and that includes helicopter operations. We have way too many helicopter training, way too many fixed wing aircraft training going on at this airport. And you adding more flights really concerns me. I'd like for you guys to take a look at the noise monitors along our main helicopter, our main helicopter routes. According to this analysis of helicopter operations that was done by the Long Beach Airport, there's 16,000 flights, over 16,000 flights done. And a third of them, according to this report, were along the Redondo corridor. So I'm not very good at math, but I think that somewhere around 5200, 5400. So if we do that and we're looking at 82 or 83 DBA, I'm kind of wondering what the analysis is on this. So I just like some responsibility done here today and for some more analysis to be done with regards to the cumulative numbers. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: John Slattery, Long Beach Neighborhoods, First Mayor, City Council. Thank for the opportunity to speak in relation to this. I just have a couple of questions that I guess you guys will answer at the end. The first one is clarify the must versus May. As it relates to that, we must add these flights versus May cause as I read the ordinance, it basically says that we must evaluate it. But if the director feels that this may actually increase beyond that, we should not actually add those flights. But listening earlier they made it sound like, no, we still have to add it no matter what. The reason I ask that I just did some quick calculations and I guess, you know, trying to look at the LBE report and the other company that took a look at this trying to understand that's very difficult for a layman . I just took a quick look, though, and Slide five and took a rough average of these newer planes because they're so much quieter. So their rough average is 92.2, a single noise event. So if you calculate that for Monitor nine, that's one of 1.475, just below just below the one or two. I think that the noise ordinance calls for. So when you.
Speaker 8: Guys calculated.
Speaker 6: For these additional flights, obviously you're just throwing a number in there. Hey, here's what the single noise was like. So my question is, were those just applied to the 7 to 11 or were they are 7 to 10? Or they also applied some to the ten and beyond because a lot of those are calculated at a higher rate and may change that. So that's kind of stuff I'd like to know. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Makes me complete.
Speaker 11: Hi. Hi. My name is Good Luck.
Speaker 6: And Gary from. And I would past president of the Bixby Hill Community Association. And just a private homeowner. At the present moment, I had the pleasure of hosting 58 meetings regarding this airport in my home. In the period of time before the airport was remodeled. Represented from the city representative from the community and various other interested people who attended those meetings. I also served on the committee that designed the airport. And Ken had several meetings there. And I might tell you that you better look at the amount of slots or gates that you have to accommodate these nine additional aircraft, really. 18. And the the problems that they create pollution wise, besides the sound, if you didn't know it back at that time, I don't know what it is now. But Los Altos had the highest red cancer rate in Southern California, according to the Red Cross. Now, these planes are going to add impact more than just sound. They're going to end pack particles going into the air and everything else. So just to merit this increase, just to satisfy the requirements of the of the. Sound thing you're dealing with here is not really what it's all about. Can the airport handle are they all going to be passengers? What's the pollution of people getting to and from the airport? This all mushrooms into a big cloud of malarkey. So I would just like to tell you that there's more to it than just sound. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Good evening, Ray Gable, eighth District. I had the privilege of representing the eighth District. And during that time, as Mr. Mays referred to earlier, there was a 2006 report that stated that we would be able to allow a maximum of 11 additional flights. And and the report said if there were absolutely no violations, I'd sure like to see a copy of that and make sure I'm quoting it correctly. But they said if there were no noise violations, which is very, very much unheard of. And I'm going to say that because the next thing I'm going to share with you is that in JetBlue, just JetBlue violated the noise ordinance 64 times in 2013, 49 times in 2014 and 12 times in the first quarter of this year. The complaints for September of 2015 totaled 1423, and since May 2015, that number of complaints was never under 1100. So statistically, and I'm just going to say welcome to my world, because you're going to see what happens with the community as all of the airport issues begin to unfold. 1983, when the City of Long Beach was sued by over 30 airlines, and then then it was limited. Our noise ordinance limited it to 32 flights. The airlines said that our noise ordinance was unlawful and it was appealed again in 1990 to the Court of Appeals. And I'm going to read this to you, because a gentleman just referred to it, but it says that limits the number of daily air carriers to 32. As the district court found, the total noise produced by 32 flights could vary significantly depending upon what sort of planes were used. Thus, the District Court concluded that the choice of the number 32 was arbitrary. What the ordinance seeks to accomplish, however, is not simply the limitation of noise for its own sake. Rather, it seeks to limit the annoyance that residents experience as a result of the airport's operation. It is not unreasonable to believe that the number of times the disturbance occurs could be as relevant as the cumulative noise created by the total number of such disturbances. Now there's a legal formula that you formula that you have to follow. And, you know, if if the legal representatives feel that it's important that you do this, I would urge you, if compliance is of concern, that you do it gradually. You don't jump up to fill the bucket to get to the very top of what was allowed previously. And you've heard a couple of other folks refer to why would you do this to impact in a negative way the quality of life for the residents? If you have an opportunity to to balance both sides, it's a slippery slope. I hope that you pay attention and that you make your decisions wisely. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And are thank our final speaker for study session one.
Speaker 2: My good evening my name is Bill. Get a lottery. I live in the eighth district at 4465 Cerritos Avenue. And I just have another brief follow up question really. And I hope that you will take over that question from me and ask it later. There are a lot of concerns, health concerns, stress, heart disease, pollution for the lungs. And and so we really don't want to take this decision lightly. And so it comes down to.
Speaker 3: Must.
Speaker 2: We accept all these negative potential and current negative consequences, or do we have a choice? And I don't know about you, but I haven't heard anything tonight that convinces me that we must. In fact, I have heard phrases such as, I'm just going to look at providing the opportunity to add flights that doesn't sound like must. In fact, you're a noise specialist. The letter that was read doesn't say anything but must either. It says, Let's see. Sorry, the consultants I quote, the flight slots could be added. And in fact, that this is the subject of your discussion. All these all that verbiage indicates to me that there is a choice.
Speaker 4: So I would appreciate it if one of you.
Speaker 2: Could ask or maybe Mr. Maes might just volunteer.
Speaker 4: It.
Speaker 2: Where is where are the words in the in the in the noise ordinance? Specifically, he says it's explicitly stated maybe he can read it to us or point us to that part. Secondly, we worry about being incompetent or finally, worry about being in compliance with the ordinance. I have another question. We are allowing JetBlue to under under utilize the flights. I would think that that might be a question for compliance, too. Maybe you should ask, do we make ourselves open to any kind of lawsuit here? Because we are allowing I know it's by agreement and it's JetBlue is not breaking the law, but we are the ones who agreed to that to that rule. We are allowing them to under utilize. So therefore, we are not allowing other airlines the maximum opportunity.
Speaker 3: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And our final speaker will take it back to the council after this.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Shirley Broussard. Previously, I was a resident of District nine at 6320 Myrtle Avenue. When God called me into service of the homeless. I took up residence in my SUV, and I've traveled just about every district in the city. Having moved in this city to 1990. In 1997. I have worked with the homeless community. And they live outside. Let me apologized to each of you Council men and women. Because you're taking up a special interest here. So I apologize on behalf of us. I was looking to purchase property on Ocean Avenue. As I get ready to move into housing again after being on the mission field for seven years.
Speaker 0: And this is related to the.
Speaker 4: Yes, it is. Yes, it is. Not one time have I heard any homeless person complain about the noise. Any homeless people here tonight? Have you lived with any have you worked with any? Not one of them have ever complained. Above the noise ordinance. If God allows me, I intend to be somewhere in the in Europe or Canada for Christmas. And I'm going get on that plane and I'm like, even wonder who I'm waking up. How many of you are like me? You're going to be guilty during the holiday. You're going to climb on that plane. And you won't even wonder one minute who is being bothered by you sitting on that plane with all that noise. And, you know, I'm right community. And so we sit here tonight complaining about the noise that we sydnor our condos. Our mansions. Our million dollar pieces of property. The noise. We're complaining about the noise. And not one of the homeless people that I have service in seven years have ever complained about the noise. Then there's the kind of weird family community. That may seem kind of strange to you that you're complaining about the noises. You can't hear you commercials because the planes are blocking out the sound volume on your TVs. Oh, come on, now. Come on. This is Christmas. This is Hanukkah. We feel a little guilty, at least for four weeks. Commission. Airport Commission. I apologize to you, whoever you are. I don't know you. But this is your job. But it's comical. This is where we had a comedy relief tonight.
Speaker 0: If you think you are just another speaker, come forward. That's okay. Just. Okay.
Speaker 3: Sorry about not leaving as a finish, but no worries. Unfortunately, I'm going to complain about the noise.
Speaker 0: You got to give us your name for that. For the.
Speaker 3: Record. I'm Sterling Reagan. I'm currently residing in the 4300 Cerritos Avenue. Uh, so, um, I just wanted to make a comment about this whole study session. So, um. Uh, Mr. Franklin, you were talking about the noise level. And for 11 years, I've attended school here in the Long Beach District. And for 11 years, these noise events have occurred. And honestly, I don't even know if it has affected me physically. I doubt it has. But, uh, it it just seems like it doesn't make sense to add even more. Now, the events are really bothersome. And to add more because it's more effective doesn't make sense to me. Why? Why, why even need to add more events in the first place? Um, so that's what I wanted to say. And thank very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. We're going to take this back to the council closed public comment for for the study session. Just a couple of things. And I want to hopefully we can get some of the questions that were answered answered as well. Um, you know, one thing I just want to say and, and, and first, I think it's important to acknowledge for everyone that there's no question that this conversation and this process actually affects people, affects people's quality of life and those that are living, particularly those under the flight path. It's a real issue. And so while it's for for many folks and I know for for staff, we're going through an administrative legal process. I get the fact that I think most people get the fact that for a lot of people, this is a real big issue and a huge quality of life issue for them. So I just want to put that out there. This is an important issue. And for some folks, this is the most important, most important issue that the the noise ordinance was discussed by a few folks. And I just want to say something. You know, it's interesting, the ordinance, while it is this kind of incredible legal document that limits and provides the airport some limits as well. It also has a lot of challenges. And one of the difficulties with our our noise ordinance, while it it literally we are one of a handful, not even a handful of cities that has this type of ordinance in. It has been a point of pride, I think, for our community. It's something that we treasure because we are we have such a built out environment around our airport. It's so important to protect it at the same time in in its construction. One of the major flaws is our ability to then modify the ordinance post adoption. And I see Council Councilman Gavlak shaking her head and here is the challenge. And so when when we talk about, well, you know, why didn't we make changes or should we have change the noise, the noise levels or the allotment? The truth is, is any changes to a grandfathered document could put the noise ordinance in grave jeopardy. And instead, instead of having a conversation about 41 flights or 50 flights, we're talking about 100 flights because we don't have a protective ordinance. And I just want to reconfirm with our city attorney, because you and I have had a lot of conversations a. Changing the ordinance or having making adjustments to it could essentially put our noise ordinance in major risk. And we had done it in the past or in the future.
Speaker 7: Yes, I mean, that's correct. And that's why I think why the council has never changed or amended this ordinance since 1995.
Speaker 0: So I just want to mention that the other thing I think is important to note, and I think it's frustrating for a lot of folks, it's frustrating for people up here. They say that as part of the the deal that was put together by JetBlue and as a reminder, listen, when when JetBlue came in, there was a lot of turmoil at the airport. There was a lot of issues about its future. They came in, they built out an operation. They were welcomed by the city, by many folks, not not by by everyone, but by many folks. And as far as the the legal framework that we created for the amount of flights they had to fly, there were some discussions about, well, you know, I think Councilman Austin called it what was that slot squatting? Okay. There was some conversation about about slot squatting. The whether we know whether we like it or not, they are operating in this legal framework that we created for them in the past. And so the issue is that there's concern by a lot of people. Will they why aren't they before we start talking about new flights, they're not even, you know, not even maximizing what they've been allotted. And I think while we a lot of folks would love for them to before we have this discussion, for them to actually fill that slot, they are operating in the legal framework that we provided . And so we're not allowing them to fly or not fly. They are flying what they can within the legal framework we provided. And it's not we can tell them, you know, flier slots all day and all night, but they have the legal right to do that. And so that is, I think, as we move forward. Mr. Mays and I had asked you this before as we develop this next set, I think we have to just be conscious of the lessons learned from the last time we did this and just ensure that we are being kind of thoughtful and progressive in how we do this next set and what the protections are going to look like, you know, moving forward for regardless of who uses these sites. I have a question about also.
Speaker 6: The.
Speaker 0: The process of who gets the slots, because I think what I would I hope most folks are hearing is this is and I know, unfortunately for a lot of the residents, an administrative process. And one thing that I asked Mike and Charlie is, is it your, you know, 100% legal opinion that we have to fill the slots or the noise ordinance is in jeopardy? And your response has been consistently.
Speaker 7: That is correct. I think what you're saying, though, is, Phil, unless we have to make the slots available.
Speaker 0: Correct. I'm sorry. Make the slots available because they may or may not could fill depending on the demand. My question is, is how? When the slots are. Let's say we go through the process here. X amount of slots at nine slots. And there's interest from current carriers and perhaps new carriers. How do you how do you make the determination of a who has been good neighbors that are maybe currently in already at our airport or B, what the potential is for another carrier to come in and provide a different service? Or is it purely on a lottery random system? And can you can we go into a little bit of that detail? And I think that's important.
Speaker 13: Merits it's a little bit of a combination of that the way it would work under the allocation process. A new entrant at the airport would have the opportunity to get two slots before an incumbent carrier would be allocated one. And the idea behind that is the thought being that a new entrant would need at least two slots to make a viable presence at the airport. So any new entrant that would apply would be eligible for two. But other than that, it's basically strictly a lottery if and it really depends on how many applications we get. If we get one application and they want four slots and that's it, they would be allocated four slots. If we get five carriers that each want two slots, we would have to do a lottery. And when we've done lotteries before, not for supplemental slots because we've never allocated them, but for our regular slots, we literally draw names out of a hat and progress until the slots are allocated in accordance with what they've submitted in their application.
Speaker 0: And I thank you for that. However, is there not at some point in that slot allocation, aren't there interests of the city business, business decisions that are made? And what I mean by that is, you know, if it is in the interests of the airport to ensure that we have a diversified. Pool of carriers. And that's obviously a determination that the airport director would would make. Can that not be considered as part of the allocation?
Speaker 13: The way the allocation rows a resolution is structured? It can't be. It's simply if they qualify legally as an air carrier, they're properly certificated by the federal government, then they're eligible to apply. And it's kind of a catch 22 sometimes with the FAA, because when we allocated the 27 slots that we allocated to JetBlue in 2003, we did not feel that the FAA would have an issue with that because prior to that time, no one was flying at the airport, even though we had a red team trying to get folks to fly at the airport. But the FAA did have an issue with that. And they've since told us that we cannot illegally discriminate among the carriers. So. Based on the input that we have received from them over the years, we are going to do the allocation as a random draw. Making them the offer is fine if we make it available to every other carrier, whether they're an incumbent or not. And so we won't run afoul of any of the FAA regulations if we do that, even if JetBlue or one of our other incumbent carriers actually applies for and gets some slots.
Speaker 0: Okay. And then I just want to also make sure that I think we know what you're hearing from some of the community. And I've talked and I've had a chance to talk to a lot of folks about this issue, is clearly they're moving forward on this. I think the slot allocation process is really important. It's done incredibly transparent. And I'm looking, you know, Mr. City attorney, you know, and you know, Charlie and we've talked about this is I think that the the community will feel a lot more confident knowing that that process is airtight. It's very clearly spelled out how we're doing it prior to the process. We know exactly, you know, who is what the interest is. And the process is then transferring not just for the community's interest, but I think for the carriers that are interested. I'm hopeful. I'm not sure legally what what, what, what can or cannot be public. I understand there's but I think the more that can be, I think we should push for for that.
Speaker 13: There's nothing that would prohibit us from being fully transparent and public. As I indicated, we distributed the allocation protocol to the council offline. We can put that on the city attorney's website. We will put an advertisement in the newspaper for all the public to see, probably more than one newspaper indicating when the slots will be allocated and what the process is for appeal. So and if people have questions, they can certainly call our office to ask about that process, if it's unclear when they see what how it's set out.
Speaker 6: Okay.
Speaker 0: And just and any information you can add on the or whether or not, you know, judgment can be used by our airport director or city manager on on who is selected or not. I'm just interested in in that piece because, I mean, it seems like, you know, flipping a quarter is not the not the best way to do it. But.
Speaker 13: You know, the FAA just has very tight rules against discriminating among carriers. The only judgment that could be used is what we indicated is if, let's say hypothetically, one carrier came in and indicated on their application that they were going to fly all MDs. We would immediately consult with our noise experts to find out what that would do to the budget. If it looked like an it would that would break the budget, then we would ratchet down and they were the only carry that applied. We would ratchet down the number of slots that carrier could take.
Speaker 0: Okay. Well, I mean, and Mr. Mays, I think in in that kind of that observation, I think there are other observations that we could get to in what's currently happening at the airport that we could use to for that process. And we'll explore that a little bit. So. Councilmember Ringa.
Speaker 12: Yeah. I was directed by you.
Speaker 0: Just to ask the question for me.
Speaker 6: For a lady.
Speaker 12: How lucky. Yeah, sure. I had a question related to these two slots and the potential for a Christmas facility and whether that would have or is it in the discussion.
Speaker 13: So is airport director Brian indicated there is no relationship between the FISA process and the allocation of these supplemental slots. If an FISA facility ever did come to fruition, whatever flights flew in and out of the airport that used that type of facility would have to fly within our current noise budgets and within the current slot allocation . So if there were 41 slots allocated or 45 slots allocated, an FISA would not increase the number of slots.
Speaker 0: Okay. Any other Councilman Austin?
Speaker 11: I do have one quick last question. And based on a question from one of the residents, and I think it was regarding the the methodology of the how noise is measured. I know how long have the has that system been in place and when was it last updated?
Speaker 8: We'll ask Mr. Reeves to respond to that, please.
Speaker 14: Yes counts when asked in the current system was installed as I recall in 2000 for 25. Prior to that, there was an older system installed. The system that we currently have is state of the art. We have type one microphones at each of the locations. These are the the most accurate microphones that we can have outside of a laboratory on an annual basis. We calibrate this system traceable to the National Institute of Standards and Technology. So we have a state of the art system.
Speaker 11: Thank you. So you're confident with the measurements that we are getting from from the existing noise measurement system?
Speaker 14: Yes, sir.
Speaker 11: So so the other question was regarding runway 25. Right. And I understood the question or somebody mentioned earlier that we're not measuring noise from from that runway. Is that correct?
Speaker 14: We do measure noise at all of our runways, including runway 25. Right. However, the noise ordinance does not specify budget limits. 4 to 5, right. Because the runway is used very infrequently.
Speaker 11: So can you explain to us why that particular runway is used so infrequently? I mean, we have a runway, and as I've studied and looked into to five. Right. It is is longer than John Wayne Airport's one runway and several others large airports across the country. It's a it's a it's a runway that could be utilized that could, I should say, fairly distribute noise from the airport. Why don't we use that runway more often?
Speaker 14: Yes, Councilman, that's that's an excellent question. The ordinance does not explicitly state. That runway to five, right. Should not be used. However, runway 1230 is designed as our primary air carrier runway. It is the only runway that has noise, budget limits, cumulative noise, budget limits associated with it. The other runways do not have cumulative noise budget. Runway 1230 is also built out to specifications designed for routine air carrier use in terms of pavement, strength, instrumentation, instrument, landing system, etc., the other runways. That's that's not true for they're designed for infrequent use. Runway 25, right. For example. On a standby basis when runway one two, three zero is is not available.
Speaker 11: So the brand new runway two five. Right. That we have is not equipped to deal with frequent flights.
Speaker 14: It is not the pavement strengthening instrumentation. The runway was not designed. For routine use. And the noise ordinance essentially designates runway 12330 as the primary air carrier runway.
Speaker 11: All right. Thank you. We'll revisit that. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 10: Our Tribal Council member, Austin. Got my questions. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Councilmember Supernanny.
Speaker 8: If I could just follow up on one final question. The one that John Dilatory brought up regarding the legal issue of must versus May, I think. I don't think you can answer that unless you try to quantify it in some way. Would staff be able to say, I think the quantification or qualification might be in terms of by not adding these flights? What is the threat to the noise ordinance? And to put that in context, how would that threaten the noise earnings versus building an FAA facility in the threat to noise ordinance? Would you would you have outside legal opinions on that?
Speaker 13: We do have outside legal opinions as to whether or not the ordinance is mandatory and the outside legal opinion is clearly that it is mandatory, which coincides with the opinion that has been developed over not just the city attorney, but all of the city attorneys that have been dealing with this since 1995. We've tried to put together historical documentation as to this ordinance when this settlement agreement was reached after the. Litigation in 1995, the press release that was put out by then, Beverly O'Neal specifically mentioned that 41 was a minimum and that over time more flights would be added. We have no doubt that this is a mandatory requirement there. As I indicated, I hope I'm answering this question correctly about the fees, but there really is no relationship between adding these slots and the request by JetBlue to consider an office facility. If an FAA facility were ever built. All of the planes that would use that facility would clearly have to comply with our noise ordinance. They would have to comply with the curfew regulations that we currently have in place. We would not increase the number of flights based solely on an office facility or a number of slots based solely on a nearby facility. Oh, and I'm sorry if you're asking, is the FISA mandatory like the ordinance? Was that part of your question? The answer is no.
Speaker 8: Okay. So you have outside an outside legal opinion that this is mandatory.
Speaker 13: Correct.
Speaker 8: There's been conjecture that the FISA facility would be of a threat to I noise ordinance building it potentially. And I realize that's an opinion now. But I'm saying we have an absolute versus an opinion. I think that's I was just trying to frame Mr. General Corey's question a little bit. I think you've answered it. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And just just to conclude, I do. This is a this is a big issue. And I actually just need to thank both our city attorney, Mr. Parkin, Mr. Mays and the airport team, because they've actually worked just in the last month or so on. This issue is really consumed. I know, particularly Mr. Mays, who has been all over the place trying to get this thing together. And so I just want to thank you guys for the professionalism and for the information you've been getting to council. I know you've been responding to a lot of questions from council members and the community. And like Councilman Superhot said, you know, showing up at Sunday morning, early meetings and whatever you can to get everyone informed. So everyone appreciates that. And thank you all for for that. That concludes the study session. As you know, it's not an actionable agenda item. So what we're going to do now is we're going to transition back to the council where we're certainly behind tonight, as probably be expected. So we're transitioning back to the council meeting we have. We moved one item to the head of the agenda earlier, which was the El Nino presentation. So that will happen. And immediately after that, we'll go into the hearing on medical marijuana and that ordinance. And so why don't we go into why don't we do this? Why don't we do? The El Nino hearing was like a short it's just a short recess and then we'll go into the into the hearing.
Speaker 8: I'm fine with that. It's my item.
Speaker 5: Because Pat said that he wanted us.
Speaker 2: This to me, like we're going to rush it.
Speaker 1: Well.
Speaker 6: I'm going to defer to you because you really like this app information getting out there. Okay. We can be.
Speaker 1: Let let me.
Speaker 0: I know. Hold on 1/2. Mr. West, can you come here for just 1/2?
Speaker 5: You did?
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 8: We were on TV and everything this morning, so.
Speaker 3: Oh.
Speaker 1: Infamous. It is 7 minutes. It's.
Speaker 0: Okay. We're going to go right into the to this presentation, Madam Clerk, if you can read the item.
Speaker 10: Communication from Councilmember Supernova Vice Mayor Lowenthal, Councilwoman Price Council Member Richardson. Recommendation to request the city manager to provide an update on the city's emergency and environmental preparedness for the anticipated upcoming El Nino weather conditions. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to conduct a study session to receive and discuss the Fiscal Year 2015 Airport Noise Budget Analysis Report and Supplemental Slot Allocation. (District 5) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12082015_15-1271 | Speaker 10: Communication from Councilmember Supernova Vice Mayor Lowenthal, Councilwoman Price Council Member Richardson. Recommendation to request the city manager to provide an update on the city's emergency and environmental preparedness for the anticipated upcoming El Nino weather conditions.
Speaker 2: Councilmember Soprano.
Speaker 8: Okay. Thank you, Madam Vice Mayor. Um. We had a president today, and I start off by saying this is how government is supposed to work. It's kind of a civics lesson. It starts with residents contacting their councilman with concerns over El Nino or predictions of an El Nino season coming forward. And these concerns were legit. Many fourth District residents remember the flooding of 1995, and nearly all of them remember the flooding of January 19th, 2010 along the Atherton, Carter and Termino corridor. And they really.
Speaker 6: Didn't put it together that.
Speaker 8: We did $25 million worth of infrastructure improvements since that time. But, you know, the average resident doesn't remember the context. So what we did is we held a community meeting and I invited Reggie Harrison to come out and speak to our community group. And that went so well that I decided to agenda is that for a committee meeting, I happened to chair the Environmental Committee, and since El Nino is an environmental issue, we brought it forward to the Environmental Committee and Mr. Harrison enhanced his presentation and ended it there. That brings us to where we are here tonight. And this is a presentation of our El Nino preparedness for the entire city council. So with that, I'd like to introduce Mr. Reggie Harrison, our Director of Disaster Preparedness and Emergency Communications.
Speaker 11: Thank you, Councilmember. Thank you, Mayor and Council members, for this opportunity to provide an update on the city's response and recovery plans for preparations for the El Nino winter storms. The city of Long Beach has staff and all of US departments take seriously the predictions of El Nino induced heavy rains, high tides and rip currents. This winter, we urge all residents to also take these predictions seriously. Typically, Long Beach receives about 12 to 15 inches of rain annually. Predictions for this winter are that we will receive 20 to 30 inches almost double the amount of rainfall that we receive in an average year. Flooding is predicted as storms are expected to occur in succession, causing the grounds to saturate. However, even as we receive this amount of rain, it is not expected to impact the four year drought that we are experiencing.
Speaker 1: This.
Speaker 11: So the El Nino refers to a warming of the Pacific Ocean off the coast of South America. The warm waters release heat, changing the wind and jet stream, which often brings more and wetter storms. And so we don't typically see this kind of wetter weather pattern in southern California and hence the El Nino and hence the expectations are predictions of extreme weather conditions this winter. From a citywide perspective, all three departments are actively engaged in Winter Stones preparations. Earlier this year, we formed a winter storm response team tasked with reviewing storm response and recovery procedures. Training staff on emergency protocols and developing new tools for communicating with the public and the media. Departments have updated contracts for emergency equipment and material procurement. All departments are in the final stages of inspecting critical systems and infrastructure and making repairs where needed. We are documenting current building conditions to provide a comparison basis for insurance or FEMA claims for reimbursement. Preparation from a regional perspective include collaborating with Avalon, Signal Hill and Los Angeles County on response and recovery plans. We are coordinating and sharing our response and recovery plans with our community partner organizations, including the American Red Cross, local hospitals , school districts, lobbies, transit and utility companies. In fact, we meet tomorrow with this group over our emergency operations center to share our updated plans and to hear their plans so that we can analyze any gaps and ensure that there is a seamless response. We've also upgraded the monitoring capabilities of the Emergency Operations Center to ensure we are in the best position possible to respond to support first responders and the public. Today, we are extremely happy to launch the city's new emergency notification system alert. Long Beach Alert Long Beach as a free emergency notification system designed to keep those who live or work in Long Beach informed of important information before, during and after a major disaster or emergency alert, Long Beach provides an opportunity for red for residents to register their cell phone, email address, text message information to ensure that they receive emergency alerts. We currently have the ability to provide alerts via landline through 911 carriers. However, we recognize that most people do not work at home and others no longer have a landline. So this so this produces additional opportunities for our residents, for our businesses, for our hospitals, for our school districts to be able to receive alerts from us during emergencies. Alerts will be sent to registrants to inform them of what has happened, what first responders are doing, and what action should be taken to protect themselves and put and protect property. And I cannot emphasize enough the importance of residents signing up or opting in for this service. Otherwise it will not be available and residents will not have received this benefit. The next few slides. Council members is a summary, including this slide is a summary of an incredible amount of work that all departments have put into place over this over the numerous months leading up to this point. This is a high level summary. Earlier this year, you got a more in-depth report from the city manager on all of the activities. So I just want to stress that this is just this is just the top of a huge iceberg in terms of the amount of work that is going in by all city departments here before use a slide representing just a highlights from the public works department to inspect 50 and clean 5300 catch basins and and test 28 pump stations throughout the city. They have arranged for sand and sandbags to be made available at various fire stations across the city. And they manage the seawall plugs, as you have noticed, during the numerous high tides that we have been expecting, that we have been experiencing recently. And they are, of course, inspecting and repairing city facilities as necessary. Same can be said for power, for parks, recreation and Marines. They maintain the berms along the peninsula. These berms are built to specific specification engineering specifications to ensure protection of the peninsula area. They will deploy the debris, broom booms. They're inspecting and removing dead trees and structures. And they have also put into place information protocols to alert level boards, the Marine and commercial operators there in the marinas . Fire. Marine safety staff are training and preparing for swift water rescues. They're also training urban search and rescue teams and preparing our search teams for activation. The police department are generally the first to know of an incident as it occurs that in our streets their helicopters are made available to provide valuable information and visuals of dangerous situations . They also work with search and rescue teams to provide support and response activities or resources. My Health and Human Services Department plays a critical role role, rather, in providing outreach to the homeless populations. And this year, we open our homeless winter shelter earlier in anticipation of this rainy season. And they play a critical role in operating that facility, as well as providing and issuing water quality advisories as rain falls impacting our beaches and waterfront. So in closing, we residents have urged to prepare now for the rains. We recommend that residents follow weather forecasts and local media and social media that they clean out rain gutters and drains their residents, remove items from their property that could prevent water runoff. That they repair leaks in roofs and windows. We urge residents not to drive or walk through flowing waters and to call 9114 downed power lines. And that's just a few of the many tips that residents can find on our on our websites and through printed materials that we have provided for residents. And you have a copy of the PowerPoint there, along with some informational materials, both on El Nino preparations and recommendations, as well as information on the alert Long Beach system. And so in conclusion, staff is working collectively with our community partners to be ready for the heavy rains that we're expecting this winter. Thank you for this opportunity. And I, along with other staff members here, are prepared to answer any questions you might have.
Speaker 0: Make any public comment on this item. Seeing none. Let me turn this over to Vice Mayor Lowenthal. No. Go ahead.
Speaker 4: Surely you saw it. I'm speaking right now as senior consultant of Swarm Group and Associates particularly. My interest is with the homeless population, many of whom. May not be able to get to that shelter if it's open in North Long Beach. Similarly, they may not be able to get from behind the buildings where they are sleeping. The restaurants, the banks. I mentioned earlier that I observed one entity that was servicing the nonprofit, picking up donuts at one of their vendors while passing by a homeless person and leaving them sitting in the same place where they found them while picking up donuts, taking donuts to their facility. Now, with respect to what you just said, and I don't know your name, so I'm address this to counsel. Who are representative of each homeless person in your district. You are their councilperson. You are their mayor. You are their city attorney. You are their city manager. Must more must be done in order to service the people who are homeless, who cannot get to the facilities that are open now. That opened up in November and will close in March. But they're going to be homeless eight months later because the permanent housing to facilitate the growing number of homeless people have not been facilitated has not been added. It may seem redundant. But if I am the only one consistently coming, arguing and complaining before council and your numbers are growing, then that may infer that enough is not being done yet. And still. And while we would like to say that the villages up Cabrillo have helped the veterans this year. So you've helped a smaller segment of those who are homeless. The thousands of homeless in this city who are not veterans are not being service yet still. So somebody God has to provide some opportunity for those who need it here. He has to provide a voice for them. Hence I said yes to that assignment and not knowing when I left my position with the federal government that I would be doing this assignment next. But I am here. I will be submitting a proposal not I'm not looking for a job in the city. I'm just submitting a proposal to you. And I will make sure that each of you have a copy, along with the city manager of what what needs to be done to augment the services. It's not that you're not doing anything, but we're now discussing tonight raising a protocol for for the airport. We've discussed the multi million dollar structure of development over on busy. All I'm saying is we need to augment those services for the homeless.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Vice Mayor Lowenthal.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just wanted to appreciate Councilmember Supernova's attention to this important issue, especially as it impacts coastal communities in Long Beach. I know that it came out of his environmental committee, but he is aware of its impacts to all nine districts. And I want to appreciate staff's presentation as well and attention to it. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 10: I want to take a moment to thank the firefighters. Several weeks ago, I chose not knowing that we would be able to afford to give out sandbags to personally with my neighbors and friends bag 500 sandbags purchased from some of them from Home Depot at $0.34 each with sand and the back laboring, no technology available. There's no stands to hold sandbags. You literally are bent over for hours on end, shoveling sand into a tiny opening. And I just want to appreciate the hundreds of bags you're about to bag for the residents of Long Beach. I want to thank the neighbors who lined up around the block to come to my house. Personally, from neighbor to neighbor and all the community getting together and bagging those first 500 sandbags. So many of us have sliding glass doors and other flood risks. I just want to remind everyone of the opportunity to get flood insurance. It takes 30 days to get it enacted. So if you're thinking about it, the major gust of the storm is late January and early February. So you'd need to do that right now. But just a big thank you to the neighbors who pitched in. Hours and hours. It took us three weekends to bag that many sandbags. And to the firefighters who are about to bag those sand through those bags of sand for you, please say thank you. It's hard work.
Speaker 0: Councilman Andrews?
Speaker 7: Yes, thank you. Also, I'd like to thank Councilman Supernova for bringing this item forward because, you know, I want to thank the city director, you know, disaster and preparedness, emergency communication. Mr. HARRIS Well, you know, being on top of this situation and continuing the effort to prepare in my city for El Nino, it's coming. When? I don't know.
Speaker 0: Councilwoman Gonzales.
Speaker 5: I just want to say thank you to Councilmember Supernova for bringing this forward. It's certainly very important, especially as our one of our speakers had mentioned, about the homeless. I know especially along the river, I now see them, the encampments now moving almost as if they're getting prepared themselves to pay for this. But maybe I missed this. But, Reggie, do is is there some sort of notice that they'll be given as well? I mean, I see a lot of individuals camped out along the freeway, but it's not on the top side as there usually are. It's along the freeway. But I, I don't know what the differences, but are they being noticed and how is that working out?
Speaker 11: Yeah, I'm going to start this and I see Kelly is here. She can jump in, but on a regular basis, we have an outreach team that goes out into those areas where we have homeless encampments, the non homeless encampments, as well as going out to to look for other areas where we suspect homeless might be in on a regular basis. They provide them with information in terms of what's happening with the winter season, the weather, as well as the opportunity to take advantage of the winter shelter.
Speaker 5: Okay, great. Thank you very much and great report.
Speaker 0: Councilman Turanga.
Speaker 6: Take you there.
Speaker 12: And I also want to help excuse me to take control of Superman for bringing this to the council. Attention being a coastal city, we are faced with a lot of other different types of challenges that other cities don't face. Basically, we have looking at sea level rise and we're looking at the need for our coastal communities to protect themselves. But I also want to point out that we do have CERT teams out there, community, community emergency response teams that are out there, there. They're I'm sure that the fire department's on top of it, getting these teams together, getting them trained, getting them. And this is area equipment to be able to respond to any emergency that may arise in any of the neighborhoods where these or these teams are in place. So looking forward to, again, working with the fire department, the police department, to ensure that our communities remain safe. And also what well, thank you.
Speaker 6: To.
Speaker 12: You've got a frog of a to to congratulate the staff. I'm bringing up this alert Long Beach application. It's I hope it's going to be a great tool not only for this event, but for future events as well.
Speaker 0: We go on to Council on Supernova.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Eric. You know, I just want to address one of the public comments here tonight. I'm particularly proud and thankful of all the homeless resources in our fourth district. We've made tremendous strides, I think, of the public meetings we've had with health department personnel. Susan Price spoke at our community meetings. Theresa Chandler. Shannon Parker. We formed a fourth District Task Force on Homelessness. We've made and I should mention, our police partners to Claudia. Officer Claudia Lopez. Now, Detective Lopez, what a tremendous job she did with us. So I'd just like to say thank you to all the entities that have helped us, and we just made incredible progress on homeless issues. Also, Elsa Ramos from the Multi-Service Center spoke at our press event this morning, and I think she mentioned L.A. County does sweeps of the river areas, too, so they assist us there. So we have a lot of features here to assist the homeless during the El Nino season. And the other thing I just want to put out there to the public, look at the debris, look at the trash, that type of thing that we might ignore on a normal basis. And again, at this morning's event, Mayor Garcia reminded us of a of a storm event where there was a clog. And, Mayor, if you'd like to carry on that story, I didn't recall it till you said it.
Speaker 0: Is that because we're not you know, some folks will leave a mattress in their alley or trash and debris that they shouldn't be leaving. What happened is the mattress flew in in the water, went right into the storm drain, clogged the drain and flooded the entire neighborhood. And so those are the kind of things we have to avoid during the storm, is please make sure that we clear debris and alleys and that folks, well, they shouldn't be leaving mattresses in the alley anyways. But we got to be more vigilant about those kinds of issues. Councilman Richardson.
Speaker 9: Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Councilmember. Super now for leading the effort on behalf of the Council on educating the community on this effort. And thank you to Mr. Harrison and City, all the departments who have contributed to this this preparedness strategy. My only question is, what are we doing? Have we figured? I know that we're under construction on the North Neighborhood Library. I don't know what else. We're in the construction on another the forest wetlands and those things. How have we factored in El Nino into those construction timelines?
Speaker 7: That's something that we definitely look at. I don't think we know for sure exactly how many days it's going to be rain, but we definitely look at the during the weather months and try to calculate that. But if if you'd like a more specific answer for a specific project, we can certainly look into that.
Speaker 9: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. With that, I'm going to wrap this up. I just want to re remind everyone. Councilman Supernanny, I had did an event earlier with with Mr. Harrison and the emergency preparedness team. And just to remind people to sign up for alert Long Beach you can access alert Long Beach from Long Beach dot gov, which is the homepage of the website. I signed up for it today. It just takes a couple of minutes. It's very easy and that will alert you in case of an emergency right to your cell phone or email. We already have a capacity to call landlines directly, but we don't have a capacity to text you if you want to receive an emergency tax in case of a power outage, a flood, all these issues that could happen. And so I would encourage everyone to please go on to lobby sa gov. Sign up for alert Long Beach and you will. It only will be used for emergency scenarios. So you know, you ain't going to be receiving a, you know, there's a fare this weekend or anything like that. It's, it's strictly emergency issues because that would be really annoying. They're not that either. So so please sign up. And again, thanks to Councilman Super now for leading efforts on this. With that, there's a motion and a second. Please cast your votes. We already did public comment.
Speaker 10: Councilman Austin. Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Okay. So like I mentioned before, we're going to take a quick just recess so people can go take a restroom break. And then when we come back from the recess, we'll go into our rest of the agenda.
Speaker 6: There's a lot of.
Speaker 1: Next.
Speaker 8: I.
Speaker 0: Okay. We're going to get started. So if I can have the council back here. Martin. Martin.
Speaker 1: And you know. So you guys.
Speaker 0: Good. Okay. Can I get the council back here? If I can. Everyone else, quiet down. We're going to get started.
Speaker 7: Okay.
Speaker 0: Okay. We can gather all copies.
Speaker 10: Councilwoman Gonzalez. Vice Mayor Lowenthal. Councilwoman Price Council member Superman. Councilwoman. Mango. Councilman Andrews. Councilmember Muranga. Councilman Austin. Councilmember Richardson. Mayor Garcia.
Speaker 0: Thank you. If we can just plead with read the item, which I believe is a. What's that. I don't know the number, but it's the. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Manager to provide an update on the City's emergency and environmental preparedness for the anticipated upcoming EI Nino weather conditions. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12082015_15-1270 | Speaker 10: Communication from city attorney recommendation to receive supporting documentation and to the record conclude the hearing and declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code all relating to medical marijuana. Read the first time and lead over for the next regular meeting of the City Council for Final Reading City Wide.
Speaker 0: Mr. Mays.
Speaker 13: Thank you, Mayor Garcia, and members of the city council. As you remember, we were all here discussing medical marijuana on September 22nd of this year. At that time, the city council requested that the city attorney present a draft medical marijuana ordinance that would be consistent with the newly enacted state legislation, which is known as Mercer, the Medical Marijuana Regulation and Safety Act. The ordinance that you requested also wanted provisions for up to nine dispensaries in the city located in all zones, except those zones zoned exclusively for residential use and subject to buffers of 1500 feet from a public or private high school. 1000 feet from a public or private kindergarten, elementary school, middle or junior school, junior high school, 1000 feet from a public park, 1000 feet from a state licensed child care facility. Only those located on commercial corridors 1000 feet from a location identified by the police department to be a human trafficking high cut crime corridor 1000 feet from a public library and 1000 feet from another medical marijuana business. The ordinance that you requested that we bring back also called for allowing cultivation in a city subject to a CFP. Although cultivation would not be a requirement as was required in the previous regulatory ordinance we had in place. The ordinance was to permit delivery services in the city, but only by those licensed medical marijuana dispensaries that also have a copy in the city, a requirement that for each dispensary that opens in the city they agree to have in place by the time they open a labor peace agreement. And the ordinance that we presented for your consideration today does have all of the items that you requested. And in addition to that, I won't go through all of them because I'm sure there'll be a lot of questions. The ordinance contains a number of operational requirements, such as hours of operation testing requirements, very detailed requirements regards in regards to record keeping to ensure that the city's tax interests are maintained. Requirements for the size of the various operations 2000 square feet maximum for a retail dispensary site, 5000 square feet for a cultivation site. And in order to attract the best possible operators, the ordinance has a feature that actually has been in there for quite some time where that we have called a priority point system. So when an application process is opened, it would give the Department of Development Services, together with their partner departments, the ability to go through the applications and on an objective basis, award points to the various applicants. The thought being that those applicants, with the higher number of points, which we believe would represent the best operators in the city, would move forward until the nine super slots are filled. And before I turn it over to Jeff Winkle, I I'd like to acknowledge Tina parmelee from our Tech Services Department, who did an amazing job putting together the maps that were provided to you late last week in which Jeff is going to talk about. It's much more difficult to put together those maps with all the buffers and trying to locate all of the various facilities that are within those buffers. And we had her do many, many iterations of those maps. I know that they are not necessarily perfect. Sometimes, for instance, with a charter school, we may not have it in our system. If this ordinance were to pass tonight, we would continually evaluate those maps to make sure we have all of the facilities that should be on those maps on them. So with that, I'll turn it over to Jeff Winkle pluck to walk you through the maps.
Speaker 6: Thank you, honorable mayor and City Council. As Mike indicated, the maps have been revised according to the council directions. All of the buffers have been maintained, including a 1500 foot buffer for high schools and 1000 foot foot buffers for elementary middle schools, parks, libraries and childcare operations on commercial corridors. Human trafficking corridors have also been buffer out. These areas were identified with the assistance of the police department based on crime data related to specific offenses. As directed, the maps had also been revised to include all industrial, commercial, institutional and planned development zones that are not solely residential as eligible areas for medical marijuana operations. The maps that were provided were provided at two levels. One was a citywide level, and that showed all of the all of the buffers. We also provided a. Maps at district levels would show the all of the eligible areas. So basically we took all the buffers. Took those off. And what we have left are only the eligible areas within each of the districts. Also, as Mike indicated, it was brought to our attention today that there were a couple of accredited non school district charter schools that were not included in the maps. These included 400 East Willow, Willow Street, 6596, Long Beach Boulevard, 608 Cherry Avenue, 508 East and 508 East Anaheim as well as a charter school in the 3900 block of Atlantic. All of those were included in the maps were revised and those revised maps were passed out to you prior to this meeting. So that is essentially it. With regards to the update on the maps, I will be happy to answer your questions. Otherwise, I will turn it back over to Mr. Mays to highlight any additional information.
Speaker 13: We also stand ready to answer any of your questions regarding the ordinance.
Speaker 0: Eight. Thank you. Five. Summary Law Enforcement.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I want to thank staff for their presentation. I would like to go ahead and. Accept the recommendation as presented with a couple of amendments, and I'll preface my amendment with a recollection on the childcare facilities that we had a discussion about that and we asked staff to bring back maps which are included of what that buffer would look like along the commercial corridors. And but it was not my recollection that all child care facilities that that was accepted as an amendment. So with that. Bearing that in mind, I'd like to make a recommendation, a modified motion that one ensures that we have one dispensary per district. I know that according to the staff recommendation, it not the staff recommendation, the staff summary of the ordinance. It was mentioned that it's nine dispensaries in the city. There is confusion about whether this would include other uses. And I want to be clear that the council, the prevailing council intent was to ensure that there were nine dispensaries throughout the city and one per district. So I'd like to be sure that that's included in this motion. And also to remove licensed child care facilities on commercial corridors as a buffer due to the nature of operations being mostly interior and children accompanied by their parents. And so those are the two items I would like to add to the recommendation. And with that, I hope to have a second.
Speaker 0: Okay. There's a motion in a second and just from a process point of view. Mr. MAYS. So I know you have a you have an ordinance presented to the Council as the motion is made by Vice President or any other motion before us today, that would require a first reading of any of any ordinance at a future date. Is that correct?
Speaker 13: Correct. We'd have to revise it and bring it back as a first reading.
Speaker 0: Okay. So there's a motion on the floor and I don't see the second on the motion, but I heard someone say it and someone plug in. Okay. There's the motion and a second councilmember during. I do want to speak to your second.
Speaker 12: I agree with Councilmember Lawton in her analysis of the amendments that she has to the current resolution.
Speaker 0: Councilman Anderson.
Speaker 7: Yes, I also approve with that. But there are some, you know.
Speaker 6: Additional things that I would like to do. And possibly there's a friendly I.
Speaker 7: Would like to also ask.
Speaker 6: For in the pursuance of the task force approved recommendation number one, I think all.
Speaker 7: Medical marijuana businesses should be.
Speaker 6: Distributed equally throughout the city with.
Speaker 7: At least two medical marijuana businesses.
Speaker 6: Per district. I do not think that we could have the support on that council for the council for this. But I would like to make sure.
Speaker 7: That those districts that can accommodate more should be allowed to make that.
Speaker 6: Happen. I have one friendly amendment that I would like to make, and in addition, I think that the relationship matters. And pursuant to the task force approved recommendations, six and seven to a lot, 2.2 individuals who successfully completed the L.B. M.S. 5.87 lottery, and two additional points to individuals who continue to purchase their original medical marijuana and oppose the original medical marijuana business location or equivalent amount of points. And I would like to offer that as a friendly amendment.
Speaker 2: Councilman Andrews. Actually, let me ask the city attorney, what is the point system right now for those who were in that process?
Speaker 13: So the way the port system is set up now, if you were a successful winner of the 2010 lottery, you got one extra point. And as we caution the medical marijuana task force in the planning commission, if we get into a situation where we allocate too many points to the previous winners of the lottery, and it has the effect of basically excluding other entrants from participating because most of the applicants that apply should be able to meet. Hopefully all of the criteria of the 20 point system. Then we are surely inviting litigation by those that are not able to participate.
Speaker 1: You know.
Speaker 2: So it's a maximum of 20 points. And I think. Councilman. Andrews is looking for a total of two points. So that's one extra point.
Speaker 6: Yes.
Speaker 2: Okay. I'm open to considering that. I'd like to hear from other council colleagues. As long as we're talking about one extra point. So it's a total of two as opposed to the one that's written in the ordinance. Out of 20, correct.
Speaker 13: But there was another part, as I understood the second friendly amendment, it was to add two points. So concerning if they have the same business location or something. Yes.
Speaker 7: Original medical marijuana business located according to the Monroe Point.
Speaker 2: So I think that would be a. A significant barrier to entry and. But the one point.
Speaker 6: Okay.
Speaker 2: Would be okay. Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 5: Thank you. I have a few questions for staff as well as our police chief. So, Chief Luna, if it's possible, I'd like to ask you a few questions as we go through. The evening. So I think all of us are in receipt of staff's fiscal impact report that was issued to us earlier this week, actually on Friday . And it's my understanding, based on the memorandum that was provided, that the analysis that was performed was based on the proposed ordinance that the city attorney's office has prepared for tonight, meaning nine dispensary storefront locations. Is that accurate?
Speaker 7: Yes, that's correct.
Speaker 5: And my understanding from reading it is that staff projects that the tax revenue that the city will receive at the 10% tax rate would yield a revenue of $3 million for the city of Long Beach. And our enforcement costs for these operations had previously been expected to be $5 million. And my accurate on that.
Speaker 7: Yes, we had previously estimated that departments when we asked them what would your needs be estimated that at approximately $5 million. The amount, I believe, of 3 million also includes sales tax and regulatory fees in addition to the 10% gross receipts tax.
Speaker 5: Okay. So just so I'm clear, our expectation as a city is that we would tax and charge fees and bring in $3 million. And our departments had indicated to us that it would cost $5 million to actually allow the operations. And then we went back and asked them to reduce their expected enforcement costs. Is that right?
Speaker 7: Yes, that's correct.
Speaker 5: And so they were able to bring their costs down to $3 million so that now it's a breakeven operation for the city.
Speaker 7: Yes. There would not be any permanent structural impact. If these estimates are correct. There would be a short term budget shortfall that would need to be covered with one time dollars, which we've identified a solution to. But then on an ongoing basis, there would not be a structural impact. We would manage the $3 million.
Speaker 5: And the one time funds that you're referring to, that's the $1.6 million, is that.
Speaker 7: Right? That's correct. There would be ramp up costs in FY16 that we estimated about $1.56 million.
Speaker 5: So instead of spending year on surplus, the 1.6 million that we expect would be year end surplus. And instead of spending that on infrastructure deferred maintenance for city buildings, we would be putting that towards startup costs for an industry that's going to yield us a break, even result and best case scenario.
Speaker 7: So yes, the funds would be identified from year end surplus in 15 and or in 16.
Speaker 5: I'm curious. Does that seem like a financially prudent decision to anyone? Okay. So in regards to that, how is it that the costs that the city estimated to be $5 million was reduced to $3 million? How did that happen? What did we change?
Speaker 7: So the city manager went through and took a look with the financial management department to see what the requests were. We took an approach to say, tell us what your what your needs would be. And then we essentially met with the departments and narrowed that list down to an approach. One of the ways that we achieved that approach was to change the regulatory approach that we will take, where in the past we had taken a very police centric model. That is, it requires a tremendous amount of police resources. This now is a model that is a team based model. It will be led by the city manager's office. There'll be a dedicated person in the city manager's office who then will assemble a team with development services and business license code enforcement. It'll have some police in order to in order to to allow for those inspections. But it essentially be a model where we pursue a business that is illegally operating and treat it as if it were a, you know, any business that does not have a business license or is allowed to operate. We would find we would aggressively go out and visit the business. But we're expecting that there would be a significant amount of times where we were not able to gain entry to the business, but then we would go through a lean process and find administrative citations in order to bring it into compliance. We do expect it will be a difficult procedure to do to do that enforcement, but it is definitely a cost savings over the model of a police focused model, which is also, you know, was was very impactful in terms of reduced services on available for other or really reduced officers available for other services. So in the memo, we identify that if we were to go through a different model, the council has the ability to do that. We can go back to a police model. There would be a cost of, I believe, $1.6 million to do so.
Speaker 5: And that would be basically money that we'd have to come up with out of our general fund because we wouldn't have tax revenue to cover that.
Speaker 7: That's correct.
Speaker 5: So in the past, when we had illegal businesses operating, we used more of a police centric approach to enforcement, is what I'm hearing you say.
Speaker 7: Yes. We also use those other those other departments. The city attorney was heavily involved in city prosecutor and business licensing code, and everyone had a role. But we did have a fairly large response from the police department as well.
Speaker 5: And whatever that level of response we had from the police department in the past was we are now proposing a reduced level of support from the police department to go after illegal operations in order to meet that $3 million break even point.
Speaker 7: That's correct.
Speaker 5: And so before when we had a robust police enforcement structure in place, how effective was that in getting the legal operations shut down?
Speaker 7: So for the specifics at at the turn of the police chief, but we we did have difficulty shutting down dispensaries in some cases that when when we're able to, you know, bring the full resources of the police department to bear, we would have some short term success. It would be pretty time intensive, but we would be able to serve search warrants and to go to the to the facility. Often it was the case we experienced that that same facility would open later. So it was challenging. You know, we have also had some success on the leans and citation side where we've been amassing those citations and in some cases that has led to compliance. In other cases, it did not lead to compliance because the value of the fines were lower than the, you know, the cost of doing business.
Speaker 5: So maybe if I could route my next question to Chief Luna. Chief Luna, do you believe that spending less money on police resources to enforce illegal operations is going to be more or less effective for the city of Long Beach?
Speaker 9: For clarification when we talk about illegal operations. Just to clarify your question, I'm talking about rogue locations, rogue dispensaries.
Speaker 6: And that's where primarily our.
Speaker 9: Challenge was last time with the rogue locations, which I can get into numbers on that. If we are as a police department to take enforcement action on rogue dispensaries, which I fully expect.
Speaker 6: To do that if this gets approved. The resources that we currently have.
Speaker 9: Are not enough.
Speaker 5: Can you tell tell us a little bit about what you mean by this term rogue dispensary.
Speaker 6: Basically rogue operations who run clandestine.
Speaker 9: Operations behind the city's back with our history. Unfortunately, the last time the council approved this, we had some dispensaries that were sanctioned. And then for every one dispensary that was sanctioned, we had approximately four or five that were unsanctioned or as I call rogue, which the police department had to apply an extensive amount of time, effort and resources to close down some of them multiple times. We estimate.
Speaker 7: That in each case.
Speaker 9: Of these rogue dispensaries, we spent at least approximately 40.
Speaker 6: Hours per.
Speaker 7: Rogue dispensary. And just to give you an idea.
Speaker 9: Between February of 2012 and November of 2014, the police department served 142 search warrants at rogue dispensaries. So if you start doing your math between approximately 40 hours and 142 search warrants, you're talking about 5680 hours that were diverted from our core mission in order to deal with these rogue dispensaries.
Speaker 5: And Chief Luna, when we talk about rogue dispensaries. Let's say we have a sanctioned medical marijuana dispensary with a mature. Responsible business partner. Will that prevent rogue dispensaries from establishing in the city of Long Beach just because. The sanctioned business is being run by a responsible operator. Do the two have any correlation whatsoever?
Speaker 6: Well, based on our own experience here in Long Beach and from our research in.
Speaker 9: The cities around us, what we're seeing is ratios of.
Speaker 6: About anywhere.
Speaker 9: Between 3 to 1, meaning three rogue dispensaries for every one that sanctioned up to seven rogue dispensaries for every one that sanctioned. I think that we're assuming, based on.
Speaker 7: Long Beach's.
Speaker 9: Experience, that we would experience a ratio of four rogue dispensaries for every one that this council approved.
Speaker 5: Chief Luna in terms of the police department's ability to perform its core function with the establishment of medical marijuana dispensaries in the city of Long Beach, impact the police department's ability to provide current services to the residents of the city.
Speaker 7: Yes, it would be.
Speaker 6: Absolutely.
Speaker 0: Guys, just real quick. Please. None of that. So we're having some council questions. So there's time for public comment after.
Speaker 9: Again, based on our experience. If we're talking of the example I gave you between that time period, 5600.
Speaker 6: Hours, over 56, eight, 50.
Speaker 9: 600 hours, work hours diverted from our core mission to deal with rogue dispensaries.
Speaker 5: And when we say our core mission, what kinds of crimes or investigations would that take away from.
Speaker 9: Our core mission? In the Long Beach Police Department is considered our patrol calls for service when we're responding to priority one, two and three calls for service. That also includes our investigative functions, both violent and property crime and quality of life issues. And it also includes homeland security or national security.
Speaker 6: Challenges that we face.
Speaker 5: And in recent times, I imagine that our police department has had to step up to. Reevaluate and enhance the security measures in terms of the services that it provides to the city with the resources that you have. And what I mean by that is, Chief Luna, you haven't received any extra amount of money in the last couple of months in order to better protect us in light of world events.
Speaker 9: Unfortunately, we have not.
Speaker 5: So when we seek the protection of our police department, we're doing that with the money that you've already been given from our budget, our existing budget.
Speaker 9: Yes. We do it with existing resources.
Speaker 5: I'm going to make a substitute. Well, actually, I'm going to make a substitute motion, but before I do. Chief, do you believe that in regards to the medical marijuana industry and the discussion we're having, what is the most problematic component of those operations in the mind of a police department executive?
Speaker 9: With the experience that our narcotics unit has had. I think everybody in this room understands the Compassionate Use Act and that we're trying to find a way to.
Speaker 6: Provide.
Speaker 7: Marijuana to people.
Speaker 9: Who may need it. But with our enforcement action that we've taken. Unfortunately, we see a lot of these businesses who are not being very honest up front, not only with the marijuana that they're selling, but the money that they're taking in. So it's it's been a challenge. And we challenge ourselves to make sure that we're thinking differently, that we're thinking compassionately. But when we come up with specific cases or videos of.
Speaker 6: People taking advantage of the system, it's it's pretty difficult to watch.
Speaker 5: Okay. I thank you very much, Chief. I. I. To share the concern for those who want access to the medication. I fear that creating storefront dispensaries at this time in the city of Long Beach is not a prudent move. I share that based on the data. The actual data that has been provided for anyone who's sitting in this room who is actually a resident of the city of Long Beach. It should cause us great concern that we are going to spend $1.6 million of one time surplus moneys that we could be using on infrastructure projects or deferred maintenance of our city buildings. Roofs that need to be replaced. Infrastructure projects that are. Desperately needing attention. To invest in an industry that is at the very best going to provide us a break even scenario with less effective enforcement of a business that we were not able to effectively enforce using more money in the past. To me, that makes no sense whatsoever. And I look out in the audience, I see lobbyists and I see a lot of business owners. And I just wonder if you are if this was your city, would you believe that that was a good financial decision to make? The thing that concerns me the most is the storefront locations and our police chief telling us that as a result of storefront locations, they are going to have less police resources to allocate to public safety issues that our residents are struggling with right now. We have property thefts, robberies, murders. West Long Beach has had so many gang related murders this past year. It's unbelievable. And we're going to take those resources and put them into a risk. And to me, that doesn't seem prudent. So what I'd like to do is offer a substitute motion that I think provides a compromise and really helps the people that it should help. And that's the patients. The patients. This is a substitute motion designed for patients, and I'll be curious to see who opposes it. Because I wonder if they're an actual patient or if they have a financial interest, which that's fine if you have a financial interest. But be honest about what your position is. The substitute motion allows for a phased in approach to medical marijuana. Under this motion, we will allow for businesses to establish with a home delivery service no onsite sales. Sales tax revenue will be collected from these four businesses that go through the process to get their license to operate in the city of Long Beach. This will allow patient access for those who need it most. Six months after the first business is operational, staff will report back with a comprehensive report to Council on the tax revenues collected. The fiscal impact to the city of Long Beach in terms of enforcement costs and any public safety issues during that time period. At that time, Council will consider whether or not we should add four storefront locations. To correspond to those for home delivery businesses at that time, we will have accurate data to be able to determine how many patients were servicing what the demand is and the number of storefront locations we think will be necessary to meet the demand . We will at that point consider adding up to three additional storefronts for a total of seven citywide. That's my emotion.
Speaker 1: Okay.
Speaker 0: Sorry. There is a motion. Councilman, if you can just plug in on the motion, please. The second think it was Councilman Austin. Thank you. There's a motion in a second. Councilman Austin that you first want to speak to the second.
Speaker 11: Well, I think Councilmember Price was very eloquent in laying out the reasons why this substitute motion has come forth. I don't want to rehash this. No pun intended. I don't want to rehash this this issue because we have debated this and talked ad nauseam as a council. My positions, I think, were clearly articulated in the last the last time we. We met, I expressed concerns with the storefront model. In my opinion, the brick and mortar model was something that is almost something in the past anyway, since we know that many in most of people are probably getting access through home delivery anyway. And so I think this is is a huge compromise, particularly coming from our third District Council member who has come a long way in in our viewpoint here. And so I want to commend her in that regard. I do. And I did in the last time we we discussed this, the last time it was before the council. I did favor a phased in approach. I think it's most responsible and it also helps our enforcement measures. I think it prevents the and I'm going to use another term here and coin another term. It prevents the pot squatting or rogue facilities from from opening up at the rate that they did before. And hopefully they don't do it at all because that actually undermines policy, that undermines progress on this issue. And so I favor the the phase in model a report back after six months a responsible approach to implementing policy that would allow us to monitor this and build on it as necessary and as needed. I think it also puts us in line and establishes us for for for the for the future. And we know that this is a ever evolving issue. There's there's movement on this every day. I did have a question regarding cultivation because I was recently at a conference with a number of city officials, and the issue of cultivation came up. And as I understand, Mr. City Attorney, do we have to take action on this? Is this a time specific issue? We have to take action on cultivation before a certain date. Can you explain that?
Speaker 13: That's actually a very good question. Under the new state law, there is a provision in there that we have heard talk may be repealed but has not yet been repealed. That indicates if a city does not take some regulatory action on cultivation prior to March 1st of 2016, then the state law on cultivation would take over and you would lose local control on that issue. And from the research that we've done, if you left a ban in place on cultivation, that would be regulation. And under the scenario that was presented by Councilwoman Price, we would not come back with a report until well after that March 1st date. So. We could either leave the ban in place or you could give us specific direction on what you would want for cultivation if it did come in the city so that we could be prepared for the new state regulations in March. The current ordinance has certain provisions relating to cultivation. It limits the size of a cultivation facility to 5000 square feet. It includes all of the buffer zones that have been discussed previously tonight. So you could leave that in place and we could write it so that if a dispensary is considered after that six month period that was mentioned by Councilwoman Price, that those regulations would kick in and, you know, you'd have the 5000 square foot limitation and the buffers and. You know, a requirement for.
Speaker 11: So so under the current substitute motion that, as I understand it, restricts storefronts but okays businesses for up to four businesses for home delivery with the cultivation component that is already being proposed. Change. Much in terms of that dynamic?
Speaker 13: Well, we'd have to make modifications to the ordinance because as it stands now, cultivation would be permitted under that ordinance. So we would have to recraft the ordinance if that was the direction of council to indicate that the regulations would only become applicable if Council takes further action to allow cultivation in the city at some future date . But we would lock in place those regulations at this point in time so that if in six months after that first dispensed or first delivery site opened up and a report came back and said, we can accommodate cultivation. Those regulations would then kick in.
Speaker 11: So I think it's extremely important for us to maintain local control on this matter as much as possible. Do we have any idea what a state cultivation ordinance or law would look like today, and how would that be different than what we have proposed?
Speaker 13: The state has a fairly extensive regulations, but most of them have to do with licensing. If I remember correctly or if you know Monica. But I believe the state has. Maybe 17 different types of cultivation licenses, depending on the size of the operation. There's a requirement to get a separate cultivation license from the state. I do not believe they get into the kind of detail or ordinance does as far as the size and so forth, although some of the licenses are tailored to the size of the operation. So you could have some fairly extensive operation operations if the state regulations. Became applicable.
Speaker 11: So I guess I'm looking for some some sort of direction or assistance from from the city attorney to to support the substitute motion, but also maintain local control that we would like to have as a city for cultivation, for when that is.
Speaker 13: So my suggestion would be as part of that motion would be also to direct, because we're going to have to bring back a new ordinance, direct the city attorney to prepare as part of the new ordinance that would be presented, regulations for medical marijuana cultivation that could be implemented only after the city or the city council determines that a bricks and mortar facility is appropriate in the city. And we would incorporate regulations much like what we have now requirement for a cup, buffers and so forth. And we would bring that back to you.
Speaker 11: So, Councilmember Price, we're open to such a friendly.
Speaker 5: Yes.
Speaker 11: Thank you so much. I think that's it for questions for now. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilman Richardson. Sorry.
Speaker 9: Thank you, Mayor. I'm really glad to see how the conversation there's been a lot of movement since the last time we've seen this. And so I want to I want to, you know, applaud Councilmember Price for making that movement in her position. Councilmember Alston as well. Just have a few questions and comments about the ordinance and and some of the proposals on the table. So in terms of I'm going to start with because this is the most immediate recommendation. It was the home delivery proposal and. We heard a lot tonight about about homelessness. And I know personally that a lot of homeless folks utilize, you know, RV hotels, sometimes public spaces. And so how will we is that with the plan B to deliver allow home delivery to a hotel or to a public space? Just thinking out loud how this would work. That's a question for whoever will want to take a crack at it.
Speaker 13: So I'd have to find the precise provision. But we do have in the draft ordinance in front of you fairly extensive regulations in regard to home delivery that requires you to have insurance, you know, proof that you're delivering to someone over the age of 21 and that that person has a recommendation from a physician. There are restrictions that would prohibit them from delivering to a federal facility to a publicly owned facility. You could not deliver to a hotel or motel as it is currently structured. And there were a couple other. Restrictions. I just can't remember off the top of my head.
Speaker 9: So in theory, how would someone who perhaps lives in their car acquired.
Speaker 13: Well, under the under the ordinance, it wouldn't be it wouldn't be under the current draft of the audience. It wouldn't be permitted at all to deliver it to a car. You would have to deliver it to a fixed location, some sort of a residence. We could if this is the direction council wants to go, we'd have to get creative and figure out a way to provide that type of delivery service. But I don't really know what it would be because based on the discussion of homelessness we had. Earlier this evening. I mean. The problem is all over the city, different types of venues. So I don't know what a single point would be where you could provide that kind of service effectively.
Speaker 9: I get it. And I wouldn't encourage anyone to have to deliver, you know, something to a car or an RV. But I do like the idea of exploring home delivery. I have a few more questions. So back to the ordinance that was presented. I appreciate the point system, but it seems just a bit simple. Even if there's a point here for, you know, someone who's been in the city before or been a part of the passed process, it just seems a bit simple when you have, for example, a question about you add one point for people who had, you know , submitted a business. Well. It's a zero point or one point, and it leaves no room for quality or judgment on how quality a proposal might be. And so I would I would ask what how would we approach it if we said instead of a 0 to 1 point, we just allowed some some some bit of flexibility in judgment by saying like 0 to 5 points. So you can see if someone submits a business plan to the city that is, you know, high quality page really thoro stands up to, you know, and, you know, an audit versus someone who who draws it with crayons and both of them submit a plan. I don't think both of them should still receive the point. So how we approach it if we you know just expand it to point system kept same categories that allowed a little bit for. For a little bit of evaluation on quality.
Speaker 13: So I should talk a little bit about the reason we structured it the way that we did. We tried to structure it in such a way. I mean, the goal of the whole point system is to encourage best practices, best operators that we could possibly get for the facilities that would be licensed. And we did keep it rather simple as far as a one point system for most of the items. And the reason for that was to try and take out the discretionary aspect of it, because if we vest discretion in our staff or the city attorney's office or anyone to make determinations who gets a, you know, on a floating scale of 0 to 5, we're likely to generate litigation as a result of that because someone who was scored very low is undoubtedly not going to. Be happy with that. So we just tried to keep it simple, straightforward. We tried to structure the categories so that they would capture all the things that we would want in a good operator. We could easily end up with a system. If everybody does what they're supposed to do and submits a very thorough application, we might end up because it defaults to a lottery if there's ties. And that's actually not a bad thing because then will ensure that whoever gets selected will hopefully be employing their best practices. When they open.
Speaker 9: Next question would be along the same lines. How do we evaluate? Well, both background checks. So if they operate, you know, dispensaries in other cities, how do we check to make sure those cities aren't having issues with this operator? How is that evaluated in this selection process?
Speaker 13: So the only thing that is as far as an evaluation, they are required to disclose whether or not they've ever had a permit or keep something like that revoked or suspended in another city. But we don't really have as part of the point system a detract for that, but we would take it into consideration.
Speaker 9: Is there a way to do some level of a background check on, say, the highest scoring applications that are submitted?
Speaker 13: Everyone's require everyone that submits an application is required to go through life scan, but that's basically to determine whether or not they have an inappropriate criminal background. We could, as part of the process, do a due diligence. We could add a category. We could add a point for never having had a license or permit revoked in another city. And then as part of that, we'd make them a test to that, certify that that was true, and then staff could do their due diligence and make sure that it was true by doing the best we could to make sure that they hadn't had a problem someplace else.
Speaker 9: So that would only make sense if they actually have an establishment in another city. So I wouldn't want to I mean, obviously if someone has never opened the establishment, I don't want them getting a point for never having gotten their license revoked.
Speaker 13: So we would set it up as a minus one. It wouldn't if you had an open anywhere else, you wouldn't get any points at all. But if you had had a revocation at some other location of and it would relate directly to a medical marijuana facility, we would detract one point.
Speaker 9: Okay. So you're a net neutral if you haven't done anything, if you've got some experience and it was a positive experience, you get a plus one. If it was a negative experience, you get a minus one. That's how that works.
Speaker 13: Well, what you were suggesting would just be a subtract one.
Speaker 9: Yes.
Speaker 6: Subtract one. Mm hmm.
Speaker 9: I like that. Next. So I appreciate the the budget and the economic analysis, and I especially appreciate the team based enforcement model so that you get different perspectives. And the last thing I would you know, given how fluid this regulatory environment would be, last thing I would like to do is hire a bunch of sworn officers and two years from now, something changes in terms of, you know, the the the regulatory environment, we won't have have the means to support those officers. So using a mix from different departments and spreading it out, I think it's smart. The question on the revenue generation, so I know it was I know there was a breakdown as to what types, you know, this was a maximum we assumed maximum tax generation from what what was the breakdown of the type. So if we were to change, for example, and say only dispensaries or nine dispensaries, how would that change if we're not doing, say, cultivation or something like that? How would that affect the the analysis?
Speaker 7: So Councilmember, I'll give an overview and then Leo can provide more detail if needed. Essentially, we did do a pretty complex analysis to try to estimate how many were allowed in the ordinance, and then we look at how much would come from if we had cultivation sites. I believe we had two cultivation sites in our model. We looked at, you know, if the nine were operating in a low in a low revenue environment or a medium or high and then made some estimates along those lines, there's also an estimate for our sales tax because we would collect sales tax on this as well. And then those that's really on the tax side and then there's the regulatory fee. So if you had nine dispensaries and you have a certain amount of cost that gets spread to the permitted or the allowable dispensaries that can only be used to recoup enforcement costs for for those expense for those dispensaries. It couldn't go for any of the for the illegal dispensaries. So if we do have a lower amount of facilities, we would have to recalculate and bring that back to you what the what the revenue impact would be and then also what the cost impact would be.
Speaker 9: So in terms of staffing, do we have a scalable staffing model that we can consider? If, you know, there are, you know, more, we can have one level or based on overtime. And if it's less, we have less in part.
Speaker 7: Yes, in part it's it's important to remember that this isn't linear. So if you if you go from X amount of dispensaries and cut that in half, it's the costs don't necessarily get cut in half. We really look at two different costs. One is to permit the license dispensaries, which we're hoping are all going to be very good operators. And really, we're just checking and making sure that they're doing what they need to be doing. Then there is the expectation and this has been our experience in Long Beach as well in other cities, that when you open up legal dispensaries, you are also going to be seeing activity from illegal dispensaries. And so that we would still have to have costs associated with appropriately responding to those illegal dispensaries. And those two aren't necessarily connected.
Speaker 9: I get. And I just think that some of the calls were represented. As, you know, these are all of these calls are, you know, on day one, we need to have these calls. But in reality, given the timeline, it's going to be a while until we're actually open and ready for business. So, you know, we wouldn't necessarily in this next, you know, have to make a mid-year budget adjustment to have this full cost. We can sort of scale or phase it in.
Speaker 7: Correct? Some are phased and some are not. So we would definitely if you give us direction on a different model, we would cast that out and look at those phases. What would need to come on immediately? What could wait until until this model would be implemented?
Speaker 9: Okay. So can you walk me through the timeline?
Speaker 7: So by timeline, I expect you are asking for if this were to pass for implementation. So as what we've outlined in our memo is if the council takes action, we would immediately start the process. We would upon adoption of the two audit of the audiences and the second reading, we would essentially bring on the staff that we need right away in order to create the application process. By February, we expect that we could have the design of the application process to be complete. We then this goes through a couple process is how the ordinance is structured. We would then in March have applications would be due. There is a process that you have to go through not just for this process, but for any business that goes through a CPA. And it is a lengthy process. So we expect that that up process would essentially be completed in October. We then would go through the planning check process with those various dispensaries. And so the plant check process would be completed in December. So if you take action tonight, we do expect and there's also construction that has to happen in these dispensaries. So we expect that will start immediately. You know, we wouldn't be delaying anything. It would be immediately getting started, but it would take approximately a year before the first dispensary would be opened.
Speaker 9: Okay. So and my final question and my final question would be if we were to so there were there are two proposals on the table already. One is to set a threshold for nine at one for district one. The other is to is predominantly, as I understand it, a delivery based model that phases in four and then four more later, you know, three more after that. How would your timeline change if you have how would your timeline change if you were to adjust opening dates? Would you if you were to have different phasing dates with all the all the regulatory stuff and ramp up, would all that be a be affected as well?
Speaker 7: Well, as we understand the proposal, you would still be creating four facilities. They wouldn't be available for walk up traffic, but they would still be for facilities. So and unless a different regulatory scheme was used, you would still go through this process in the setup process. So we expect it to be similar.
Speaker 9: Okay. So here's what I'm going to try to do. I'm going to try to merge the motions. And if people are sincere about compromise, let's see what happens. So the delivery options obviously have issues that need to be vetted out as well, but I'm willing to allow staff to try that out. So I want I move that. We include the, you know, delivery options on day one and that we I have an issue with opening up just delivery and no walk up space. I think that's not fair to a certain demographic and I don't think that's anyone's intention here. So but it seems like there's interest on the council at jumping way ahead at at, you know, nine or some larger number might be too high. So here's I like I also like the elements that Councilwoman Lowenthal mentioned about a per district cap. And I believe there was something about the after we looked at the there was some misunderstanding about whether we included child care as a as an example to look at or to be written into the ordinance. And that the original intent was to to take a look at it. Well, if if the interest is to remove that, I'm okay with that as well. So to be clear, I move the ordinance as presented include remove child care centers. A cap at one per district to be phased in beginning with five. After six months of evaluation. The other four. And delivery on day one. And my hope is that that includes a phase in from the substitute motion and the main elements from the main motion. And so that's my motion.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Mr. Mays, would you repeat the motion just because I want to make sure it's clear?
Speaker 13: Husband Richardson was talking about for me. Sorry, but it. I'm going to have to ask him to repeat it. Sorry.
Speaker 9: So what I'm trying to do here is get the elements from the main motion of you. Repeat to me the elements of the main motion. I'll tell you that I'm going to include those.
Speaker 13: When you say the main motion, do you mean the motion made by Councilwoman Lowenthal?
Speaker 6: Yes.
Speaker 13: So that would be to adopt the ordinance as presented. There would be nine dispensaries in the city, one per district, and remove licensed child care facilities from the buffers that were presented in the district in the ordinance.
Speaker 9: Yes, that's the motion and the caveat the change would be to add a phase in. So we would start with five and six months later adding four.
Speaker 13: So just to be clear, just to be clear, you would start with five. And could those be anywhere in the city in any of those five district or we're still going to risk more than one.
Speaker 9: No more than one per district.
Speaker 13: Okay. No more than one per district. Five total. Mm hmm. And then after six months of the first being in operation, would we incorporate. The provision that would require a report back to the city council as to how things were going at that point in time. And then you would consider adding an additional four to bring you up to a total of nine.
Speaker 9: Yes, I'm fine with that.
Speaker 0: So just and just so I'm clear, essentially, the motion is, is Vice Mayor Lowenthal was motion with one change, which is instead of opening up the process directly to two nine dispensaries up to nine I'm sorry, citywide, you would first open it up to five and at six months then you would open it for an additional four
Speaker 13: . You would report back to consider adding an additional four.
Speaker 0: Well, that's okay. That's different. So I want make sure I'm clear. So is it is it five? Because quite frankly, the council on any Tuesday can add four at five to, you know, change things. And so is the motion to go five. And then after six months you go into four or is a motion only five and then the count the council debates and discusses again and can choose them to go to for up to four more.
Speaker 9: Councilman, what I envision is, you know. If a district if districts. So let me simplify. Nine is the motion is one for district and I want to begin with five to allow some for some evaluation. So that could come back to the council in the form of a two from for a study session. If any council council member based on the data would like to take actions and not implement those other four, then they have that opportunity. But my hope is the hope is to allow some sort of a I want to sort of see if there's middle ground here. I like the idea of a phase in.
Speaker 0: Okay. So just.
Speaker 9: Like the other ideas as.
Speaker 0: Well. So just to be clear, your motion is, is the Vice Mayor Lowenthal original motion. The difference is that instead of going directly up to nine, you're going directly up to five, and at six months you begin the process for the next four. However, there is an update to the council at six months, and if at that point a council member wants to change the ordinance, then they have a right to as they would have a right to any other week.
Speaker 9: Absolutely.
Speaker 0: Okay. So that's the motion on the floor.
Speaker 13: Mayor, I need further clarification. In the six month period we're talking about is six months after the first dispensary actually opens.
Speaker 9: Yeah. So. So how about this? We're going to have six months. We're going to have six month updates every six months. During this, I want to say every six months I update every six months until everything gets open. And that and the five the four additional dispensaries will be opened up after six months after. Well, cannot open until six months after the the original five have been open for business.
Speaker 13: Okay. And one further clarification, because you said you want to allow delivery. So I seem I assumed by that the model would be that if we have five eligible for a cup, each of those five as part of their original cup could also ask to do delivery.
Speaker 9: So let me ask you the question. I mean, are there considerations we have? It sounds fine to me if someone would prefer to have home delivery as an add on to their service. I don't have a particular issue.
Speaker 13: And that's the way the current ordinance tonight is structured. So if you apply for a CFP, you can indicate on your application that in addition to bricks and mortar retail sales.
Speaker 9: I don't have to. You could do.
Speaker 13: Delivery. Yeah.
Speaker 9: Yes, thank you.
Speaker 0: I think there's one piece of clarification to that so I can repeat the motion. Is the is the is the additional up to four? Does that timetable is that because does that clock begin when all five applications have been processed and or an open or does that start when the first one open? So you're saying after the first five are open, is that. I think that's what you're saying.
Speaker 9: So I mean, yeah, but let me just restate. Um, can you tell me when the first ones would be open? Based on today's.
Speaker 7: Timeline.
Speaker 13: Mr. Modica indicated the likely scenario is that approximately one year.
Speaker 9: So if we were to start their process delayed from today, six months, we would would we be able to, let's say the first five, it was a complete disaster. Will we be able to stop someone in their process if it takes a year to get opened? Let's say they'll be six months down the process and we delay it six months, not six months from when they open, but six months by the time they actually get open, we will have six months of data, correct?
Speaker 13: No, you wouldn't, because it's going to take a year for us to open the first ones. And I think the the premise of your motion, if I understood it, is to get an idea of whether or not the ones that you are authorizing the first five would be operating successfully, not causing a nuisance in the neighborhood. So you really would want to make the trigger point at some point after at least one, if not all five of them open so that you could see if they were operating appropriately or not. You weren't getting complaints from neighbors or so.
Speaker 9: So what my hope is then will be to create some sort of a a overlap so that, you know, there can be sort of caucus one or cohort one that's in the process that takes a year. Six months into their process, you can start the process on. You can stagger and start the second process. If the first by the time the first process is up and running and you have some data, if it's a complete disaster, would we have the ability to stop the process on the others and return any money from the city? We have the ability to just stop that in the process before they get open.
Speaker 13: It would be very once you start down that it's very expensive, number one, for the applicant to go through that process. So if we started them down that road and got halfway through it and then said, Sorry, you can't do it again, we would generate, I guarantee you, litigation from everybody that's in that process, even if we gave them back the money, because usually by that period of time they have had to identify a physical location where they could go. They have to get capital together, they have to put together business plans. There's a whole lot of work that they would have to do, so it really wouldn't be fair to them to get them in the pipeline, only to revoke that at some point in time that the other the initial five didn't work out. It would be better to get some statistical data after you have one or more, 1 to 5 actually operating so that you can see that now we have a good model we can use and you have a database from which to draw to know whether or not you really fight for more.
Speaker 9: So so hearing that, I mean, that fundamentally changes my intent of what I wanted to do. I mean, my hope was to try to get some sort of a phase in that was more reasonable. But if you have a phase in that, you know, it takes a year to get one up and going in six months and then another year after that. That's two and a half years. That's two that's a pretty long well.
Speaker 13: Presumably they they would be moving through the process in parallel. So I don't anticipate one would take a year and then another one would take another year. You'd have all five of them presumably going through the process roughly at the same time. So if everything worked out well, people submitted their applications on time, they were properly vetted. All five of them could be into well into the CFP process by this time next year.
Speaker 9: And so the additional four would not be able to begin their process until we have data back on the on the originals. That would be another year after six months of being open.
Speaker 13: It would take a process.
Speaker 9: Two and a half years.
Speaker 13: So you're saying. Yeah, you're correct.
Speaker 9: So that fundamentally changes what I was hoping to do here. I mean, that said, if there's no realistic way to have a phase in that structurally changes my thought on the substitute motion as well, because we would be subject to the same timeline on the subject to motion as well, correct? I mean, if the substitute motion were to open up, you know, in six months from the time that six months from the time that delivery is opened, we begin storefront sales, that would take we we evaluate then begin storefront sales that would take us how long would it take to get delivery up and running a year.
Speaker 13: It would be about a year or.
Speaker 9: So, a year for delivery. Then six months of evaluation and then another year to get the storefronts open. So two and a half years before we getting the storefronts open. If the substance of the motion is.
Speaker 13: Well, yes, that's correct.
Speaker 9: So so I'm withdrawing my motion and I can't support the substitute motion either. I'm just going to support the main motion for the simple fact that.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 9: The timeline doesn't make sense to phase it based on what you said, to have a sincere effort at this. So I don't I don't really see any way around it either. We're going to do this because we support it or we won't. So there it is.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. Moving on, I still have a list of members and the public. We're nearing 210, so I just want to make sure that we are moving as expeditiously as possible. Count summary ranga.
Speaker 12: I guess that's a veiled hint, to be sure.
Speaker 1: To.
Speaker 12: Be direct. Well. Well, before I begin, I want to thank Councilmember Lawrence out for bringing this forward. I know she and and former council member Oranga Tony have brought this forward many years ago. And now here we are. We're almost we're almost there. We're almost there. And I want to also compliment Councilmember Price for coming around a little bit. I mean, it's still complex and it's not an easy topic. It's not easy to grapple with it. And of course, I want to thank Councilmember Richardson for. Coming around full circle to where we first started with the original motion that I seconded. So having said all that, I'm not going to ask any further questions. I'm going to just support the original motion.
Speaker 0: Councilmember Gonzales or Councilwoman Gonzales.
Speaker 5: Yes, I have a few questions that I'd like to ask and perhaps I might be interpreting it a little bit differently. But just first, in terms of staffing and costs, how did we formulate these costs and did we look at this? I know in some cases we looked at the city of Los Angeles. How did we come up with, you know, $3 million and get a baseline for all that?
Speaker 7: So, Councilmember, what we did is we did look back at prior experience. We have had experience in the past of doing some regulation and doing enforcement. So we know what those what those costs are. We also did a kind of a zero based we asked each department. So given the ordinance that the council is considering. So the council passes the current ordinance. Please estimate your cost to do those. And so we asked them to split it into what would it cost to do the regulatory and to approve if there were nine approved, what were the costs that could be associated with those nine and only associated with those nine? And then what is the cost associated with stopping some of the illegal ones that we expect would come? We had to make some assumptions in the analysis we assumed, and this is based on our past practice as well as other cities, that for every one that is opened and allowed, we expect up to six potentially could be here within, you know, while we're doing this process within that year, those are going to start fairly soon is what our expectation would be. So being able to have sufficient resources to address those departments came up with that that amount of about $5 million. And then we essentially estimated what we believe the revenue would be from from the nine from the tax side and also from the regulatory side. And then we managed to that budget. So we did make some reductions. We created a model that we believe the council, if you want to move forward with this, we were hearing that it would be paid for by by the amount of funds available. So we managed to that budget and that's how we came up with the 3 million.
Speaker 5: Okay, great. Thank you. And I understand will be using existing employees should this be rolled out. But are there any new will we be looking at new hires or is this because this is such a large undertaking? It wouldn't be. You know, it's it's certainly existing within the roles of the city employees. But would we have it would we have any new hires for for this?
Speaker 7: So it would be a combination of both. We would be expecting on a go forward basis that we would be hiring new staff. This is a very time intensive process to do the enforcement. And so we will need new staff and we are budgeting for that in that 3 million, although we do expect that those illegal establishments could open very soon and we would need to respond to those using existing staff. And so we split it between how many existing staff we're going to have to pull and that there would be diversion from, you know, other business that those staff normally do. And we would have we would have some diversion so we would be mining back to you on what that diversion would be. For example, for on the police side, we're estimating two and a half police officers. It takes about two and a half years to fully train a police officer through the academy, through the field training program . And so in that interim time, we would have to pull from existing resources in order to, you know, on overtime and others to have those police officers available even at the two and a half additional that we added.
Speaker 5: Okay. Thank you. And now that we're on the subject of police officers, Chief Luna, how many police officers currently are we down at the moment?
Speaker 6: I want to say we're down about approximately 20 or 25.
Speaker 2: Okay. 20 or 25.
Speaker 5: Okay. Thank you. And as far as our approach to enforcement, I know it could be a longer process. Is this due to the fact that we're now taking more of a team approach if we are to implement this? Is that the reason why it's going to be called the Collective Health Department, city prosecutor, everybody kind of pulling together.
Speaker 7: So under this model, we would shift away from a police model where we're serving search warrants and showing up with large groups of officers and doing all the work that goes into the search warrants. On the criminal side, we would instead switch to a lean type model where we are assessing fines and trying to, you know, assess as many of those fines as possible if there is an illegal establishment. So that requires time to create those. And there's a there's you have to serve them and you have to inspect and you have to get access to the facility. So, yes, it would be a different model and one based more on financial penalties than one on criminal enforcement.
Speaker 5: Okay. Thank you. And as far as enforcement as well, I know in here at least I didn't see where we had issues in the past with property. So for for the most part, for the unsanctioned for facilities or properties, the property owner was often a large part, a large piece of this, this issue. And so how do we or what more of power do we have as a city to to enforce in those instances?
Speaker 13: So the draft ordinance that is that we presented to you does have provisions in there that makes it illegal for a landlord to rent a property to someone. For medical marijuana purposes unless that person actually has a copy from the city. So there would be the potential for criminal prosecution and there would be the administrative fines, as Tom mentioned.
Speaker 7: So essentially, we would be going after both. We would go after the the establishment, the business. But at the same time, we we are going to be leaning you know, the fines and fees were going to be leaned on the property, which is in many times not the same person as the the business that's operating.
Speaker 5: We did that before. Correct. So there's nothing different that we would do this time around. It's going to be basically the same process that we have had used before.
Speaker 7: Correct. Where we would look at additional tools that we could use as well. And we would look for safety violations that we could red tag the building we would look for, be more aggressive with liens. If we had dedicated staff and dedicated city attorney help, we could actually move to a sale of the property potentially, which which we hadn't done in the past. So there are some of those tools. But those you know, and just to set expectations, those take a long time. There are there are legal hurdles that you go over to over. You have to have due process. And so those those do take time in order to fully effectuate.
Speaker 5: And then lastly, I know it's important that I, I believe it's really important that we gather a lot of data if, you know, whatever takes place tonight. You know, I think data is certainly very important, as Councilman Price said, is as Councilmember Richardson said. And so I'm wondering if at all possible, since we are taking this team approach with the health department in looking at patients that we're we're I'm really looking at is as far as if this is to be implemented, is there data we can get perhaps from the health department that would say where we can work with these property owners or work with these establishments or these home delivery business owners and say, uh, you know, get some data as to what these ailments are from these patients. I mean, is that I don't know if there's any legal issue there with that or how we would.
Speaker 13: So the state law is actually fairly broad in regards to who can qualify for medical marijuana. And it's really up to the discretion of the physician that issues the prescription. So. It's very broad and we couldn't limit what the state law does. We could probably get data, but it would only it would probably be very difficult to get, quite frankly.
Speaker 5: Right. Well, I guess I'm asking the question in the sense of we'd like to know as a city what type of ailments that are more prevalent here in our city and as a health department or, you know, is that without giving, you know, all of the information out, without giving, you know, names and all that, is there , you know, does this person have HIV AIDS? Is this person have cancer? And what types of cancer and what types of ailments we have out there?
Speaker 4: We we track in the city. We have.
Speaker 13: Data from hospitals around that what different diseases.
Speaker 6: Are.
Speaker 1: We wouldn't be.
Speaker 3: Able to do is identify that is is what the prescriptions are being written for as those data wouldn't be collected. And that's not something that we currently have ability to track. Okay. Yeah. But otherwise, within the city, we do understand what the cancer rates look like in those sorts of things that different age groups and different communities
Speaker 5: . Okay. Um. All right. Perfect. Thank you. Because those are all my questions. I appreciate it.
Speaker 0: Thank you. We have to close at the council portion here, Vice Chair Lowenthal.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I wanted to thank my council colleagues for the discussion. And Mr. Mayes, just. Can you restate the original motion or shall I restated?
Speaker 13: So the motion, as I understood it, would be to accept the ordinance as presently drafted, with the exceptions that we make clear that there would be nine per city but no more than one per council district, and that when we brought back a new ordinance, we would also removed licensed child care facilities from the buffer zones.
Speaker 2: Okay. And I knew that I had accepted a friendly amendment from Councilmember Andrews. And in all this time that we had deliberated, I had reflected back on your advisement that that might create a barrier or most likely create a barrier. So I'd like to remove that friendly amendment for that extra point and leave it as the ordinance reads. Councilman Andrews, is that acceptable? Thank you. So the only change is the removal of the buffer.
Speaker 13: In the specification of one per district only.
Speaker 2: Correct. Thank you. And with that council members, I hope you can support that motion, I think. I think in the seven years that we've attempted to have some reasonable policy in place, we have come to a place where we can take a measured approach. And that measured approach is really a number as small as nine. I don't have any data to support what a city our size would really require if we were to meet all the needs of people that were in need, medical need of of medical marijuana. But I don't think we're here to really determine that because none of us is an expert on that. I think what we're here to do is look at land use and look at our. Approach to public policy, this one particularly to try and balance land use issues with public policy that would enable our residents to participate in something that they are legally able to participate in and ensure that they're able to do that in a city that they live in, as opposed to traveling great distances and lengths to acquire something that they are legally able to do. And in doing so, looking at the buffer zones and the various conversations we've had about the different attributes that we would like to assign to the buffer zones, I do think we've taken on the land use issues quite thoroughly, and I'm satisfied with it. And and I have to say that I'm pretty confident that we're moving in the right direction, not because we've spent seven years at it and not because any one of us knows more than the other, but because we truly have vetted this to the extent possible and balanced our public safety interests and needs. With this conversation, I don't know that there is anything that we have not considered. It doesn't mean we'll get it right. But that's the beauty of public policy. It's not a one shot deal. You do have an opportunity to correct as you go. And I think this measured approach of taking nine at this time and it will sort of be phased in because not nine would be ready to move forward at the same time. So I think we would organically see a phasing in of these nine individual sites. And so with that, I request council support and look forward to hearing comments from the public.
Speaker 0: Yeah. And what I'm going to do is before I go into the onto the public, I just want to make sure we have two motions on the floor. We have a substitute motion by Councilwoman Pryce, and then the the initial motion by Vice Mayor Lowenthal. Councilman, prices for brief. Repeat your motion that we're the ones on the floor and then vice mayor, repeat hers. We're going to go to public comment and then come back for the vote. Councilman.
Speaker 5: Thank you. And I would ask my colleagues to support my motion, which is to allow for businesses to establish with a home delivery service, no onsite sales. This will allow patient access for those who need it most. Six months after the first business is operational, staff will report back on the tax revenues collected, the fiscal impact to the city in terms of enforcement costs and any public safety issues in that time period. At that time, Council will consider adding four storefront locations to be aligned with the home delivery business. Same operator. Six months after the first storefront operation is operational, we will consider adding up to three additional storefronts for a total of seven. So that is my motion. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And then we have the original motion on the floor. Vice-Chair Lowenthal.
Speaker 2: So the original motion on the floor is adoption of the recommendation, the staff recommendation for support of the ordinance as written with one change, and that is to remove the child care buffers. From the ordinance. Is that correct, Mr. Mason? I articulate that correctly.
Speaker 0: I think you also you you made a change on the on clarifying the language as far as one per district.
Speaker 2: Correct? One per district? Correct. So the number is the same as nine, but one per district and removing the childcare buffers. And if I can also add that I appreciate the interest in moving towards starting with just deliveries, but I think if we. Asked honestly to our public safety officers, or at least our police chief, there are many, many, many home deliveries that are taking place in the city today that are not being stopped today. And I don't know how we would end up being able to quantify. The price of that, what the value of that is, and in the interest of being sure that we're not moving toward a beneficiary pays type model of public safety, we don't put other businesses through that kind of rigor. We have a tremendous amount of calls for service to the Wal-Mart in downtown. And I'm not just singling out Wal-Mart, but that's the one that comes to mind. I used to live right across the street. We don't put them through those rigors. We also don't put other businesses through the same rigors. And so I do appreciate the conversation, but I I'm fully aware of the various businesses that we do not put through the same rigors in terms of beneficiary pays. So with that, council members, I hope you will be able to support the original motion.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Okay. So I'm going to go to the public public comment before we go to public comment. I just want to remind everybody that I. I know that we've got two motions we're going to vote on. Please just know that I think everyone's anxious to move forward, whatever that ends up being. And so please come forward. Make your comments. Please try not to repeat the information we've heard. I think most folks have heard these comments many times, which I've argued this and debated many times. And so just ask if we can please refrain from from too many comments, that would be great so that we can actually get back to deliberation. And please begin and say your name for the record, please.
Speaker 6: My name is Mike Bartley. I live at 40 409 Charlemagne Avenue, Lakewood Village, Long Beach. And I'm just curious. I want to know if the city.
Speaker 9: Council is aware of The Beachcombers.
Speaker 6: September 18th. This year, article by Stephen Downing. And it says here it says, the criminal organizations operating these systems salaries are alleged to have.
Speaker 9: Been making regular payments, a mere one in money. The cash ranging between 10,000 and $15,000 weekly.
Speaker 6: To members of the Long Beach Police Drug Squad. Now, what is going on here? We can't control the rogue operations, obviously. So why are we voting on this tonight as it is? I think that the priorities of this council is mixed up. We need to stop the rogue operations first before we can proceed with legal marijuana for medical reasons. And I don't see this happening. This is a it's a cancer. Really aware of this article here. This is very important. It is there. Are you laughing about it? No. Okay. Well, it's right here. And I assume that the editor, the writer of it is. He didn't specify who was by, but I assume is by the FBI. So and you read it further in her article here on the back page, you'll see that more details about the police who were paid off and assumed that they were paid off by the these the dispensaries. So. And another thing to Chief Luna says we don't have enough resources. To to come back the rogue dispensary. So if it which evidently will come up, according to Charles Parkin and assistant manager. So what are we doing here with this stuff if it's this dangerous and and in light, too, of of 911 and what happened recently at San Bernardino. Where is this money going to this cash flow from? These dispensaries are not accountable. We need to come up with a accountable plan before we can proceed. And there isn't any way I mean, if the cash where's this cash going anyway? And I don't have enough time. But Mr. West, the city manager, came up with this plan here about the tax payments are expected to be made entirely in cash. So where's accountability in this? Banking accountability. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: Good evening, Mr. Mayor. Council members. My name is Mark Greenberg. I live in the eighth district. Mr. Austin. And I was your vice chairman of the Marijuana Task Force. I'm a former federal prosecutor, prosecuted organized crime for ten years, then left and been in private practice. I've seen both sides of this issue and saw certainly a great deal of discussion about it over the course of 60 hours of the meetings of the task force. I as much as I've seen the law enforcement side of it and have prosecuted organized crime drug trafficking groups, I went to a funeral for a friend on Sunday who died of cancer. So I know both sides of this issue. And if what you're talking about is access and that's what you're here to do, there's two issues that really permeate this whole situation. There's money. There's money for votes. There's money that people want to make a profit. There's all the cash involved. This is a big money business. But there's also an access issue for some people. As a councilman, Gonzalez asked for the data. There is data and the data is that about 94% of the people that go into these establishments do not have serious illnesses . They do not have cancer. About 5% do for that 5%. You should have access for people battling cancer. There should be access to this to ameliorate that doesn't cure cancer. In fact, under Prop 65. Smokable marijuana is covered under Prop 65. So for every sale in the state, in the state, it must be warned that you are causing cancer. This causes cancer. It doesn't fix cancer. It does ameliorate have since there's benefits, home delivery serves that need of access. If what we're really talking about is access for these people that need it, that truly have a need. The home delivery model works. It's been working for quite some time. Quite honestly, there's 30 companies right now that will deliver it to your home that I could have it delivered right here. It's not an issue. And so there is plenty of access if you want to have the revenue from that home delivery and allow it within the city, have it controlled from the city. But I live in the eighth District and in the eighth District we had what's been called a rogue dispensary on Atlantic Boulevard. I would walk by. Every shop is on the way to synagogue and there was a guy there with a gun here and a gun here out in front. Five things could happen, four of them bad. This guy was a nightmare. That dispensary was a nightmare. The police would raid it, close it down. It opened up the next day. There is no team approach that's going to really resolve that problem. They tried. They worked at it. They could not get it closed down. I talked to Chief McDonnell over and over again about my concerns with them. But home delivery resolves these issues. It addresses the access without all the problems. Thank you, sir. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker.
Speaker 6: Please. We want to just thank Mr. Mayes for all the time he gave to our task force and Kendra Carney for what I think was unpaid time.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir.
Speaker 10: Thank you for your service.
Speaker 0: Next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: Honorable Mayor and city council Bill Napier here. If this was about home.
Speaker 8: Delivery, I would not be here.
Speaker 6: All of these many, many times. And even before the new council. This is not about home delivery because I don't trust none of that. And that's what we've been here for the stores. But here's the deal. We asked for a potshot and we got Governor Jerry Brown and instead. Now we're here begging again. The governor could have stayed out of it. The appeals court already had this one. But I guess he just couldn't let it be. So here we are. Begging you again for a punch up, please.
Speaker 8: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you, sir.
Speaker 8: I was going to add that.
Speaker 6: Uh oh. I wish they were all California. I wish they were all California girls. Thank you. Okay.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please. Okay. Let's try to get through this next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: Yeah. Hi, I'm Larry Parks. I was a managing director. Of a medical marijuana facility here in Long Beach. A lot of winter. Lotto winner. Also with a collective and a cultivation. I am. Have adequate.
Speaker 11: Proof here. These are very hard to find.
Speaker 6: Probably the only one that has one as somebody else could produce one. This is a medical marijuana collective permit that was that was presented by the city of Long Beach to us after we followed everything. I went through all the recommendations, spent $100,000 on a facility. Facility that was also handicapped facility. Very safe facility and sand in the walls in case anybody tried to come in and shoot anything. We never we had a very sophisticated. Alarm system, a very sophisticated camera system that even several times at the recommendation or the request of the Long Beach Police Department to help on robbery down the street at a facility, a liquor store facility, and another one at a small market facility. They used our cameras. So we tried to comply as best we could. We were raided ten times. Each time that cross was $15,000. So I would suggest that and certainly that mayor that I think last year you said give us a litigation free ordinance. And I would suggest and certainly recommend that you look at the people that won a lottery, that paid their $14,732, spent probably 100,000 plus in a facility. But they should be given the first opportunity. I would hope that you would get it right. So litigation doesn't get it right. And want to hear the economics of one. Councilwoman, if you were to take the budget, which I don't think is accurate, but it could be $5 million. But if you were to have to. Our district gets 18. Look at the income you'll have there. And the budget's not going to grow up that much more. So there's your facility offsets your cost. You'll bring in about $3 million more if you had.
Speaker 11: To.
Speaker 6: For district. So again, I urge you to consider the people that won the lotto. That we're here that opened. They should be given the first opportunity. And if not, then I think litigation will be. We don't want we're trying to stay away from litigation. Thank you very much, Mayor and city council.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Before we have the next speaker, I'm going to close the speakers list. So the gentleman in the back with the hat will be the last speaker speak. There's more people. Okay.
Speaker 1: Stand.
Speaker 0: Go ahead, Jack.
Speaker 6: Hi. Good evening. My name is Jack Smith. I live at 240 Chestnut Avenue in Long Beach. That's in the first District. I was a representative for the second district because I lived in the second district at the time of the task force, a representative on the task force from the second District. This ordinance has a number of inconsistencies that I think need to be cleared up. First of all, I'm very glad that Vice Mayor Lowenthal has, as clarified and specified the maximum of one per district among the.
Speaker 7: Ninth district for a maximum of nine in the city. If that's.
Speaker 6: The number, remember, the number.
Speaker 7: Is very arbitrary. That you choose one per district is what you've chosen.
Speaker 6: As long as it's evenly distributed across the city. I think the most important phrase in this new proposed ordinance was at the very beginning, where it says protection of the public shall be the highest priority for the city. Whenever the protection of the public is inconsistent with other interests sought to be promoted, the protection of the public shall be paramount. That is very, very key to remember. With regard to the cups, I'm a bit confused as the ordinance is written right now as to how those cups operate. It specifies in here that the cups are for each individual property. That's how I see you normally operate. The previous ordinances had had a scope for two, potentially two properties of a business. So how is that working? If if we have nine cups in the city? If a business happens to have a farm and a store, does that mean C to you cups limiting it to a maximum of four businesses in the city? Something to be clarified. I also was confused a little bit about the issue of food. Several times, a couple of times in the ordinance it says edible products shall not be considered food. And then it goes on to in another section to say that that in order for edibles to be produced, it must be in a retail food establishment and a certified food handlers with a kitchen. So is it food or is it not a food? Some of those things need to be cleared up. So do what else do I have here? Oh, advertisements. This is the one I get the most grief over, I guess. Print advertising. I was a recommendation in the task force that advertising not be permitted. I think that needs to be in the ordinance. Right now it is specifically permitted. There are a number of print media already available to minors, and that's the problem. And we have the press telegram. We have the single Tribune, The Beachcomber, The Gazette, L.A. Weekly, Aussie Weekly. And we've seen the ads in the U.S. Weekly. So we knew what we were likely to be getting. So I think print advertising should not be permitted. So the question of how do you do a copy for a delivery service? How do the cups work with the businesses and yes, to the maximum of one per district? Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And Speaker, please.
Speaker 6: Good evening, Mr. Mayor. And City Council.
Speaker 0: I've been your name for the record, please.
Speaker 6: John Donahue is the name live in East Long Beach. I've been here since 1952. Now, I consider myself an expert on this subject, and I'm going to give you some of the benefit of my expertize. It seems like you need some. I've been here many times and listened to this, going on and on and on and it just doesn't seem to be getting us anywhere. For one thing, I started smoking marijuana in 1946. I just got back from World War Two and I found it very pleasant and I went on using it. I didn't get really into using it till I got out here to California. And the Sixties. Remember the good old sixties? And I started using it daily. And I never had any problem acquiring it. And now one thing we have to know about marijuana is if it actually should be calling it cannabis, because marijuana is a phony name that they gave the because the Mexicans were using it when they first criminalized it way back was four years ago. But now we have this problem. But one thing I understand that marijuana is not a crime. There are of course, there are laws against it, as there have been laws against tea and coffee and alcohol. But marijuana per say is not a crime. A small amount of marijuana is no criminal. I'd like mispriced or explained to me where the where is the crime? If I'm sitting at home with some marijuana and I got a bottle of scotch and I got Cigarets and I don't have a letter, why is that a crime? Anyway. It is not a crime. Another thing that I found amusing that we're now concerned about whether the homeless are going to be able to get the marijuana. Well, there's something else. How will they be able to pay for it? Because it's outrageously overpriced. It's about two or three, $400 an ounce. If a homeless person had that much money, he wouldn't be homeless.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Let's try to stick to, if possible, to the motions on the floor. I think we've heard the obviously the arguments about medical marijuana for many meetings. So we have a couple of motions on the floor if possible. Next Speaker Thank.
Speaker 6: You. Hi. My name is Nick Morrow, a resident property owner in the fourth District as a member of the Medical Cannabis Task Force. And I'm a former law enforcement. Law enforcement is not a for profit enterprise. So when we talk about the budget considerations, making money on medical marijuana is probably not the way you want to start the argument. The phased approach is is flawed because you have a fixed number of patients who aren't going to phase in their need. So you open the door a little bit. You're going to have problems with smaller and fewer locations. So keeping with the minimum of 914 district I support holly. Long Beach PD was very, very effective, very aggressive in closing down not only the rogue operators, but the operators that were doing their best to abide by the state state standards. With all that closed down, we don't have any operating medical marijuana locations in the city of Long Beach. The question I would have, has crime gone down as a result of that? Of all those closures, probably not with the the number of delivery services operating right now in the city of Long Beach, but checked it on my phone. There's at least 40 that will deliver to the city of Long Beach right now. None of them are actually located in the city of Long Beach. Those tax revenues are going elsewhere. Phasing in the delivery set up in Long Beach. You have to know where the medicine is coming from. If you just allow people to do delivery services without a location to verify quality and and strain and all those other issues that are important to patients, maybe not to the to the council per se, because we're looking more for the money than we are for quality of medicine for the patients. But the access is first and foremost. You got to open the door and you got to open it. Smart opening up nine locations and starting that process. Right now, patients in the city of Long Beach have got to go elsewhere. And so they're going to have to go elsewhere for at least another year. And so we need to open this door up. Take the chance. Open it up. It's working other places. We talked about getting information about patients, actual medical issues. City of Pasadena has a requirement on a research collective there that they collect that very information. When they when they put a patient into the system, they get that voluntary information which gets around HIPA laws if you volunteer it. So that's always a possibility. So we could make that part of the CFP process that there is a data collection process with the health department. Just a couple of suggestions. We said it was it was a pleasure to serve on the Medical Cannabis Task Force. And I hope that I hope that we get this push forward. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please. And the last person in line. Raise your hand. That gentleman is the last speaker. Speaker, this is closed. That's it. Yes, sir. We have about a 50 minutes of public comment. If everyone uses 30 minutes still. Yes, sir.
Speaker 12: Good evening. My name is Miguel Skee. I'm a resident.
Speaker 6: And voter in Long Beach living in the Wrigley area. And I would like.
Speaker 12: To read a letter that the Wrigley Association sent to our Honorable Mary.
Speaker 7: Garcia, Councilman Andrews and Councilman Durango.
Speaker 12: The Wrigley Association has voted to oppose the proposed ordinance pertaining to the lifting of the present ban on medical.
Speaker 6: Marijuana sales in Long Beach.
Speaker 12: Because the proposed.
Speaker 7: Language specifies allowing nine dispensaries citywide.
Speaker 12: And as such would allow all dispensaries to be established in a single council district.
Speaker 6: Or a single geographic area within the city. It is our desire.
Speaker 12: That this.
Speaker 6: Element in the language of the code be amended to specify no more than.
Speaker 12: One dispensary per council.
Speaker 6: District.
Speaker 12: Respectfully submitted the Wrigley Association. Thank you for your kind attention.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. And just that was and that was changed in the original motion. So what you just said is, is there in the original motion? Next speaker.
Speaker 6: Good evening. Council members and Mayor Robert Garcia, it's it is great to.
Speaker 7: See you all again. My name is Joe Sanchez. And I say all this with great pride. I love Long Beach. I live here all my life. I'm a senior Wilson High School, and I carry you chair for your leadership, Long Beach. I stand here today against but not completely against medical marijuana dispensaries. By telling you.
Speaker 6: By a little bit about myself.
Speaker 7: By informing you and the public about my experience as a high school student, and how I have seen how medical marijuana experiences have affected our schools and our youth. I'm friends with about half of the people in Long Beach, causing me to know many people of many different backgrounds and personalities. With this and some of the people I have came to socialize with, such as friends and acquaintances. Have told me about their use of marijuana. Led them to skip school or come late to school. Because they want to smoke. Just this past Friday, I was getting ready to come to city hall for a class they would leadership on bitch causing me to have an excuse absence at school. Well I was getting ready. I looked out the window and I see three students. One of them who I mean, when you skipped school because they decided to go smoke marijuana. Since my freshman year, I came to learn from all the U.S. students on how most of the students at our schools come to acquire most of the marijuana and marijuana products, most of which the product name were related to Bob Marley or for 20. And I came to know that most of the providers I've heard of were owners, workers and people that have means of acquiring marijuana for medical marijuana dispensaries such as medical marijuana dispensaries. However, I agree with Councilwoman Susie Price with how delivery with delivery systems for these. For those who truly need this medication, although this has affected our you in the past, the present, and will affect our future.
Speaker 6: For our youth as our our future. So please take in.
Speaker 7: Consideration when making your decision. Thank you for your time.
Speaker 6: And have a lovely night.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I thank you for doing Youth Leadership Long Beach. It's a great program. Next speaker.
Speaker 7: My name is Brett Johnson, born and raised in the Fort District. Thank you, councilman or councilman and mayor. I just have a couple quick questions to address. The original proposal and the second, how can you calculate an accurate revenue number and city police expenses based on only for delivery services? How can you calculate accurate sales numbers that provide city tax revenue from a mobile delivery operation? How can policing be applied with adequate supervision to the safety of delivery service drivers and its patients at home without a brick and mortar location? Where would these delivery service store drones and distributors based on a delivery service and how would they be safe without a storefront? How would you award these delivery service licenses on a fair basis without established brick and mortar locations? How would city police? Rogue operations differentiate than they do currently. How many rogue operations have been identified and closed since the last numbers released in 2014? What examples of working brick and mortar locations in other cities are you basing tax revenue number estimates with the estimated year lead time? What consideration is there from the city to potential dispensary operators paying rent or fees towards locations without an approval from the city? Given location requirement for acquiring a license. How is this structure cost efficient and pro-business to any potential operators? How are these? How are these current proposal changes cost efficient to the city in regards to previously spent funds developing the current program? I feel an extensive amount of time and effort and city funds have been put forth towards the current plan. The best way for the city to streamline in receiving tax revenue is to implement the current developed plan. And just to kind of give you a relative number based on 2013, 2014. In Denver, they've actually had a 6.9% reduced rate in nonviolent crimes since they've approved their recreational facilities and medical marijuana dispensaries. And there are only 100,000 more than we are roughly here in Long Beach. So just some things to think about. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 7: Hi. My name's Stephanie Morris. And so I'm a attorney and former city employee.
Speaker 9: I'm going to go and discuss specifically section of page 41, section Q of this ordinance, it's the.
Speaker 7: Extract ban. There is a host of reasons why this is a particularly bad one, so I'm going to go as.
Speaker 9: Fast as possible on them. The first is the economic argument. By not providing any.
Speaker 7: Regulations, just banning extracts per say, you are at best forcing these businesses. The meeting that the other cities are going to be getting.
Speaker 9: Revenue from it. We are all aware of that.
Speaker 7: And at worst we're going.
Speaker 9: To be encouraging more black market concentrate making, which resulted in a rather large house fire in Belmont Shores recently. Today, however, today we.
Speaker 7: Know that we have licensed both nonvolatile and volatile solvents at the.
Speaker 9: State level. We have chemists and we have professionals who are now.
Speaker 7: Making these making these these.
Speaker 9: Essential oils and every other type of extract you could possibly imagine. Secondly, the public health argument.
Speaker 7: The black market.
Speaker 9: Extractors are not going to have any reasons to abide by OSHA standards.
Speaker 7: Unlike the newly sued the newly created to.
Speaker 6: State licenses. By excluding these these particular.
Speaker 9: Manufacturers from the market.
Speaker 7: Entirely under your ban, again, you're going to be forcing this sort of production either to other cities, meaning more.
Speaker 9: Revenue to them or to the black market. Banning extract encourages unsafe consumption.
Speaker 7: Methods as well. The safest way to consume medical.
Speaker 9: Cannabis is either in an edible format or three vaporized.
Speaker 7: Particular vaporized oil.
Speaker 9: I have an example of one right here that I that that I use. This is not something you can.
Speaker 7: Easily get high off of. I have tried.
Speaker 9: This is something akin to a morphine. To a morphine pump, if you want to think about it, providing a small dose titrated amount.
Speaker 7: To two patients who are experiencing severe pain but at the same time do not want to be intoxicated and incapable of performing their jobs. Additionally, you would be banning topicals entirely non psychoactive substances that would be applied to the skin and help people in extreme pain. Alice Huffman of the NAACP.
Speaker 9: Is is helping aid is support it and uses a product very similar to this.
Speaker 6: For her for her particular ailments. So then we get to a.
Speaker 9: Product liability issue by again, not providing the subject.
Speaker 6: The proper regulation.
Speaker 7: For this particular subject. One of the most popular substances on in this market you're going to be making. You're going to be guaranteeing that any customers for it, if they suffer from a product liability issue related to the concentrates, are not going to have any means for recovery at the tort level. You're going to be here again putting people in danger.
Speaker 9: Lastly, this is also an issue of discrimination. People who choose.
Speaker 7: To medicate in this particular way are usually from.
Speaker 9: Protected classes. These are people who are already suffering ailments or would be classified.
Speaker 7: Under the Americans, the Americans with Disabilities Act by denying them their medicine of choice.
Speaker 0: You're going to be forcing them on to.
Speaker 7: Pharmaceuticals, which again, debilitate them and deprive them of their ability to live. This is inviting litigation at the civil level. They can have a good day.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Good evening, Mayor Garcia and Council. My name is Lauren Mendelsohn. I am a resident of the third district. I am also a law student right now. And I have just a few assorted thoughts. First of all, I am a medical marijuana patient. I moved across the country from New Jersey to come to California so that I could legally medicate because I do not feel that I'm a criminal and I wanted to do it legally. I also am on a full ride to law school and I was able to achieve that while smoking cannabis every single day. So just in response to people who say it makes you lazy and don't go to school, that is completely false. Some people have motivation to do things. Some people don't. And whether or not you smoke marijuana will not change that. If anything, it's motivated me to go to law school. Ed In regards to Councilwoman Price's alternate motion. A few thoughts that would, you know, allow fewer operators, only seven total as opposed to nine. So you're limiting the amount of people who have opportunity. Also, just in general, there's all this talk of rogue dispensaries and how we have to tackle that problem before we have to go forward with legal dispensaries. I don't I don't think that's true. I mean, I think rogue dispensaries are always going to be a problem whether or not you have legal facilities. And I don't think that you should hold off on allowing potentially good operators to function in a legal environment just because there were bad actors in the past. And, you know, I also in regards to the comments warning earlier about a lot of people getting delivery. That's not always the case. As a patient, I can tell you I prefer to go to a storefront when you order delivery, you don't know what you're getting. It could be some stuff that you don't see the quality testing versus going to a store. You can have the opportunity. You shouldn't force these customers to do something that no other customer wants to do. Buyer of any other product can go to a store and choose what they want. You shouldn't make these customers treat them any differently. And I also just wanted to caution against the statements someone earlier made about cannabis causing cancer. The science there is really unclear as to whether it causes or whether it doesn't cause it. Studies have actually shown tumor reduction with cannabis treatment. So just don't just, you know, don't don't take that at its face, do your own research and do the science of these things. And I hope that Long Beach can serve as a model for other cities in the area and that we can move forward with progressive ordinance. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: Hello. Jeff Abrams, one Love Beach Club. Thank you so very much for pushing the ball forward. All of you. I really have to congratulate you. It is hard work, but the fact of the matter is that we have someone very close to us, county of Los Angeles, to just look to what's happening there. And I just don't read daily all the problems that seem to be in our minds here. I don't see anything happening in Colorado that's significant. And page one, I don't see anything happening in Lost in Los Angeles, page one. But I do have a couple of comments, if I may. Mayor, particularly in this talk about the delivery services that are available right now. If we're talking about codifying for and putting those as the legal, what do we do about the other 36 or more that we don't even know about? How do we collect taxes from them? Isn't that somewhat discriminatory? But also, I think, Councilman Richardson, you might have talked last time that I heard about Wal-Mart, hesitation about dispensaries being. I just don't think you understand the numbers involved in in Long Beach. It's way more than you think, way more. And I can tell you that with a certain amount of certainty. But if you would, let me just ask you that. When you have a harborside, you all know that name Harborside, 110,000 patients or more in Oakland, California, 110,000 single location. You are creating a self-fulfilling police centric policy because you will have lines out the store. Therefore, public nuisance. Therefore, police call there for enforcement efforts. And we've kind of gone backwards. So please, if you would, let's think about that Wal-Mart position. The rogue operations will cease immediately if Chief Luna assigns one patrolmen to stand outside of a rogue dispensary. How much does that cost? I estimated the cost. The city about 30,000 bucks a year, not 5.9 million, and all these millions of dollars. One cop in front of us, in front of a storefront will prohibit anybody from coming in there. Guaranteed. So I keep hearing comments at the behind the dais here, about a 10% tax. I was under the impression it was a 6% medical marijuana tax. Am I wrong? 6%, not 10%, because I heard 10% a couple of times being talked about. And lastly, I believe as I read through the ordinance, it does speak about banking. And as you know, please review that language in the proposed ordinance because it conflicts with the actual federal banking regulations. Right now, we cannot write you a check. We would like to write you a check, but we can't even bank at a significant bank. What I have proposed earlier is that we bank with your bank, city of Long Beach Bank. That way it can be very well identified. Cash in, cash out. Once again, I thank you so very much for pushing the ball forward.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: Thank you. My name is Libra. And the Park Estates Homeowner's Association representative and also the East Anaheim Street Business Alliance president. We have 500 businesses in our neighborhood. We have 600 residents. And there's a lot of statistics that I could give you. There's a lot of statistics that have been given. The fact of the matter is, I'm not against pot and people are using it. What I am against is people and dispensaries going to dispensaries. First of all, I'm really nervous being up here no matter how much I'm in charge of you guys are used to it. But if the biggest issue is that it's against the law and federal and federal law and that being the case. There's a lot of cash involved. There's a lot of cash that can't be used correctly. And that creates danger. And the danger, no matter what the statistics are, there is a fact of 6.9% nonviolent crime. What if one person is killed because somebody breaks into a pot place and it's been done with messengers. It's been done in other places. Colorado might not have an issue with it. Washington might not have an issue with it. But if it was your sister or brother. Or your cousin. It doesn't matter what the statistics are. One person killed is too much and the federal law prohibits it. I don't as long term, I don't know why this is being pushed. To go forward when there's so many problems that it can cut, then it can cause. And I don't bear anybody, any ill will to promote this. But it's dangerous and it can cause a problem. It can cause one problem for many people or many problems for for many other people. Thanks for your time.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: Sam Sams.
Speaker 7: As our first of all, the war on drugs is racist, and anybody advocating for a prohibition policies, especially from a prosecutorial position, is advocating for a racist war on drugs. The war on drugs has decimated many communities. Those communities.
Speaker 3: That have been.
Speaker 7: Destroyed, those families lives that have been destroyed, they know that the war on drugs does to them. They know what prosecuting and promulgating war on drugs does to the individual. And that's far more dangerous than the cannabis plant. Now, you guys have done a very good job trying to get us to this point. And I want to encourage you to look at another permitting mechanism or to like laboratory testing, for example. We'd love to help bring in laboratory testing facilities to ensure the quality of cannabis meets the standards for respect best practices, best manufacture, manufacturing practices, agricultural practices and laboratory tests in the city. You guys could offer permits for and get some more revenues for if you're looking for revenues from permitting the permitting process. From that same position, if you're looking for increasing revenues, offer us a manufacturing permit. We can't offer patients concentrates in any form and topical and non smokable and sublingual and all of the various forms of non smokable, including non psychoactive cannabis. None of that can be offered by our own facilities, with our own strains that we would grow if we don't have a manufacturing license, that we can show that we're following the best manufacturing practices, good manufacturing practices. So I'd like to encourage you to expand and zoom out from your approach, what you're trying to do so that we can find a solution at keeping drugs out of the hands of people who should not have them, and keeping lifesaving medicine in the hands of people who need it. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 6: Hey.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Sean Donohoe. I have some questions as well regarding the revenue calculations and the consultant that was hired, 800 active accounts. And I'm not quite sure what sort of a consultant is out there that has access to all of these accounts. And in any event, it would seem that the tax revenue calculations that are based for sort of the pan pay out don't take into account new newly available licenses to be issued that were not available prior to the passage of the Medical Marijuana Regulation and Safety Act at the state level. I know the state level really well. I worked for the California Cannabis Industry Association, presently local advisor to the California Growers Association, also assisting Ms.. Hoffman of California, Hawaii and ACP on many of the the task force issues that they're appearing over. I absolutely also agree with the on the problem with banning concentrates. One of the most used cannabinoid therapies is for children with epilepsy, intractable epilepsy. I don't think anybody is advocating causing those parents to put a joint in those kids mouths. But in effect, that's what you're doing here in furthering the the idea of creating manufacturing as well as distributor as well as other licenses. I see within the draft ordinance that it calls for a state permit to be held. Those state permits will not exist for two years. You need a local permit to acquire the state permit. So there's a catch 22 that's been created. I think I also commend moving forward on the dispensary, on the retail front. What we're doing in the city of Oakland, where I'm sort of appointed by the council president on our Cannabis Regulatory Commission, we've summed up frankly all that which is retail belongs in one ordinance. Anything that that is non-retail in nature up the supply chain, the distributor, the cultivator, the manufacturer, the accredited testing laboratory.
Speaker 9: It doesn't seem that that has the same.
Speaker 8: Sort of deleterious impact that that I've witnessed over the last two years being discussed much of what's been discussed, be they child care facilities, K-12. Um, and obviously the, the, the human trafficking corridors, those all seem to be a matter relating to public visiting these facilities.
Speaker 9: But if a medical marijuana.
Speaker 8: Facility, medical marijuana business is a facility that's not visited by the public at large, I'm not sure why all those sensitive use distance requirements are necessary. Again, the state requirement is only 600 feet from a K-12. I think a simple amendment would be would be possible if you made.
Speaker 9: That nine only only apply to retail locations. Frankly, that seems.
Speaker 8: To be after observing for the last two years where most of the concern has been about having a retail location.
Speaker 9: In your in your district, etc..
Speaker 8: So I would simply recommend deleting in all due course the ban on concentrate as well as applying the the restriction of nine sirups only to medical marijuana businesses engaged in retail.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Next speaker.
Speaker 6: Please.
Speaker 4: Shirley B'stard I address you as senior consultant, pastor for Swarm Group and Associates. I may be representing a host of other pastors who have failed to show up tonight, even though they showed up to light that Christmas tree and menorah Hanukkah candles last night. They failed to realize that the war that they were fighting was tonight. The Scriptures say the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. My father was 51 when I was born, and when I started being disciplined, the first law he laid down is I am the law of the House. I entered my adult life that way so that when the God of Israel asked me to work for work for the homeless, it was not what I want to do. It is God, what do you want me to do? And I'm following suit to that with that tonight at 55 age of 55. So Mr. Price, you said something regarding financial prudence and I commend you on your your got one to call it a dissertation but I had to make a note and say, what about spirit of prudence? Now I understand that not everybody has the same faith. I understand that. But to those of us who celebrate in December 25th, we have an obligation tonight. What are we standing for here? What are we still? What? One of the one of the movies I used to teach is New Jack City Rent, that it's time to pull it back out. And then you might want to get a point of no return. You might want to look at those two movies. And if the police can't handle your rogue operations, you've got a serious problem going on. Why am I here tonight? Because I heard that the pipe, the sewer pipe leaks started, the gas line lid started to blow off. Right. Then I said, Oh, it started when God gets ready to judge a city, when he gets ready to judge a nation, when he gets ready to judge a town or a person. He has to give them due, due process of warning. And he will give you a warning when you're overstepping a line that you should not overstep. I don't know who's voting. How you're voting tonight. I called Mr. Austin the office. I called Mr. Price's office, and I wanted to know. And I called someone else's office, and I wanted to know why they voted the way they voted. I believe that you should not move so fast just for financial consideration here. This city is not starving for money. And at the point you start making money off of marijuana and you put alcohol then and I'm not knocking it. I'm just saying at some point God is going to say enough and this stuff is going to start happening and you won't be able to explain why it's happening. I can. I serve this as a warning. Yes, I am.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 4: We must obey God's laws.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please. These are our last speakers. And we're going back to the council.
Speaker 6: City Council. Thanks for having me. My name is Chuck Brewer. I'm from the ninth District, and I've been here almost my entire adult life. Hmm. Interesting. You've had a couple of issues. Airport, El Nino, and all deals with quality of life and preparedness. I have to compliment Councilman Price. I think you've come up with a very good. Amendment. The current bill that was they came out with 45 pages of nuisances alone, says there's a problem. When I hear that. We could be so far away from a school district or from a resort 1500 feet away from a high school. But a thousand feet for a junior high. What does that mean? The junior hires don't have to walk so far. I mean, come on. Why do we have all these nuisances? Why do we have these issues? I am a firm believer in the strength of medical marijuana. Under the tone of medical marijuana. Why are we eliminating this nuisance to be away from? Child cares. I don't understand that. Does it make sense to me? I'm going to say child care. Little ones should be exposed to it. But the high school kids only 1500 feet away. The whole thing just doesn't make sense to me. Sort of. My councilwoman, I would say. Stacey, please go ahead. Support this amendment. Under the basis that it is serving those who have medical needs. Tell us about Orson. I'm going to leave you with just a small story. I am a realtor. I travel this entire city and more cities. Lakewood. Does not have this. They've banned it. I think they're pretty smart about it. But in your council, I had a piece of property that I was representing. And in it, it was a commercial piece that was prime for the for a dispensary. I received three phone calls as the agent regarding could we. And use this as a dispensary. We will pay extra for it. They they saw dollars. And in the runners, it wasn't for medical needs. It was for recreation. Because I said, well, I'll tell you what, I'll take it to the owner. He's an ex-cop, retired cop. You know what I heard at the end of the line? Click. They have no desire to do anything but look towards us as a recreational piece. I don't think we need that in our city. I think we need to take care of those who need it for medical purposes. I'm a firm believer the delivery plate is good. So here's my final thought. We have four police stations. Let's put it next to each one of those stations and for those people who do not want it in their district. Put it put your vote to your district to the next election. Do you want it in our district? And if District nine says no, Stacey, you know how to vote.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir.
Speaker 6: Thank you. Next speaker. Hi. My name is Scott Montgomery from District five. Real short. I think mispriced your proposal is wonderful. It's not exactly what I want. I'm going the other way. But I think it's a it's the right step to start. Let's follow through to do the due diligence, check the money, check the flow, check the records, do all of that. Stacey, please support it. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Final speaker.
Speaker 7: Good evening, honorable mayors, city council and various city departments. We appreciate the City Council's thoughtful deliberation on the topic of medical cannabis and the opportunity to collaborate with the city to create a fair and balanced regulation. Since the ban went into effect in August of 2012, we have organized on behalf of the qualified patients, stakeholders and voters to advocate for safe access. After three years of study sessions and debate. We are thankful that the idea of finalizing an ordinance is finally here, being reviewed and hopefully approved tonight. This is a win for patients and the community as a whole as we look back in the rearview mirror in a few years from today. The ordinance in front of the city council has a fundamental flaw and direction, and I don't believe it's from the study sessions conducted or the long debates, but only from the ideology and stigma that is associated with marijuana. Not in my backyard. We need to protect the children. We need to protect the community from marijuana. The stigma and ideology is exactly what is keeping a good, balanced policy to be established, which will actually protect the community and the youth. Trying to keep this issue in the closet or turning a blind eye to best practices is wrong. We have patients and veterans demanding access to cannabis. We have hundreds of good paying jobs at risk. Tax revenues that have been understated. A black market, which is the true public safety issue at hand. Minority groups being jailed and kept from basic rights like applying for a job. Lastly, thousands of voters that are tired of the failed war on marijuana spending, millions of much needed tax dollars on enforcement and courts. The state legislation has implemented a robust system to regulate. Let's do the same here in Long Beach. In regards to Councilmember Price's motion, completely appreciate the tolerance regarding.
Speaker 6: Um.
Speaker 7: You know, deliveries. But in all the reality, it will not be able to captured.
Speaker 6: The.
Speaker 7: Market because it's happening every single day here with these deliveries. And it's not being regulated and it's not being tax rights, and it won't even begin to capture the legal markets. With that being said, Please supports the main motion in Vice Mayor Leo Anthony's motion and hopefully review that nine will be in place. And if it does turn out that it's a nuisance because the supply does not meet the demand. Please be swift in reviewing you guys as policy. Thank you very much, guys.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And I want to thank everyone that spoke on this issue from all sides. Important issue that the council's been discussing. Take this back to the council where we have a substitute motion on the floor which will take a vote on first. Which Councilwoman Price. This is Councilman Price's motion, which he described right before public comment. And so that is that is the motion that's on the floor. And so there's no other comment, which I don't see. We're going to go and take a vote on that motion and.
Speaker 11: Make it a point of clarification. Yes, sir. On that, we have the cultivation component in that piece already.
Speaker 5: Channing is that it was your amendment that we adopt the cultivation regulations so that if we adopt regulation in the future, those regulations would carry the day in terms of those businesses.
Speaker 12: Great.
Speaker 0: Okay. So we're going to go ahead. You have a question, please, Councilman.
Speaker 9: Just quickly. What are the zoning requirements on this motion? Where could those four? Where can they be located? Councilmember the four. The four in the motion. Where would they be located? Is there still a per district cap?
Speaker 5: Well, there's only four.
Speaker 9: I don't want four to land in the ninth district. Yeah. So is there still for the per district? Yeah.
Speaker 5: No more than one per district.
Speaker 9: Just clarify. Just clarify.
Speaker 0: Okay. There's a there's a motion and an a second on this motion. Members, please go and cast your votes on Councilman Price's motion.
Speaker 10: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Okay. Motion carries. So that's. That's a councilman price motion. Motion carries. Thank you all for for coming out. And again, just just as a reminder, what's going to happen here is this this creates a ordinance that will come back to the council as soon as the city attorney is able to put the ordinance together for discussion and approval at that point, correct. Mr.. Mr.. Mays. Okay. Thank you. We're going to go and going to write right to the next item. Madam Clerk. | Ordinance | WITHDRAWN
Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by adding Chapter 21.66; and by repealing Chapter 5.89, all relating to Medical Marijuana; declaring the urgency thereof and declaring that this ordinance shall take effect immediately, read and adopted as read. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12082015_15-1253 | Speaker 10: Item 12. Communication from Councilman Andrews. Councilwoman Gonzalez. Vice Mayor Lowenthal. Recommendation to request the city manager to direct staff to implement the Sixth District Trail of Infinite Hope.
Speaker 6: Okay.
Speaker 0: Please go ahead, Mr. Andrews.
Speaker 6: Okay.
Speaker 0: Let's just keep going. Guys, we just got. Please keep it down on the linguine.
Speaker 6: I think.
Speaker 7: You. Mayor, we have a we have created a very unique walking trail that will not only highlight the city of Long Beach, but focus on the central area as well.
Speaker 6: The walking path will identify unique landmarks within a six digit community. It is designed.
Speaker 7: To raise awareness of our community and to encourage others to keep hope alive. I will be calling the Sixth District Trail of Infinite Hope, which is named after one of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Famous quotes that reminds us that we can we can't accept disappointment, but we must never lose definite hope and hope. My friends, is what removed the blight at its core. To explain this item in more detail, I would like to ask my staff member, John Edmonds, to give a small presentation.
Speaker 6: Since he's down, probably eating. We will move on. Oh, here he is. I thought he was gone.
Speaker 1: Okay. Right.
Speaker 6: Okay. Sorry. No presentation. Would you smoke, please?
Speaker 1: Yes. Oh, yes. Yeah. Please.
Speaker 6: I'd like to move to approve this item, please.
Speaker 0: Is any public comment on the item? CNN members, please go and cast your vote. I'm sorry, but you're doing a presentation. No. No presentation. Okay. Members discussion. Cast your vote.
Speaker 10: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Okay. Item number are we do item we're going to the a couple of the liquor licenses that they've been requests. So I, I think it's 15.
Speaker 10: Report from financial management. Recommendation to adopt resolution authorizing the formation of a Joint Powers Authority with the Housing Authority of Long Beach Citywide. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Manager to direct staff to implement the 6th District Trail of Infinite Hope. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12082015_15-1265 | Speaker 10: Do you want to go back to item 14? Yes. Report from Financial Management Recommendation to award a contract to Fleming Environmental for the construction of an above ground storage tank field site at the West Police substation. For a total contract amount not to exceed $708,000. District seven.
Speaker 2: Can we have a second, sir? Thank you. Is there a staff report.
Speaker 7: Please? Manager Dan Berlin.
Speaker 6: Good evening, Mayor Garcia and members of council. This project is to award a contract for the replacement of an underground fuel storage tank at the West Santa Fe Avenue substation with an aboveground tank and system. The tank is due for a replacement based on its age and condition. The project includes associated piping, fuel dispensers, alarm and monitoring equipment. The Fleet Services Bureau manages the fuel program for city vehicles, which includes both U.S. cities, which are underground storage tanks, as well as aboveground storage tanks or Estes. Whenever possible, we seek to replace a USB system with an AC to use. These are less expensive to build and to operate due to their simpler design. There are also less regulated in the case of West PD. We work closely with the police department to ensure the tank would meet their needs in terms of size, location and functionality. This tank will be a larger tank to allow for emergency storage of fuel in this part of town. 3000 gallons larger. And it provides unleaded fuel through four dispensers and nozzles available for use. 24 seven. The system is due for replacement this year under our Schedule Tank Infrastructure program and also is only 50% operational currently due to a piping problem that cannot be repaired and must be replaced. The Tank infrastructure program is funded through regular collection of funds from city departments using fuel for their vehicles. Funds are available in Fleet Sub Fund for fuel system capital improvements. That concludes my presentation. I'm available to answer questions.
Speaker 0: Any public comment on the item? CNN. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 6: Thank you.
Speaker 10: Motion carries. | Contract | Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. ITB FS15-151 and award a contract to Fleming Environmental, Inc., of Fullerton, CA, for the construction of an above-ground storage tank fuel site at the West Police Substation, in the amount of $623,314, plus a 25 percent contingency in the amount of $155,828, for a total contract amount not to exceed $779,142; authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to enter into the contract, including any necessary amendments thereto; and
Increase appropriations in the Fleet Services Fund (IS 386) in the Financial Management Department (FM) by $480,000. (District 7) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12012015_15-1216 | Speaker 1: Report from Public Works recommendation to receive supporting documentation, including the petitions into the record. Conclude the public hearing and request the City Attorney to prepare an amendment to the Long Beach Municipal Code to establish preferential Parking District AC as recommended by the City Traffic Engineer District seven.
Speaker 0: Assistant City Manager Mollica.
Speaker 6: Thank you, Vice Mayor, again. The staff presentation will be given by Ora Malloy and our Director of Public Works.
Speaker 9: Vice Mayor Lowenthal, tall and honorable council members. The item before you is a similar item as hearing. Number one, there is a request to establish a permit parking district in Council District seven permit permit permit district called AC. So the residents of the west side of Cherry Avenue between Roosevelt Road and Marshall Place and Marshall Place between Cherry Avenue and Gardenia Avenue, has requested the establishment of a new professional parking district to seek on street parking relief due to overflow parking generated by employees of businesses located along the east side of Cherry Avenue. The residents have also requested that a 30 minute parking restriction from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. Monday through Sunday except holidays be established within the proposed permit parking district permit parking study was concluded was conducted by staff during the peak periods of activity on Cherry and it was revealed that 75% of existing on street parking spaces within a two block area were occupied at the time of the survey were that was the first test. In addition, we determined that 59% of the vehicles parked were not from the residents and from the outside of the neighborhood. A petition formally requesting the establishment with a 30 minute parking restriction was received by the city, a copy of it which is attached as Exhibit A. We conducted the review of the petition. It showed that 76% of the residents are in favor of implementing a permit parking district and the proposed parking restrictions in order to prevent parking spillover in the blocks adjacent to the proposed permit parking district. The city traffic engineer is proposing to expand the district to include several other streets. The streets are Cherry Avenue, Gardenia Avenue, Roosevelt Road and Bixby Road. Residents of these streets were informed of the proposal by mail and feedback was requested. These streets in the proposal expansion will not include signage or parking restriction at this time. However, by including the streets in the permit parking district, the residents could request parking restrictions in the future. Through a well-supported petition, the city traffic engineer has reviewed the results of the parking study, the resident petition and the feedback responses from the mailing, and has determined that the area qualifies for establishment of a permanent permit district. This concludes my report and we're here to answer any questions.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Mr. Malloy and Councilmember Turanga. Okay. Is there any member of the public that wishes to address Council on hearing item two? This is on the parking. Please come forward and state your name.
Speaker 11: Good evening and thank you for listening. My name's Rama. Cool. I live at 3959 Cherry Avenue and been there for the past 30 years. It's only been within the last three years that we've had the parking situation. That's why we haven't been involved asking for this sooner. Some of the problems that have arised is if you move your car, there's no place to come back to. The other thing is, is it employees that are parking on that street are now jaywalking across Cherry to get to their prospective business openings. And it's going to come down to where somebody is going to get killed out here on that street. They just come out of those bushes and there's been more than once that somebody is almost run over somebody. So we need to do something. And I think this is the right way to do it that we can get. The owners of the companies to understand. They got to work with their employees for the parking and try to get them on that safe side of the street for them. There's not much else I can say to stop. You guys go with it and it'd be great for us. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir.
Speaker 1: Hi. My name is Cynthia Hindu. Burka and I have resided in the seventh District for 34 years. I have investment properties on Cherry It be south of Bixby. I became informed about this over the next door neighbor website when people were talking over the holidays about this meeting coming up. Up until this point, I have not been notified that this was an issue or being brought to the city council of this permit parking. Although my addresses for my investment properties are not included in that, I am very concerned about the over spillage that will come down cherry and affect my property as well. That car dealers that are across the street from my properties. Whenever my tenants have complained about the people parking there, they've always been very responsive in moving their cars. But I am very concerned that that property owners all along the frontage of Cherry were not notified. I also find other discrepancies about the signage that happens on Cherry. It seems like from north of Bixby to Carson on Cherry, they're allowed to park on the wrong side of the street, only during sweeps street sweets tripping days. But the rest of cherry is not allowed to do that. And I'd like to know why the neighborhoods are separated like that, why one part is getting attention and the other part is not getting attention with street sweeping and this preferential parking. My understanding from listening to the next door neighbors talk about this is that not they're not aware of the fact that the property owners are the ones that have to pay for this permit parking and that a lot of those homes are rentals. And so as property owners, we did not know about that. That means that any fees are going to come across, are coming to us, not to the renters. So I don't know where I can get more information on this or, you know, how all the property owners are going to be made aware of this because all a cherry is affected.
Speaker 0: So I can certainly have staff touch base with you, Mr. Malloy, and after the presentation will either speak with you directly or send one of his staff members to speak with you.
Speaker 1: Okay.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Okay. So your greatest concern was notification.
Speaker 1: Notification.
Speaker 4: And the.
Speaker 1: Spillage of the employees that are going to continue to park down the other parts of cherry because it's still the frontage. Okay. Understood.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Sir.
Speaker 11: My name is Mark Helmke. I'm a 25 year resident of the the area that you describe. Unfortunately, I am on the next street. I'm on Rose. I'm not on gardening and I'm not on Cherry. So in the earlier in the earlier presentation, one of the gentlemen made a big point of saying that Lakewood Village had preferential parking . And then what happened was the parking situation just migrated to the south. Well, the students that parking in the in the previous district, they're students. They have an option to park in the parking structures. And it's more secure. It's safer for all the reasons that were identified. My question to the council is. Just like squeezing a balloon. If we're going to put permits, if we're going to require permits to park on Cherry and Gardenia, why are we doing that? If it's to accommodate employees of surrounding businesses that have been there as long as we have? They're not going to go on the other side of the they're not going to go on to the rail yard where the lumber is. They're just going to come further and deeper into the neighborhood. It's just like squeezing a balloon in the middle. The air doesn't go out of it. It just moves to a different area. So it seems to me that the issue is not. Permitting the parking. It seems to me the issue is revising the zoning to require parking. Of the businesses that are there for their employees on the southwest corner, Cherry and Carson, there's a there's a U-Haul that's been there 25 years. It's full of U-Haul trucks. The people that rent the trucks park in the neighborhood, the people that attend that work at the businesses on the east, on the west side of Cherry I'm sorry, on the east side of Cherry, if they're not already provided parking, where are they going to go? Not on Cherry if it's permitted, not on Gardenia if it's permitted. But they're going to come to my house. So I think it has to be a greater picture that you have to take into account. The other thing is, is that I got several notices in the last couple, three weeks, and every single one of them, the area that was bounded, was incorrectly indicated as clerk. So I think that a little more needs to be done with regard to serving others in the neighborhood and and the notification this needs to be, I think, continued to another date.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Any other members of the public that wish to address the Council on this item.
Speaker 1: I'm not a resident, Shirley Brassard, but I have service that area in the last three, four years for the homeless population. And just listening to this discussion tonight, I don't get the feeling that it has been thought out. You're addressing college students for Cal State, for Lombard City College, which is on Clark. As you walk down, Carson, you run right into Clark Avenue and then to stretch that permit all the way to Cherry Avenue. I don't believe you have very many students except those who live near Cherry Avenue, who are walking from Cherry to Clark to get to school. That seems like a very large area to ask people to have permits to park. And to use the school as as the reason why it seems like you're separating your community where in the long run it's going to backfire in some way. This just doesn't sound right. If I'm asking council members, have you walked the circumference or driven the circumference of area that's being entertained here from Cherry Avenue to Clark?
Speaker 2: You're confusing.
Speaker 0: That's your. Mike's not on, but it's. It's a separate motion. Okay. Yes, but thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Hello.
Speaker 0: I wasn't really going to come.
Speaker 8: Out here and speak, but none of our group, they are getting cameras or whatever, so I'm going to.
Speaker 2: Speak for them. Um.
Speaker 8: My name is Linda Rendell. My address used to be 3923 Cherry Avenue. My mom's lived there. There she is right there since 1965. And what the main problem is, what we're trying to say is the residents in front of the service street right there on Cherry. They have no place to park. I go over there a lot and there's no place to park during the daytime.
Speaker 12: My mom goes to the grocery store.
Speaker 2: There's no place to park where.
Speaker 8: She can, you know, park in the middle of the street and take her groceries inside. So we don't have driveways, we only have an alley. And that's clogged up, too. So what we're just trying to say is it's been like three years now. It's the Volkswagen Place across the street and they do have lots in the back where their employees can park. So there is the businesses over there. They have they don't have to park on cherry. They have parking area in their lots. And there and and like my neighbor said, they are walking across Cherry Avenue in the middle of traffic. And if you've ever been down Cherry, it's very congested and they just walk into traffic and something is going to happen if they don't. And the police, they don't seem to to care if they jaywalk. So I'm just kind of speaking for them and they've been trying to do this for a long time now, and I hope you guys pull with them.
Speaker 0: And since you're representing the group. Yes, we do. It's not that hard, guys, to get up there and talk. And you're doing beautifully. So are you. Would you say that the group is in support of the motion? Yes.
Speaker 2: Oh, yes, very much so.
Speaker 0: I just want to be sure you're reflecting there.
Speaker 8: Yeah.
Speaker 0: They're not there's.
Speaker 8: Not as many as we wanted to show up, but yeah, we're in support of it, so.
Speaker 0: Thank you, guys. Thank you. And I appreciate that. This is probably the first time each of you has spoken before city council and you did wonderfully. And. And that's that's what civic participation is about coming out for the things that matter to you. I am going to if there are no further if there is no further public comment, I'd like to turn it behind the dais. Councilmember Urunga.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Vice Mayor. Mr. Malone, could you summarize again the issue that we are being faced with tonight? I think there's some confusion out there as to what this proposal does for the community, for Cherry Street. Jerry. I mean.
Speaker 9: Absolutely honorable. You rung up the item before you. It's similar to item number one. I think there's a confusion that we're talking about a huge geographical area. The question the area that's in question is Cherry Avenue for two blocks between Bixby and Roosevelt and Roosevelt to Marshall. This is in front of the car dealership. The residents were requesting that a permit parking be established in order to prevent the employees of this dealership parking in front of their homes. We have gone one step beyond and as one of the gentlemen explained about the squeezing the balloon. We know that there could be some spillway. We're proposing that we expand the the permit parking zone, one more block all the way to Gardena. And this this will allow for future residents in if they feel that there is parking problems in front of their homes, they can request the petition. We need to receive minimum. Well, there are two tests that we do in order to establish a permit parking zone. One is that 75% of spaces has to be occupied. When we do the survey. So that means at the peak hours, whatever the peak permit, peak parking is, there has to be 75% of all available parking on that street occupied. And second test is 50% of those vehicles have to be outside of that neighborhood. We will check the license plates for each car. And if 50% or.
Speaker 11: More.
Speaker 9: Are parkers outside of that neighborhood, then this qualifies for a permit parking district. So we also have to recognize that these are single family homes. They all should have parking spaces in their garages and their driveways. So it gets very difficult to justify in most districts a permit parking zone. So this this district qualified, which is on cherry, we also we asked the neighbors to participate if they want to expand this, but they're not going to have any signage. They don't have to pay for it. It will be only for residents that are facing on cherry that will pay if they want to have a parking space reserved. But residents on Gardena don't have to do anything at this point. They don't have to pay for any permits. If they choose to expand their district, then it's administrative. We don't have to come to city council because you're establishing the district. We have to establish that first. That 50% or more of parkers are not residents and 75% of spaces are occupied during our peak parking area. I don't know if I explained or clarified the issue that you asked.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think that basically that in summary, the affected parking spots that we're talking about are on Cherry Avenue. There's no spillage into the neighbors neighboring streets. I'm Gardenia or Rose. It's basically the most affected area is on Cherry. Now, we did hold a number of community meetings, including the residents along that Cherry Avenue, including the business owners at the car dealerships across the street. We did talk about the parking situation in regards to their employees being having access to parking in their own facility. And that was addressed. However, there was the number of employees based on the number of parking spots available within their their business area, their locations. It was not enough. So there were there is a spillage and that affected the neighborhoods. And that's where and that's what brought us to today. So I want to thank you, first of all, Mr. Malloy, and for facilitating these meetings, and also Hector Rivas and Ignacio Ochoa for also working with our office and working with the neighbors and with the businesses to address this issue for you residents who are here tonight. Thank you for your patience. I know it's been an arduous journey to get to this point. This has been a problem for a number of years now. This is a point where we're hoping it will address your concerns with parking and that the contentious situation that we have with those businesses throughout the street will, if not go away, at least be minimized to to a very low, low point where there's practically nothing there. So I do ask that my council colleagues support this motion and that we're able to move forward with this in. And finally, I want to also congratulate. Aaron Malloy in on his appointment to the city of Pasadena. This is his last council meeting here tonight. Very good report. Although you had to do it twice, but that's okay. Sometimes these could get confusing. And I want to thank you for being here tonight, this evening, for sharing your thoughts on this very important issue to you . Thank you.
Speaker 0: Are we clapping that he's leaving?
Speaker 1: Heck, no.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember. You're on it. Councilman Austin, would you like to address this motion? Councilman Austin. Would you? Did you want to address the motion? You're the seconder. No, that's okay. Thank you. Thank you. Members of the public, for your comments. And members, cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And we are at the time where we take public comment. I have six speakers who have signed up. Kenneth Roth. | Public Hearing | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation, including the petitions, into the record, conclude the public hearing, and request City Attorney to prepare an amendment to the Long Beach Municipal Code, to establish Preferential Parking District “AC” as recommended by the City Traffic Engineer. (District 7) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12012015_15-1246 | Speaker 1: Communication from Councilwoman Gonzalez. Councilmember Ranga recommendation to join by signing the amicus brief prepared and filed by Cities United for Immigration Action.
Speaker 0: Council member, Urunga.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Nice Mary Little and thank you. Got a woman who needs all this. Put her say now to the side as well. I know it sounds cliche and it probably is, but we know that this country is a country of immigrants. We are a nation comprised of people who have come here to break away from repressive governments and dictatorships. We have come who have come simply here to build a better life, a better future for themselves and for their families. As I look around the days at my colleagues, I see immigrants, children of immigrants, naturalized citizens and individuals whose commitment to public service is only surpassed by their love for this country. And as I look out into the audience. I see individuals whose willingness to participate in civic engagement to be here tonight is only surpassed by the knowledge that they had the ability to exercise their right to free speech. To add their voices to the public debate that is present in this item. I commend you and I welcome you. There is a group of individuals, however, who are not as easily encouraged in this debate, engaged in this debate, nor who are as well. Of course, I am speaking about the 4 million people who will be subject to deportation because of their undocumented status. I want to be clear. Without an effective policy towards immigration reform, this debate will continue ad nauseam. In short, this motion request that the City Council enter into an amicus brief to stave off a draconian policy that will result in unintended consequences of deportation of millions of people and what it will have to this economy, to stability of our country, and to the break up of millions of families along the way. There is a better way towards immigration reform. Texas versus the United States is not that path to take. Therefore, I asked my colleagues on the council to please join me and Councilmember Gonzalez and the hundreds of other municipalities and jurisdictions in supporting the amicus brief. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 4: Yes. I want to thank everyone who's here tonight gratis at all those photos that are kiko nosotros is the is the no check. Mr. Milagros. Yes, I too want to just reiterate everything that Councilmember Ranga said. I think it's a, I feel very proud to be part of this city because we do invite many of our immigrant families to be a part of the civic participation process, as many of them are here myself, as a daughter of an immigrant mother, very proud to be in a city that is has taken a stance. A few things that we've done. Earlier this year, the Long Beach City Council adopted a federal legislative agenda item that included the following statement. It was a support to support comprehensive immigration reform that will provide a dignified path to United States citizenship, strengthen the nation's workforce and the economy. Secondly, we also led a citywide resolution in support of comprehensive immigration immigration reform this past summer, supported by all of our councilmembers and our mayor. Tonight, hopefully, we can be a part of this amicus brief to basically show not only ourselves here, but many other cities, as well as many other nations as well, that we are certainly part of this process to allow people to be who they are, who are immigrants. But much more than that, people who work very hard in our city and beyond, people who have been here for many years, have paid many taxes, who raise their children here, who go to school and who just want to learn and earn a good living. A few numbers that I wanted to share with people. So as many of us know, we're a very diverse city. We're 40.8% Latino, 29.4% Caucasian, 13% African-American, 12.6% Asian and 1.1% Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander. 86% of children in America born to immigrant parents are U.S. born. 12 121 billion. That's total net business income is generated through immigrant businesses, and 11.8 billion in taxes are paid by Latino and Asian individuals. And I'm sorry, Latino and Asian in the U.S. have 2.1 trillion in purchasing power. Those are pretty stark numbers. And I just wanted to throw those out. I know many of us know the demographics here in the city, but it's really important for us to kind of re relook at this as as we look at this larger immigration reform issue. And so I hope our council colleagues can support us on this. I think it's something that Councilmember Suranga and myself have been very strong in supporting, but also will be the voice continuously throughout for many of you. So thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember Richardson.
Speaker 3: Thanks, Vice Mayor. I just want to chime in and and express my support for this as well. You know, we did at this our at our supported the federal legislative committee. And I think it's only appropriate that we support. I think and was reasonable approach by our president. And so I think we are sort of just restating that commitment that we made it fit large in time and time again. So count on me and support on this and I look forward to seeing the brief. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Councilwoman Pryce.
Speaker 4: Thank you. I, too, want to thank my colleagues for bringing this forward. I do have a question for our city attorney. I'm wondering, could you enlighten us a little bit about what the legal process would be from here on out in terms of our action and then the broader action of the brief?
Speaker 6: Certainly, vice mayor, members of the city council, tonight's action would allow the city of Long Beach to sign on an amicus brief in the case of Texas versus the United States. That case involves 26 states challenged DAPA, the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents Program and the the states sued to prevent the implementation of DAPA for on three grounds. One was that DAPA violated procedural requirements of the Administrative Procedural Act. Second, that the states claim that the DHS, the Department of Homeland Security, lacked the authority to implement this program. And third, that the this was DAPA is an abrogation of the president's constitutional duties. And so that case, as Councilman Turanga has indicated, has been ruled on in the Fifth Circuit. And this item tonight would allow us and it's being appealed so that the city of Long Beach would sign on an amicus brief in support of the government's position that the program is consent. The powers were not abrogated and that it is consistent with the authority of the Department of Homeland Security that we anticipate that this case will be heard by the Supreme Court and our amicus brief would be filed in the Supreme Court at some point.
Speaker 4: And when we're signing on, are we actually augmenting by providing any pleadings as a city, or are we signing on to someone else's pleadings?
Speaker 6: The latter. The city of Long Beach would not be and our office would not be preparing the amicus briefs. The amicus brief is being prepared and we would sign on as a signatory to their amicus brief.
Speaker 4: Great. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Councilman Austin.
Speaker 15: Thank you. And I'll be short. I will support this this item. And we stand with thousands of Long Beach residents who are immigrants and who are of immigrant families. I want to keep those families together. I want to support our president. I think his executive action was was was right. And this council council's already taken a position. And so I think we join with dozens of other cities in signing on to this amicus brief. It's the right thing to do. So thank you.
Speaker 0: And Councilman Andrews.
Speaker 12: Yes. Thank you, vice mayor. You know, I think a lot of times I think a lot of people read in the paper about what you like, what you dislike about your president. And I think this time he got it and he got it right, because the fact that no one wants to be separated from their families, you know, I totally, you know, support this item that you brought to the floor. Thank you very much, Mr. Ewing. And. Lena. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Andrews. So any member of the public that wishes to address council on this item. Please come forward. State your name.
Speaker 12: Very good you. Clark, is the address in full disclosure, when I first read this, my the factory senses kicked in, told me that our mayor was looking forward to taking another junket, this one down to New Orleans where the case will be heard. We are a nation of immigrants. Half of my family were immigrants. Where you came from, what country is irrelevant, period? This, however, is extraordinarily dangerous. Well, you heard today faint echoes of the hosannas that were sung in this chamber. About two months ago, less than two months ago, about legions of people streaming across our borders that would come from different countries, etc., etc.. All right. Separation of families is a bogus issue. They need not be all they have to do. All the government has to do is do what Eisenhower did, and they can escort those families that want to leave. Or be together that are here illegally. Escort them back to the country from where they came to the American consulate. Walked them down to the end of the line. The people that are waiting legally and had them explain why they should be allowed to come in just like. That person up there at the end of the line might want to come up and stand here instead of waiting, period. It is disingenuous to say there's no cost to this. The cost will be enormous. We can't afford to pave our streets. And you want to invite the world in. Because, you know. Once they get here. They will get the checks. And hopefully your vote. It's surprising the number of people, the talent, the fact that they have a Ph.D. but don't understand. And we'll share with our colleagues why what led to the collapse of the Roman Empire and every other civilization since that period of time? You follow the law. Allowing these people in is like allowing somebody to rob a bank and say, Well, he did it for good cause he had to feed his family. He was doing this. It's a the law is they've got to come in a certain way. If they're not here, they're illegal. If they choose to stay, it's their decision to separate themselves. Nobody is forcing them to do that, that the United States government will be more than happy to walk them back to where they came from. And to say otherwise is disingenuous. You have a moral obligation. Your oath of office requires you to reject this.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Mr. Good.
Speaker 12: Thank you. Good evening, City Council.
Speaker 2: My name is Alex Montano. Yes, I.
Speaker 12: Live in the First District and I'm a community organizer with the Filipino Migrant Center. There are over 20,000 Filipinos in this city and over 4 million Filipinos nationwide. It's estimated that one out of four Filipinos in the U.S. may be undocumented, with the highest concentration of Filipinos living in Southern California. The Filipino Migrant Center has been serving.
Speaker 2: Filipino immigrant.
Speaker 12: Workers, youth families in Long Beach and the greater Los Angeles area for the past five years. We've served undocumented immigrants who are victims of human trafficking, survivors of domestic violence, low wage caregivers and hotel housekeepers and struggling youth and families. The Filipino Migrant Center celebrates the collective courage and unwavering fighting spirit of undocumented immigrant communities, community organizations and supporters across the United States who have worked tirelessly to protect the human rights of 11 million.
Speaker 2: Undocumented.
Speaker 12: Immigrants and challenge the mass unjust deportations and separation of hardworking immigrant families. We will stand against the continued criminalization of immigrant communities whose only crime is to make difficult sacrifices to put food on their families tables, provide a good education and a better future for their children. We'll continue to challenge narratives of deserving and undeserving immigrants that only aim to divide our communities. The Filipino Migrant Center strongly supports the city of Long Beach, signing on to the amicus brief prepared by Cities United for Immigration Action. Signing on to this brief shows that the City of Long Beach stands with its diverse.
Speaker 2: Immigrant residents and all those who support President Obama's executive action on.
Speaker 12: Immigration through DOCA end up as expansion programs. We'd like to thank.
Speaker 2: Councilwoman Gonzalez, Councilman Aranda and all those who are here in support of this. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 7: But that's not just me. None of it. So me on the immigrants.
Speaker 11: Good night. My name is Elizabeth. I'm a member of the Long Beach Immigrant Rights Coalition.
Speaker 7: I'd be one of your winners that I know of when you.
Speaker 11: I'm also a resident of the First District. I came here eight years ago.
Speaker 7: The when you look in memory then. In accordance with Google's promiscuous ethical program that panels beneficiary mutual mutual.
Speaker 11: And like everyone else, I came here with a lot of dreams of having a better life and looking for.
Speaker 6: Better educational opportunities for.
Speaker 11: My children. I have two children who are citizens, so that would mean I would qualify for the DAPA program.
Speaker 7: See the program. It is cyrano beneficiary of the Machado Trabalhos imagery soil does continue to be the.
Speaker 11: If this program would exist, it would benefit us. Myself and my husband a lot. We would have better work. And because of better work, we would also have better wages.
Speaker 7: As a compendium of programs under the moral deportation. Ethan. Air separation, then, is just familiar. Asi como mi familia. I know. Even if I sit down with just family. This.
Speaker 11: We would also be free of fear of deportation. And just like how we would be free of fear of deportation.
Speaker 6: We would also want to see this for all the residents of the city of Long Beach.
Speaker 1: Thank you.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 1: Immigrants have had a bad image because of some.
Speaker 0: Activists you name.
Speaker 1: I'm introducing myself later on. My name is you. It's Garcia.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 1: If we really think about it, immigrants aren't bad at all. We fail to realize that we all come from a line of immigrants, from farming to making products for the U.S. We hope this land grow and prosper and it would harm this country if we got rid of them. I am here to Garcia, a junior at Renaissance High School and a youth organizer with Californians for Justice, a grassroot organization that believes that youth and students are the leaders of the future. I am a mexican American, born and raised here. But my parents were immigrants. They worked hard in this country to keep themselves and our family going and sustained. If we get rid of these people, things won't circulate the same way. Yeah, there will be more job openings. But how many people are actually qualified to do those jobs? Are they willing to do what they do? But why would this matter to me? If immigrants get deported, then I would lose my main support. My best friend, my sister. She is one of the most important people in my life and I'm not ready to see her go. She was there for me since day one. I finally got her back in my life for five years after she moved out when she was 17 or 18. I look up to her and thanks to her I have had my life on track and I do better because I cannot disappoint the person I care most about. I want to help make her life better. She has three kids. Two haven't even started kindergarten yet. And the oldest is in fifth grade. They love her dearly and are always around her, smiling, laughing and caring on her last nerve. But she loves them the same way as these people. Are these people really ready to break up a loving family? I would be dead right now if it wasn't for her. Honestly. This is my story. A story of a little girl who might lose her best friend. Because all the ugly opinions of immigrants because people don't see the impact she has made in people's lives in my life. We need to see each other as humans. Strip the labels off and show love towards one another because no one is illegal. Hello. My name is Sandy Garcia. I'm a junior, a renaissance high school. I know you've organized with Californians for justice. Undocumented immigrants should have a pathway to residency and citizenship. Immigrants have shaped this country in many ways from the beginning. Our ancestors immigrated to this country. Immigrants fought for our independence. And today they helped the economy. My parents were also undocumented immigrants, as well as my aunts and uncles. My mom's worked hard for as long as she's been here. About five years ago, my father abandoned us and was deported back to Mexico. He left my mom as a single mother working minimum wage to support me and both my handicapped brothers. Today, my mother my mother has fought and won for her residency here in the U.S.. She's now learning English to become a full time nurse, and she's inspired me and been there for me through everything and inspired many people to how she's lived her life here. If she had been deported, I don't know where I would be today. I don't know how life would be for myself and for many people. Words can describe the loss of a loved one as I felt when I lost my dad. And I can't imagine how I would be now and how would I be feeling if I lost both of them. But that's the case for many people. They lost both their mother and her father because they're deported. We can't let families be torn apart. That's why undocumented immigrants should be given a pathway towards residency and citizenship. Thank you. Good evening, city council members. My name is Alejandro Campos and I reside in the second district. I have been living in Long Beach since I was two years old, and even though I was born in Mexico, I consider Long Beach, my hometown, and my home. I am Marissa at Long Beach City College Transfer student and a current Cal State Long Beach student. I am also a member of the Long Beach Immigrant Rights Coalition. Dacher has affected me in a positive way and has allowed me to work and maintain myself in school. If it wasn't for Dhaka, I wouldn't be able to afford to go to school. It has also allowed me to support my mother financially as best as I can, and aside from the difficulties, it has also allowed me to keep motivated and help others in the same situation. Stay informed and aware that families will benefit from Dhaka and DAPA programs. My mother herself would be one of the many who would benefit from this. She has been a single mother who raised me through the challenges of working multiple, low paying jobs. I believe our parents deserve the opportunity to work legally with without the fear of losing their jobs. Why? While I am thankful for Dhaka, I am aware that there are still millions like my mother who will benefit from the Dakar and double programs and be given the same access that has been granted to me. We should empower and document. We should and undocumented communities as deserving and undeserving as it creates a hostile environment. And it is a human right to live and work without fear and not be targeted because of socioeconomic and legal status. While I'm still here to represent many of the Dhaka many youth, I am here to fight for people like my mother and millions of others like her. Some of our most marginalized communities, like our LBGTQ, hue API and low income communities depend on these programs and they cannot wait and risk their lives any longer. Thank you for your time.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 1: Good evening, members of the council. My name is S.A. Hernandez. I am a student at Long Beach City College and president of B Student Org at ABC C Coalition for Latino Advancement. Selah is a support group for the undocumented student population at NBCC and we are assisting with their academic goals. I am here tonight not only to share my story, but many of my peers confront. It is important for that council to approve the sign on to a letter because it will benefit both the undocumented and the documented community. These programs will help limit workplace exploitation, discrimination, wage theft and other violations. Because now our community will be protected. When I began working on my current job under the old management, I was asked to provide a copy of my Social Security, California ID and work permit. Because of that, I can present these documents, but some of my coworkers have limited protection and thus increases the chances of work violations and displacement. I have learned in my environmental science class that immigration and first world countries helped keep our population and economy healthy. But these benefits can only be done with programs like DOCA, DAPA and immigration reform. Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzalez and Council Member Muranga for introducing this item.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 7: Good night, council members. My name is Smiley. Never meets. I has. I had been living in this city for the last 22 years. I have two kids. One is a senior at Cal State Long Beach. The other one is a freshman at UC Santa Barbara. And I am an American but undocumented in the United States. In. I has been involved in this community doing many things to change. The things that were around my kids because I want to see my kids grow in a healthy safety place. And I has been in ball with many organizations, many giving my time volunteer. I never get any payment for that. My job is I'm a caregiver. I'm taking care for elderly people. But at. I'm asking. Many people here say. This country is giving the opportunity to those people who are dreaming and have a better life. I think I deserve that life. For me, it's for me and my family. I need that support. I need to have my documents. Because I'm tired to be living in that way. I want to get a better job. I want to go back to the school. But because I am. And the comment that I had to pay for my units. Like, if a person person pays like a $3, I have to pay almost $300. I can do that. But I need you guys to support this recommendation because it's going to help not only me, all of these families that are here in AG. When they came to this country, I came running for the violence in my country. And I don't want to go back because now is worse. And I came to this country 24 years ago. I think. I deserve that opportunity. And I ask you to give me that opportunity with due support to this recommendation. Thank you. Thank you. Buenas noches. Emmy nominee sister. The lawyer. If only six of these three. Then go the baby in Colombia.
Speaker 10: Good evening. My name is under the when I'm here from the sixth District and I've been living in Long Beach for ten years.
Speaker 7: The heaviest one can say Sorry.
Speaker 10: I said ten, but I meant 15. Sorry.
Speaker 7: Ginger. Yes, the pie is. For La mesa Galaxy CMC has notable opportunity that at the nitty in a solution is the base.
Speaker 10: I came to this country with the hope of providing opportunities for my daughters. Unfortunately, I didn't have the privilege of having children born here in the United States.
Speaker 7: Maybe they're still more defensive. Jackie Sandona, Marine documentarian. Victima. They are also sexual. I see, though. Well, if he's still all. Look at Myanmar. We though they need a key.
Speaker 10: So my my life has been very difficult here, being the mother of an undocumented daughter, being a victim of sexual violence. My life has been a challenge.
Speaker 7: Cuando me patrimonio youth. NASA Sanyo yell Yale. Mexico muchos. Buenos. Centimeters are more proximal junk. That panelist premier John Figure. Just like.
Speaker 10: So my father passed many years ago, and before that he was able to instill many values in me. I learned a lot from him. Part of that was many values where even though I don't benefit from myself, I'm still here and supportive of my community.
Speaker 7: Which is familias, which are some eagles which does business just like a know if you serve it up. Peckham already had Principal Strachey put me down. Are they? Yes. Established the heat able programmer Thacker Laboratories paid up for a program that is the suit that is literally missing yet those let the program is we need those is charitable amino acid moment on reporter story I keep me company that.
Speaker 10: So there are many people in our community, there are many families, many neighbors that would benefit from this program. I'm here because one of my daughters is a doc recipient. One of my other daughters is awaiting DAPA. This is the land of my grandchildren. This is a land where they've grown up. This is the city where they were born and raised. And so even though this is not something that that benefits me directly, this is something that I support because I support my community.
Speaker 7: Eco my principle on so-called liner notes. The hook eloquent, they say, is policy until they need you. As soon as a serious squeeze on the personal commentators. Jonathan Wiener. But can also take some responsibility because the police sega probably sent the UK non-existent racismo.
Speaker 10: So as Councilwoman Gonzalez mentioned earlier, 86% of children born here are children of immigrants. So there's still a lot of work left to do. We need to support our neighbors and our community to help make this city a better place.
Speaker 7: That's just Atlantis. Of course, Eskimos will be the Iscariot. About how much of can stay this. A Syrian elsewhere was puzzled by the action, the rescue, the seals crisis at todos atolls. An importer K is selling Contra Newport Pakistan of about those almost hermanos. Communalism was have to skin Romano's.
Speaker 10: So thankfully, through the many experiences I've been here before, I'm here again just to say thank you. Based off of last week's Thanksgiving, I'm here to say thank you. Thank you for for your support and thank you for moving forward.
Speaker 7: Which has gracias. E So you must have a hand.
Speaker 10: Thank you very much. And we will continue to work.
Speaker 11: When there's no chase. I mean no one Rivera. That is soy miembro devo the.
Speaker 12: There I go.
Speaker 11: Here what I iglesia.
Speaker 12: Psalm Attanasio is the. Gracias. Uh, I lost Miembros. A lunar rover.
Speaker 11: Poor, poor supporter.
Speaker 12: That gave up. Rivera.
Speaker 10: So good evening. My name is One Rivera. I'm an active member of ACO and also an active member of Saint Athanasius Church. I wanted to say thank you to Councilwoman Lena Gonzalez and Councilmember Robert Otunga.
Speaker 11: Yeah. Totally.
Speaker 10: Conciliar and all of the council.
Speaker 11: Uh, you think all those sequels start next to donate your time, your is the thing or being dear to your psyche?
Speaker 10: I have two children. They're studying it in college. I have 28 years living here.
Speaker 12: But I mean, we through academy. And it's the.
Speaker 11: Investors being the Chinese getting lucky.
Speaker 12: Uh, e. Busy man.
Speaker 11: City employee movie and also truth cannot support Diana Cuomo's.
Speaker 12: Standpoint, that guy in Napa.
Speaker 10: So I worked the entire 28 years that I've been here, and I just wanted to say thank you that I hope that you support this and moving forward with Doc and UPA.
Speaker 11: But on the reform.
Speaker 12: A moratorium proposes a crisis because it's a process. It is to the process.
Speaker 10: And also for a broader immigration reform, continue working for a broader immigration reform. So I just wanted to say thank you to all of you. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 7: When I'm not just me, nobody is. Alison Gomez, Ignacio Sal el Consiglio Khalid portable yet is the dapper.
Speaker 2: Alison.
Speaker 10: Good evening. My name is Elisa Gomez, and I just wanted to say thank you to the council and to the mayor for supporting this.
Speaker 7: So, I mean, of I go. People in long. But the glaciers are not done as you.
Speaker 10: So I'm a member of. I go and I pertain to St Athanasius Church. I live in North Long Beach.
Speaker 7: Gillespie, Lochaber, Fort Walton. What impressed upon Lisa can also necesitamos tanto.
Speaker 10: So I just wanted to to ask for your vote to help support this policy.
Speaker 7: Yeah. You're going mi familia. Tenemos bueno, Cinco and your saki. It's a monster. I had a bit of butter up north and there was some trouble with Staveley for Siempre for me the call us trabajo jag jag immigration.
Speaker 10: So my family and I have been here for about 25 years and we've worked the entire time and although we've had jobs, they haven't been stable jobs for fear of immigration showing up.
Speaker 7: Good thing nosotros hermosa basado pronounced momentos melody celeste then grammy hussle baby enter the concert our little thing Grammy Millennium put out a whimper necesitamos necesitamos trabajo L.A..
Speaker 10: So we've had a very difficult time here. One of my daughter is a cancer survivor. My son just had his foot amputated. And so we need a more stable job and we need better opportunities.
Speaker 7: Hi MoMenTos. Marie Dificil. As Kay Cannon said, most basado Yoki sera go animal sacrifice the police. This woman, Linda Bass, gave the animals which are great. They certainly kennels that although better compared to Moscow, nothing more.
Speaker 10: So I just wanted to say that, you know, although we've had some difficult times here, this is a beautiful country to be in. There's so many beautiful opportunities. But to be able to to to excel and there's so many wonderful things that we have access to. But we need. We need more support.
Speaker 7: I momentos. Okay. C'est un dificil free. This is a more complete take on this dog. Yes. Gucciardo is the. Gets. Guess it a salary they could get in a car on. Conquistadores personas symbolize us.
Speaker 2: Con me who?
Speaker 10: There's there's a lot of concerns that we have with these difficult times, such as the the the law that wants to be that people are trying to pass where it puts those that need those in need, those with special needs at risk.
Speaker 7: Services, then go then go to more violence bitterly. In Malawi, another amendment is seen that in no way actually not that we're not going. Yes, gucciardo this other las personas adults because one last person is going to say you then not done this offers up, you know, the land.
Speaker 10: So there's a lot of fear revolving around taking my son, my adult son, into the hospital where he might get medication based off of what I've been hearing. That can basically do away with him. So there's a lot of fear where if we go, even as adults, they can be given medication that would put him at risk
Speaker 7: . What part of our let's be the start of our list that other corazon. Yes, yes, yes.
Speaker 10: So with all my heart, I just wanted to say thank you. And I ask for your help. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Good evening, members of the council.
Speaker 1: My name is Barry Escort, senior side in.
Speaker 4: The third district. As a member.
Speaker 1: Of the Long Beach Community and member of the Long Beach Immigrants Rights Coalition.
Speaker 4: I have seen.
Speaker 1: And heard the struggles that many members of the community face concerning their family, their work, their health, and the stress they experience because of their legal status. Programs such as DOCA and DAPA dramatically improve the lives of our community members. In terms of families, it helps prevent the break ins of families and losing loved ones. It also prevents 2 million deportations that occurred during Obama's presidency to reoccur in terms of their work environment. These programs help to prevent mistreatment, discrimination and oppression against members of the community. These programs also help the health and the stress of the members of the community that they face. It helps them achieve less stress and have a better well-being. Instead of focusing on external stressors.
Speaker 4: In the ESL classes that I help volunteer in, there is a woman that I notice and her name is Ramona and every day she goes to work and she cleans houses.
Speaker 1: But on Tuesdays and Thursdays she comes in and she takes two busses to get here and is so and persevered to learn English that she willing to take those two busses.
Speaker 4: And come to these classes for 2.
Speaker 1: Hours to learn English. Even though she struggles, she continues on. Members such as her are an example of an exemplary member in this community. She demonstrates the strengths that members of this community have despite facing adversities. I would also like to mention that I know some of those believe that this is more of a burden to address . But I would just like to say that if we focus more on fixing this problem and. Leading the continuation of Dhaka in Dhaka to continue. That we can have members of this community focus more on their strengths and the strengths of their community. Instead of worrying about external stressors that they have, the elimination of these stressors will help them better focus on themselves and helping the community. We think council, we think the council and specifically Councilwoman Lena Gonzalez and Councilmember Otunga for passing a resolution in support of comprehensive immigration reform and the expanded Dhaka and DAPA programs. And we hope you can take a step further by approving this letter and demonstrating our city values are undocumented community. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Hi, my name is Melissa Gomez.
Speaker 10: And I want.
Speaker 1: To thank the council and mayor for supporting us the last time. And I am a member of Echo. I just hope that my parents get their papers soon because.
Speaker 7: I dream of going to high school.
Speaker 1: And college and graduating. But I can do all of this if my parents get in back to Mexico. My parents are a big part of my life and if something comes to happen to them, well, I just can't imagine my life without them. My parents are a big deal in my life because two, they spent two years in the hospital with me. And what I mean by that is that I am a cancer survivor. My parents need to get the papers soon because I need a bit. They need a better job because we.
Speaker 7: Could barely manage.
Speaker 1: Our house rent.
Speaker 10: And my mom has a dream of.
Speaker 7: Taking me to Mexico once.
Speaker 1: Before they die. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Well, I mean, Maria Reyes it yesterday I keep hearing about this. I consider your little cadre. GARCIA the Ebola resolution, the attack carried out by your side of the aisle. But then last year, the San Antonio.
Speaker 10: Good evening. My name is Maria Reyes, and I wanted to say thank you to the city council and the mayor for their support on the resolution for DOCA and DAPA. I am a member of ICA and I also belong to Saint Athanasius Church.
Speaker 7: Must be the you must report for. More then ETA is the police and what are you doing here?
Speaker 10: So I'm here to ask for your support in favor of this policy, because it would help a lot of us but cannot.
Speaker 7: Animal documentaries. Yeah. But if hear your story, you know, personally.
Speaker 1: Yes.
Speaker 2: Okay.
Speaker 10: So for instance, it would help a lot of those individuals who are undocumented. As an example, I am one of those individuals.
Speaker 7: I would then work. You try to throw a handle and me throw I know Metrodome, Obamacare, so you're not taking a lot of commenters. Me Pardon my vocal you are going to throw out are not going into the struggle of Mahayana outside Australia. Yeah.
Speaker 10: So I just wanted to say that we've been here for 30 years and we've worked. It's a difficult job because they, they do mistreat us very much, mainly because they understand that I don't have my documents, they work us for long hours from three in the morning until 12 p.m..
Speaker 7: In North Central a hundred years festival. So I know what on the regular. And I said, what about various quotas, good morale. But I look at the and in the comments I really Byron must be back on Manus you know so Megan these young Americans of course almost all those in the commentators.
Speaker 10: So they must treat us very much and they pay us very low, very low wages. They force us to work on holidays and pay us as if it were a regular day. They pay us less than they pay those others who do have their documents and they also humiliate us and talk down to us and say that you are the, you know, undocumented people.
Speaker 7: A portfolio list bureau cannot say you are then, but I will not reforma migratoria para todas las personas cannot the of documentos. But also, you know the land multinationals see who's, you know, they been there and as you see what you see, migration borders, which are most precious.
Speaker 10: So I just wanted to say and ask for your support in moving forward for immigration reform in general, we need to be able to have the support that we need for the communities, for us to be more self-sufficient and be able to work and support our families without the help from anyone else. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Buenas noches. Me Nombres Dora Valdez.
Speaker 10: Good evening. My name is Dora Valdez Quiroz.
Speaker 7: I realized that Axel Consiglio Yul. Mr. Alcala. Rovere Garcia.
Speaker 10: So I wanted to say thank you to our city council and our mayor.
Speaker 7: Garcia whatever percent la resolution the DA by Baca.
Speaker 10: For the support on the resolution for DOCA and.
Speaker 7: You're saying miembro de vida iker e Burton Isco. Imogen Griego in Iglesia San Antonio.
Speaker 10: So I am also a very active member of ICA and I am a member of Saint Anthony Congregation.
Speaker 7: Pedro Neto Cassian, they were the last letter carrier catamaran in Winter Ale. Both are Bautista Police added DAPA.
Speaker 10: So I just wanted to ask that you take into account to vote for this DOCA policy.
Speaker 7: Or general Arizona policy. Qual Is your main career in question in because.
Speaker 10: One of the main reasons why I've become involved in civic engagement.
Speaker 7: Is Paquette. I won't get killed on beach. I'd never see that come up. What member states? Those on the different spaces.
Speaker 10: Because here in the city of Long Beach, there's a lot of diversity, such as yourselves sitting here.
Speaker 0: Today.
Speaker 7: So that we're necesitamos bosses, Latinas kill as well as you can think.
Speaker 10: We need more Latino voices that have pain for their people.
Speaker 7: You'll be one in the street. On where? Yeah. Mucho mas, Afro-American y.
Speaker 10: So I come from District nine and there are many African-American individuals.
Speaker 7: There is no police. They can be very confused.
Speaker 10: I am very happy to congregate with them.
Speaker 7: Pork Burger Your Boy. The bear killed on Martin Luther King Jr. Elementary de Hojo. Boil, tap on me hand.
Speaker 10: And why? Because I know that there was Martin Luther King that said I'm going to fight for my people.
Speaker 7: Is a solo? No.
Speaker 10: Did he do it alone? No.
Speaker 7: Secondarily, when organizations in Esquina in Todos Lugares.
Speaker 10: He became involved in schools and congregations and any other place he could.
Speaker 7: Establish being and also turn not. So now most objected to establish a precedent that that's the case, that.
Speaker 10: It's important for us to come together and unite in support of this policy.
Speaker 7: End up on your list. But I won't talk. Key person told you that is the Long Beach get to trabajar la policia in cahoon tokenize.
Speaker 10: So I ask you what what about the the collaboration between the city of Long Beach and the police? Well, I'll be PD and I.
Speaker 7: Work for them on Lucero Besim was born with Russell that. Get emails soon as you that. Segura Necesitamos do not do that, Segura.
Speaker 10: So we can start there. But we need a safe community. We need a much safer community.
Speaker 7: As a trust message. Raytheon receive emails sent so they can do so in document that I put as their beneficiary services center.
Speaker 10: So about three months ago, I received my my driver's license because based off of HB 60, I finally qualified despite being undocumented.
Speaker 7: Maybe he made that with our, say, mass killer TV.
Speaker 10: My first ticket was given within that first month I received my IT.
Speaker 7: If you go for Korea, you're the one ticket.
Speaker 10: That first day that I received my driver's license in the mail, I received a ticket.
Speaker 7: El Policia Criminal the all the Nerazzurri Inter Milan four at sea on parole for a bystander assistant.
Speaker 10: The police officer that gave me the ticket had had reason, but he was extremely racist.
Speaker 7: El maitre thor the 13th though Javier comi esposo quando la romantic con me yellow double contrato conmigo more indifferent to Jonathan thi.
Speaker 10: So he treated me very, very differently. I have experience going with my daughter and my husband, but it was a very different treatment that I received from this individual.
Speaker 7: Mainly me, though. Joining me, I'm Morgan Isadora, the L'organisme de I Copper Catherine de Comorian. Mr. Tratando.
Speaker 10: He discriminated against me. I reached out to my organizer with Iko to help support me.
Speaker 7: You open sea Cairo's Tahrir Square. Look elsewhere the author call me when is the personnel sincerely fit in the you give me family anything get us Abacha you story what are the custom?
Speaker 10: So I thought what what is it about this driver's license that provoked this treatment to be different without my family even knowing that I was out of my house Wednesday?
Speaker 7: Mr. Morris, you then me familiar? I see those seem pretty. Elton Plan Pacino Yep. About Mama Cass that.
Speaker 10: One of the biggest fears that we have is to have a plan in case one of our mom or our father don't come home one day.
Speaker 7: And it's just the important because your circle has fiestas. As you can also see it almost la familia. Only that. La Esperanza. There's Vanessa. Sue status. No support. And yes, that's the only diva. Get it? What is what is it? Reform that necessary.
Speaker 10: So given the holidays coming up, there's there's a lot of need for our families to be together and enjoyment from our families being together. So we need to have the support of this DOCA and DAPA policy in order to make that happen.
Speaker 7: Gracias, todos. Gracias. Asterisk is impressed on this crescendo. Bit on a certain necessity, almost at theend. Yeah. La Comunidad is ASEAN.
Speaker 10: So thank you very much for listening. And I just wanted to say, you know, what we need is action, the community. Iko, we're here to continue this work. And thank you very much.
Speaker 1: My name is Debbie Jones, resident of the third district. I'm here to show my support for the brief, and hearing all the people.
Speaker 0: Has really.
Speaker 12: Convinced me it's the right thing to do.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 1: Tony Reyes, Iran GOProud, resident of the seventh District. I want to, first of all, thank Councilmember Gonzalez and Councilmember Rangel for bringing this forward. I totally support it. I also want to thank Councilmember Andrews, Austin and Richardson for expressing their support. And I know the rest of you will do the right thing. Thank you.
Speaker 8: Good evening, Vice Mayor and Council Members. My name is Itamar two letter and I reside in District seven and I'm here to ask for your support this item. I also want to thank Councilmember Wodonga and Councilmember Gonzalez for bringing this forward. I have been an advocate. I am the co-founder of the Leticia Network, a professional association of educators from across the state who have dedicated their lives to advocating for undocumented students. Creating opportunities for undocumented students in our colleges and universities. And. Every time we see our students.
Speaker 7: Coming through the doors.
Speaker 8: Every time we see our students graduating from the university, we know that these individuals have earned the right to be in this country. Many of the citizens that you hear, the immigrant citizens that you've heard tonight, many who are not here, are already contributing to our society. They are already productive members of our society. They are not asking for a handout. They are asking for the same opportunity that was afforded to the many immigrants who have come to this nation over the centuries looking for a better life. That's all they are asking. And you heard it here, story after story. They are here for a better life. They are here to provide better opportunities for their children. So I hope that tonight you will do the right thing and support this agenda item. Thank you.
Speaker 7: When I'm not sure my number is Rosanne Mosqueda.
Speaker 10: Good evening. My name is.
Speaker 7: Rosa.
Speaker 10: Rosa muscular.
Speaker 7: Easternmost Aggie. But a simply Carlos cannot support you.
Speaker 10: So we're here today to ask you to support us.
Speaker 1: But.
Speaker 7: But at the end, I don't make her travel who she is. The. Yes, that must be important to me. See who has got to keep that.
Speaker 10: So that we may have better jobs, so that we can spend more time with. With our daughter. Our little daughter.
Speaker 7: Forget. I assume I know my far here. You know, you must sit up. And there was a poultry maker per kilo. They bought that on their key, you know, for the most. Well.
Speaker 10: So about a year ago, my husband passed away and unfortunately, we were unable to see him one last time and be at his funeral because they had deported him.
Speaker 7: When the relative where their key of love and communion. Yeah what I'm meaning happens a calvary get a son or you're living up with that kid, you know. Yeah, it'll just. If we can, you'll sit up again. The ending. Yeah. Yeah. These are your kids via your Canadian. But they're doing this, Papa.
Speaker 10: So when my husband was here, he would talk to my daughter every day and.
Speaker 2: Excuse me.
Speaker 10: And so since she's so young, she doesn't understand that he's passed on. So she always asks me, like, when are we going to go? When are you going to take me? You know, you can take me to go see him.
Speaker 7: Visit my mom, but give me these. Just give me the gist of it. But I like this topic. Nothing or papa. But it cannot be in but can move on. Was a very low. Let me go. You're not with him. You don't know whether he'll continue.
Speaker 10: So she tells me. My daughter tells me. Why does everyone know that I don't have a father? Why does everyone know? Why can't you just take me to go see him? Why don't you just take me? And I tell her, you know, I can't go with you. I can't take.
Speaker 2: You.
Speaker 7: He left Peter there for a walk in the supposed Emperor Simeon with the young troublemaker. Poor kid, trabajo mucho years. 3 minutes. The book on me, Nina. Yes, the orientalist affect and the journalist well know may submit given in primitive era, although not my past operation, Freddy said its committee thin analyst Aquila me by me my mum at the end and get you that I could Natalia.
Speaker 10: So I work many hours and I'm here to ask for your support, to have the opportunity to have a better job. I work many hours and I don't get to spend as much time with my daughter. And as a result, she's been struggling in school. And so she'll tell me that her teachers constantly tell her that she needs to have her mother and her father help her with her homework. But since I work many hours, I can't be there.
Speaker 7: With this bit I'm just getting a casino support unique. He kept that mostly joke on me. Nina is the must book. I think I must tempo. You're communing yet you bother me Nina. The irony is that La Tumba, the Super Bank is health of urban decay, though.
Speaker 10: So I just wanted to say thank you very much and that we ask for your support so that we may have that opportunity to get a better job so that I can spend more time with my daughter, and also to have the opportunity to take her to see her father's grave so that she could finally understand where he is.
Speaker 8: Thank you.
Speaker 10: Thank you very much.
Speaker 7: When I notice, I mean, normally I see Scylla but then escalate.
Speaker 10: ATTANASIO Good evening. My name is Ishola and I pertain to St Anthony's church.
Speaker 7: Let's talk about this. Qualcomm, silicon is this concerto almost or it's not the most helpful. But as Bonanno said necessity that this.
Speaker 10: I wanted to say thank you and show gratitude to our city council who's taking the time to listen to all of those of us who made the time to come out today?
Speaker 7: So most troubled or not, the normal Thelonious Monk cannot play the most. Um, probably myself base.
Speaker 10: So we are hard working people. We are people without felonies. We are people who are making our country a better place.
Speaker 7: Qui sera sera. No, no, oportunidad. Your. I said, and you remember you. Music was around when.
Speaker 4: You couldn't.
Speaker 2: Make.
Speaker 10: So I'm here to ask for your support. About a year ago, they murdered one of my sons.
Speaker 7: Let's talk about the Syria Mutual. Can. So they can know the problem can also put together. In Mexico. I'm delinquency. This school, man. We are glad. Although that is. I.e. Contemporary Metal Sultan. I personally could if you run me. That is. The current Solomon. This could be.
Speaker 2: Well.
Speaker 10: So I just wanted to share a little bit about my story. My son, who was murdered and I just wanted to share, first off, that we're people who aren't criminals. Unfortunately, in Mexico, there is a lot of delinquency. And part of my story is that of my son. Of the three that murdered my son, only one remain in captivity with unfortunately. I'm going to speak a little bit tonight about some of the authorities in Mexico, unfortunately, with a little bit of cash. They're able to to release anybody.
Speaker 7: The school as we know about mental as good as yes can also change so most can stay. His son was killed. And what's yet is the price is right. They must. This cool urban myth, not politics. Romney's will need all of Congress or so a new one. Those are what are the austerity scare. And because, of course as soon as they. Muchas gracias. Those.
Speaker 10: So I just wanted to say excuse me and thank you again for for taking the time to listen to me and to hear part of my story. Of course, I understand that not all law enforcement is the same. Not all of our officials are the same. But I just wanted to share a little bit of that.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Good evening, Vice Mayor Lowenthal, members of the City Council. My name is Jessica Quintana and I'm the executive director of Central Asia, where, as you know, we are a community based organization here in the city of Long Beach providing immigrant and integration services for over 15 years. I just want to come today and just acknowledge the championship and the leadership of our city council today. Councilmember Gonzalez, thank you so much. Councilmember Warren. God, thank you. And all the council members here in support of this issue for really taking the courage in protecting your your residents and the students and the families that are here live here in Long Beach. And sending a message and signing this brief on behalf of our city is is really honorable of you all to do this. So I just want to thank you on behalf of our organization, because these are the stories that we hear every single day. And so as a social service agency, you know what? The dollars that we get, we're trying to help families who lost their children, help families who need to get their kids to college, help families with their immigration documentation. So, again, on behalf of our organization, thank you so much.
Speaker 0: Good evening.
Speaker 4: My name is June Cow City. I am in District two and I stand here in solidarity with the folks who came up to speak to the undocumented community in Long Beach. And I do I work in the domestic violence field, working with teenagers, doing prevention work and with Southeast Asian youth. And a new challenge that came up recently for me was when talking about healthy families, it's really difficult when some of the youth that I worked with don't have their parents with them because, you know, even they have been victims of deportation for crimes they committed at a young age and didn't even.
Speaker 8: Realize.
Speaker 4: They would get deported for even after serving their time. And even.
Speaker 1: Today, some of the families that I work with in the.
Speaker 4: Cambodian community have a real fear that ice could come through their door any minute and take them away, despite already serving the time.
Speaker 1: For the crimes they committed from their younger years. I hope that by supporting.
Speaker 10: This.
Speaker 1: Act.
Speaker 4: All families in Long Beach will no longer have to fear being separated from their families. There's actually going to be a community forum coming up in two weeks on December.
Speaker 1: 16th to discuss.
Speaker 4: Deportation in more depth of the Southeast Asian community. And I just hope that for the holidays.
Speaker 1: That these families.
Speaker 4: That I work with don't have to fear deportation as well.
Speaker 2: So thank you.
Speaker 0: Councilmember Urunga.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Vice mayor of this ghetto, sir. Me, me, me and those days those giving aid and a lot of this was I a demo. Saric it's an important tip but a lesson that is will get tomorrow but they need to not. But here we are in the demo is somewhere right as you e and I hear that was Nina's it was Nina's Damien that Gregory said portray Damien because we importanti gay you can see where I would like to see sit where there is to get. He said, We're up there. And there is, he said wearily again, the surprise as he passed more than just. For the for the bilingually challenged. I basically just gave the thanks to the community for coming out this evening for the the mothers who brought their children here tonight saying basically that they it's an expression that they are able to come forward before this body to speak their minds. That they can study, that they can learn. And that they can live free in this country. All.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember Urunga. And we appreciate all the public testimony that's been heard, I think, from the comments that council members made prior to the public speaking, that there is overwhelming support here among council members. But we are happy to have heard each and every one of your individual stories and and your perspective on why this is important for us to take action. I think you all understand that this council does not have legal authority over this issue. It is, but it is important for us to stand up and make statements, however symbolic they may be, that impact a great percentage of our residents, and that is what this action would be. And so while it may not change laws or move the mountains that stand in the way of families being united and remaining united, at least symbolically, you will know that your council stands with you and stands on the side of humanity. With that council members, please cast your vote. Motion carries. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Will you remind us what our next item is?
Speaker 1: Item 22.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 1: 322 Report from City Manager, Financial Management and Public Works Recommendation to award a contract to all American asphalt for the construction of the shoreline. Drive traffic improvements. For a total contract amount not to exceed $606,000. District two. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to authorize the City of Long Beach to join by signing the Amicus Brief prepared and filed by Cities United for Immigration Action in Texas v. United States. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12012015_15-1233 | Speaker 1: 322 Report from City Manager, Financial Management and Public Works Recommendation to award a contract to all American asphalt for the construction of the shoreline. Drive traffic improvements. For a total contract amount not to exceed $606,000. District two.
Speaker 0: Thank you. There's been a motion by me and a second by Councilmember Austin, I. We'll wait till folks are able to. Make their way out.
Speaker 6: We can have a brief staff report by Eric Lopez. Honorable Vice Mayor, a members of the city council. We are ready to proceed with the construction of the shoreline, drive traffic improvements to provide enhanced pedestrian bicyclist and vehicular access to the Alamitos Beach parking lot and beach area located at Shoreline Drive and Ocean Boulevard. The project is expected to begin this month and be finished by February. And that concludes the House staff report.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Mr. Lopez. I appreciate that. I wanted to share with my colleagues on this issue that anyone who has biked or walked to the intersection of Ocean and Shoreline Boulevard has experienced the lack of connectivity with the beach. And I think a lot of us have. Our hotel guests instinctively head down Ocean Boulevard toward the beach, but they reach a point where the sidewalk ends at this, forcing them to run across Shoreline Drive and its median. And clearly, you can imagine how unsafe that is. So it was this dangerous condition for bicyclists and pedestrians that led my office and our mobility coordinators to discuss a safer pathway. Since then, we've met with residents at the Villa Riviera and other buildings who shared the same concern and lent their support to our proposal. I'd like to thank Charlie Gandy, formerly of our staff. Allen Crawford, formerly of our staff. Eric Lopez, currently on our staff in our Tidelands Division and our public works team for their stewardship of this project. And with that, I make this motion to approve. And there's been a second. Is there any member of the public that wish to address the Council on this item? Right. Seeing nonmembers cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Item 23. Report from City.
Speaker 1: Manager and Fire Recommendation to award a contract to JAG Architects for Architectural and Engineering Services for the Lifeguard Headquarters, Rehabilitation and Junior Lifeguard Facility. Rebuild projects for a total amount not. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to adopt Plans and Specifications No. R-7037 for the construction of the Shoreline Drive (between Ocean Boulevard and Linden Avenue) Traffic Improvements; award a contract to All American Asphalt, of Corona, CA, in the amount of $505,505, and authorize a 20 percent contingency in the amount of $101,101, for a total contract amount not to exceed $606,606; and authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to enter into the contract, including any necessary amendments thereto. (District 2) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12012015_15-1236 | Speaker 1: Item 25 Report from Financial Management. Recommendation to approve the Fiscal Year 2015 fourth Departmental and Fund Budget Appropriation Adjustments Citywide.
Speaker 0: There's been a motion by Councilmember Austin. Let's let's give our audience a little time to make their.
Speaker 12: Exit. Let him get out of here. I know a. Back to top the one. You wouldn't even Indian reservations. The city was born in and am your wife.
Speaker 2: I know.
Speaker 12: It. I know it's right. And that that was. Yeah. You write that. That was a low blow. Come on. You don't cause you you don't get that. You speak about all the time.
Speaker 2: You go over.
Speaker 12: So you can see.
Speaker 2: Yeah. So what about you? Do you do?
Speaker 12: Yeah, I see how much they care about it. I thought about it. Well, yeah. Thank you.
Speaker 2: You just keep in mind. What? Thank you.
Speaker 0: All right, item 25. So there's been a motion and a second four. Item 25 motion by Councilmember Austin. Second by Councilmember Andrews. Mr. City Manager. Is there a staff report?
Speaker 6: Deputy Finance Director.
Speaker 12: Ericsson.
Speaker 2: Good evening.
Speaker 1: Vice Mayor and City Council. This is the fourth department and Fund Budget Appropriation Adjustment Report for up by 15. This reflects changes in revenue or operating conditions that require technical appropriation adjustments. Examples of items included in this report are a technical correction to the successor agency bond refunding reimbursement revenue for the fire department for staffing assistance for the California wildland fires, an increase in urban area security initiative, grant funds and increased appropriation for water needs and an adjustment for the general fund portion of the I am 3% one time payment. While there are a number of items in the general fund that impact the bottom line funds available as they're offset by reductions or transfers in other areas and savings from other programs. This concludes the staff report and department representatives are available for any questions that you may have.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilman Austin. No. Councilmember Andrews. Okay. It's an emotion. Second, is there any member of the public that wishes to address Council on item 25? See none. Members. Cast your vote.
Speaker 2: And.
Speaker 1: Councilwoman Mongo motion carries. Item 26 Report from Parks, Recreation and Marine. Recommendation to adopt resolution authorizing the City Manager to submit a grant application to the San Gabriel and Lower L.A. Rivers and Mountains Conservancy for the. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to approve the Fiscal Year 2015 fourth departmental and fund budget appropriation adjustments in accordance with existing City Council policy. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12012015_15-1237 | Speaker 1: Councilwoman Mongo motion carries. Item 26 Report from Parks, Recreation and Marine. Recommendation to adopt resolution authorizing the City Manager to submit a grant application to the San Gabriel and Lower L.A. Rivers and Mountains Conservancy for the.
Speaker 0: El Dorado Duck Pond Restoration.
Speaker 1: Project, District five.
Speaker 0: It's motion. Okay. Who's most? Thank you. There was a motion by Councilwoman Mongeau, second by Councilwoman Gonzalez. Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 1: This is a very important plan. We are looking forward to this and I'm very supportive. I hope we'll have the full council support on this.
Speaker 0: Councilman Gonzalez. Okay. I'm sorry, I should have asked for a staff report. It was there a short staff update on this?
Speaker 6: Interim Parks and Rec director Steve Scott.
Speaker 11: Honorable Vice Mayor and members of the City Council. The item before you tonight is to authorize the city manager to apply for a grant from the San Gabriel in Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy.
Speaker 2: To help fund the Eldorado Duck Pond Restoration.
Speaker 11: Project. The Department of Parks, Recreation and Marine proposes to apply for close to $1.75.
Speaker 2: Million in funding.
Speaker 11: From the Rivers and Mountains Conservancy for the Restoration and Rehabilitation of the Pond at Eldorado Park West. Components of this project include removal of accumulated sediment.
Speaker 2: In the pond, restoration of the habitat.
Speaker 11: Surrounding the pond, incorporating native trees and shrubs, replacement of the concrete shoreline path around the pond, creation of a wetland buffer between the shoreline path and the pond, and reconstruction of adjacent parking lots to eliminate.
Speaker 2: Flooding and to redirect.
Speaker 12: The treatment wetlands.
Speaker 2: So this funding will help.
Speaker 11: Complete the funding needed to complete the project.
Speaker 2: That concludes our staff report.
Speaker 11: And if you have any questions were available for comment.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I'm sorry, Councilmember Miranda.
Speaker 2: I apologize to Councilmember Mongo for jumping on that, but it's just that I sit on the Rivers and Mounds Conservancy and I will be supporting that item when it comes to the to the committee.
Speaker 1: Thank you.
Speaker 0: All right. All is well, remember. So any member of the public that wishes to speak on item 26, seeing none members, cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: All right. Item 27.
Speaker 1: 27 was with.
Speaker 0: I'm sorry. And 28.
Speaker 1: Report from police recommendation to receive and file the application of El Chico of. | Resolution | Recommendation to adopt resolution authorizing City Manager to submit a grant application to the San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy for the EI Dorado Duck Pond restoration project; and execute any documents necessary for the implementation and administration of the project. (District 5) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12012015_15-1240 | Speaker 1: Report from Public Works Recommendation to execute contract amendments with three firms to increase the total aggregate amount to $13 million for as needed. Certified Materials Testing and Inspection and Construction Management Services Citywide.
Speaker 0: Mr. West.
Speaker 6: Ah Malloy in one of his last reports.
Speaker 2: Hmm.
Speaker 9: One before last honorable votes, mayor and council members. The item before you is just to ask City Council to increase the appropriation by 1.1 million for three firms that are currently providing consulting services for City of Long Beach. They are basically they provide material testing, construction management and various consulting services that the city currently does not possess. We also asking that you extend the contract duration until January of 2018 while we are providing an RFP in the next couple of months for. For the new slate of consultants to be selected. That concludes my report. If you have any questions, I'll be ready to answer them.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember Richardson. It's been in motion. And second members cast your vote.
Speaker 8: Motion carries.
Speaker 1: Item 30 Report from Public Works and Financial Management. Recommendation to enter into on Bell financing agreements with Southern California Edison to fund the Con to fund the conversion of the city's streetlights to LED fixtures citywide. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager to execute contract amendments with three firms currently under contract for as-needed certified materials testing and inspection, and construction management services: Psomas Corporation, Totum Corporation, and Twining, Inc., to increase the aggregate total of the contract authority from $12,750,000 to $13,850,000, and to extend each contract term to January 31, 2018. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12012015_15-1200 | Speaker 1: Item 32 Communication from City Attorney Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code relating to speed limits red and adopted as red districts six and nine.
Speaker 2: Hmm.
Speaker 0: Councilman Andrews, please. Thank you. Thank you.
Speaker 2: Okay. Right.
Speaker 0: You know, we're just a big family, so.
Speaker 12: You know, just having fun.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 12: So.
Speaker 0: Would you like to address.
Speaker 12: Fine.
Speaker 0: We're okay. Okay. Councilman Richardson, would you like to address the item? No. Okay. Thank you. Mr. West? Nothing. Right?
Speaker 6: It's a good thing.
Speaker 0: Wonderful. All right, members, please cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. We have. One item under new bids, two items in a new business.
Speaker 1: 33 Report from Councilwoman Mango Councilman Austin Councilmember Richardson recommendation to request the city attorney to draft a resolution in support of the joint applications by charter Time Warner Cable and advance new House Partnership to the FCC. | Ordinance | Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by amending Subsections 10.12.010.A.40 and 10.12.020.A.29, all relating to speed limits, read and adopted as read. (Districts 6,9) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_12012015_15-1249 | Speaker 1: 33 Report from Councilwoman Mango Councilman Austin Councilmember Richardson recommendation to request the city attorney to draft a resolution in support of the joint applications by charter Time Warner Cable and advance new House Partnership to the FCC.
Speaker 0: Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 1: I'm thankful for the opportunity to address this item. I think that this will provide some economies of scale that would be beneficial to our neighbors. I think that any time that different technology companies can join together at the benefit of neighbors, it's a great thing. So I hope that will have support of this item.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 15: Yes. And I'm also in support of this. I want to thank Councilmember Mongo for for bringing this forward. I've had an opportunity to meet with both Charter and Time Warner Cable. And based on the information that I've received from them, this is going to expand their their capacity and ability to provide services to to residents in Long Beach. Specifically, I'm concerned with some of the lower income communities and the ability to to receive broadband as well as cable television. Specifically in my district, I know the Carmelita housing development is an area that has not had the been afforded the ability to have cable television. And in my conversations with the folks from from Charter, they have assured me that they will be working to to make their services available to those residents. And so I'm in support as well. This is a good thing.
Speaker 0: Okay. Councilwoman Mongo.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Councilmember Austin, for also bringing that up. I think those are very important points that needed to be mentioned. And then also the more choice we give, the better our residents are. Would I be able to ask? I received some information from a constituent on this item specifically stating that when they chose to turn over from Charter from sorry, from Verizon to Charter, that there was a allegation that Verizon had cut their lines, the charter lines. And so if if this goes through, I want to make sure that all residents have the opportunity to choose any partner. What would the method that we would look into this be?
Speaker 6: So all these companies are now regulated under Give CA, which is the state. The state has taken over that function. This used to be a local government responsibility when it was just a charter, when it was just cable companies. And so there is a state office. We can certainly identify that for for residents that have any of those issues. We certainly don't want to have any of that type of impact to our residents, and we can identify that for you.
Speaker 1: I surely hope that it was a mistake and that no company tried to cut out other companies lines. But I think that it would be prudent for us to look into that and ensure that neighbors have those opportunities and that those costs are not burdened by the the competitor company for any mistakes made by the other company . So if someone from my office would work with the city staff on that, that would be great. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember, is there any member of the public that wish to address Council on item 33? SINGH None. Members Cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Item 34. Withdrawn. Oops. That's right. 35.
Speaker 1: Part of consent.
Speaker 0: Are we done?
Speaker 2: No.
Speaker 1: Yes.
Speaker 2: Okay.
Speaker 0: All right. Thank you.
Speaker 12: Got it.
Speaker 0: You'll have to queue up again. Somehow it disappears. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Attorney to draft a resolution in support of the June 25, 2015 joint applications by Charter Communications, Time Warner Cable, and Advance/Newhouse Partnership to the Federal Communications Commission. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11172015_15-1202 | Speaker 1: Communication from Mayor Garcia recommendation to receive and file a budget update from the city manager with updated budget shortfalls, projections and recommendations for fiscal year 17.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I will have some comments at the end of the presentation. But I do want to just begin by saying that we all know that we've known for a while that we have some some years where because of what we're paying into our largely unfunded pension liabilities that we had had some deficits. We've been planning for those. We've been working hard to make investments. And through economic development, I think our team has been doing a great job at at eliminating that and lowering that deficit as much as possible. And so I think what you're going to hear tonight is, is some good news that we're moving in the right direction and that while we still have a challenge, the challenge is even a little more manageable than we thought it was a few months ago. And so I'm really happy to hear and I think the council will be happy to hear tonight's presentation.
Speaker 10: Mr. WEST Thank you, Mayor and council members. We've been asked to update you tonight on the most recent projections for the fiscal year 16 budget through fiscal year 18. The past three years we've experienced budget stability. However, fiscal year 17 and fiscal year 18 have been projected to have shortfalls. Therefore, we have been closely monitoring revenues and expenses, and we do have a preliminary, preliminarily updated outlook for the next three years. The good news is that even though the price of oil is continuing to decline, other revenues have offset this reduction. And so instead of facing a $7.5 million shortfall for next year, our preliminary outlook is that we are now looking at a shortfall of 5.1 million.
Speaker 9: We will be taking steps to proactively address this shortfall, which, while difficult, is.
Speaker 10: Manageable compared to the deficits of the past when we were cutting 20 million to $38 million each year. I will now turn it over to Assistant Finance Director Lisa Erickson, who will describe the changes to the three year outlook and the approach we plan to take to address the budget shortfalls. Lisa.
Speaker 1: Good evening, Mayor and members of City Council. First, I'm going to start with a review of the current year that for the FY16 budget that we just passed last year, two months ago, it was based on an improving economy and it was balanced as a result of discipline and prudent decisions. It contained no service reductions. It also included funding for both police and fire academies. And we are working to maximize the police academy and in fact, are working to conduct two academies in police academies this year.
Speaker 0: Real quickly, I'm sorry, when the announcement it didn't make a case you were here for item 24. Is that item 24 has been withdrawn? I didn't mention that. So I don't want anybody waiting. So 24 has been withdrawn. Leah, continue.
Speaker 1: We've also continued to work on outstanding financial issues and cost savings, and the budget included a projected structural surplus of $675,000 and that does appear to be on target. We are carefully monitoring this budget, though, for key revenue and expense items that are impacting the outlook for this year and the next two years. So on the revenue side, we have positive revenue impacts that are helping the outlook. Our sales tax is stronger than projected due to economic growth and also due to some economic development agreements, including CRC Services, Office Depot, Human and Worthington. We've also had a stronger transit occupancy tax performance due to economic growth and our property tax has higher residual property tax growth from the RTA dissolution. We have the new fee implemented for first responder fee that's helping the revenue. And then also we have stronger electric duty and lease revenue from the pike. On the negative side for revenues, our property tax is also being hurt though by low oil prices, which is reducing the value of oil related properties. And also our uplands oil revenue is coming in lower because of the reduced price per barrel. On the expenditure side, we have positive expense impacts, including our open space bond debt service, which was going to be a general fund obligation is now going to be paid by RTA city loan repayments per the state. And also we are proposing to make our CalPERS stabilization fund contribution in FY 17 by using one time revenues from 15 year end surplus rather than structurally building it in the budget. Negative expense impacts are the R&D termination is causing increase expense in the fire department. However, we are anticipating that that would be covered by the first responder fee and if needed, the 15 year end surplus. And then also we have some county park fund funded maintenance. That is because of the ballot initiative. Failing last year is now a general fund expense starting in up by 17. We have some assumptions and uncertainties used in this outlook, including the fact that we're assuming CalPERS costs are locked through FY18 and the low investment returns of last year, though, will mean that we are going to be needing to draw down or CalPERS stabilization fund in 18. We're continuing to assume that the economy is good, but that is uncertain and difficult to predict. We are now assuming oil at $45 a barrel for 16 instead of 55, which was what the budget was based on. And we're looking at $50 a barrel for 17 and 18 instead of 60 and 65. This is also very uncertain and difficult to predict. We're also continuing not to assume any raises or takeaways due to current or upcoming labor negotiations. And I should note that the projection will change based on the 6xy 16 status as the year continues and along with any new information. So as as the city manager mentioned, the outlook has improved. We had a surplus in 16 both years and we were looking at a seven and a half million dollar shortfall in 17 and an additional $7.8 million shortfall in 18 for a cumulative 15.3 million. We're now looking at a 5.1 million shortfall in 17 and 5.2 million in 18 due to all those revenue and expense impact changes that I described before. So that's a $10.3 million cumulative shortfall, which is 5 million better than originally projected. And the fact that we did not spend the 16 temporary temporary surplus does mean that the 17 deficit was reduced from 5.8 to 5.1 million. And that amount is not at the level of the cuts that were that were needed during the Great Recession, as the city manager mentioned, which was 20 million or $38 million, depending on the year. And while this fiscal outlook for 16 and 18 is better than the original projection, this is on top of the already cut cuts of $134 million in almost 700 positions since I was seven. And we're also looking that it looks like likely that the shortfalls will continue through FY 20 due to continued low oil prices and pension cost increases that were planned. And this is a preliminary outlook and it will be updated later and up by 16, and it could change materially at that time. So our approach for the budget is for up 16, we want to be cautious. We are exploring general fund department budget savings targets, which would begin in January in order to ensure that 16 remains in balance and to generate funds for one time purposes, including that second police academy cost, which is likely to also need 15 year end surplus funds as well. And then we're looking. These cuts would be in order to help prepare for FY17 by initiating some savings. Now, that could help to balance fiscal year 17 and beyond. 417 Our approach is to allow no service enhancements without offsetting reductions, to continue to develop efficiencies and cost reductions to focus our one time expenditures on reducing cost and meeting critical needs. To focus on economic development. To continue to grow that our revenue base and identify potential new revenues and develop approaches to meeting any reduction targets that are needed. And we're going to also be working with our employees to secure fair agreements that recognize the value of our employees while also addressing our fiscal realities. So in summary, in our next steps, as Long Beach is projected to do better than earlier anticipated, but we must continue to take steps to address this new economic reality. And we need to reduce our expenditure growth to match that limited revenue growth. And this preliminary budget projected shortfall of 5.1 million equates to 1.3% of the departmental budgets. And while this is difficult, it is manageable due to mayors and city councils, discipline and fiscal restraint. However, we do need to stay focused on our core services given our limited resource capacity. City staff will continue to evaluate our financial projections, and we'll be updating City Council in February with the 15 year end status and will return in March with updated estimates for the 17 through Fy19 outlook. This concludes my presentation and I am available for any questions you may have.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I'm going to make a couple of couple brief comments and then I'm to turn this over to to the council. Let me just be just begin by saying that I'm really obviously very proud that the council has maintained a level of fiscal responsibility the last few years. It's certainly something that started a few years ago when we were experiencing major deficits. I think if we all remember and think back to 2009, where I think our deficit was close to $40 million for that one year alone. And so to have gone from a $40 million deficit down to we went down to I think it was 28 and then down to in the teens and then continuingly to drop that deficit down to where it were. We had a few years of a small surplus and now back down and to to to a deficit that certainly it's there, it's real. But it's also, I think, manageable. And I think if you think about what that means from a from a fiscal perspective, you're really talking about one point at 1.3% a piece of that general fund budget which listen, we are the services that we currently have in place are all important, they're all valuable. But it is something that we can manage and is not the type of of of tough times that we certainly had five or six years ago. While the budget is better than expected and is going in the right direction, that doesn't mean that we can somehow loosen the belt and and overspend. I think that something it's really important for this council is the reason why our budget continues to improve is because we continue to be fiscally responsible. And so that measure of responsibility needs to continue if we want to continue to see these types of of of better days ahead of us. Let me also just say that one thing we should be considering is if budget trends continue and this deficit has now reduced and we'll get a better picture, you know, when we're in February and March. And obviously we all hope that it keeps going in this direction while 1% is manageable. I think we can all agree that in certain parts of divisions of our city, any type of cut would be devastating. And I think we can think certainly of our police department, which right now, quite frankly, is stretched to the bone. I can't think of a of a of a group of officers anywhere in the country that do as much as our officers do with the resources that they have. And so any kind of cut, I think, to our to the men and women of the police department would be very, very difficult. So this is a real challenge, but I think it's one that will hopefully have a robust conversation over over the course of the next few months. And so we decided to do this budget presentation kind of ahead of the normal budget cycle. Normally you would hear this, I think, in January or February, but in talking to the city manager, I felt it was important that they start getting this information out. Earlier so that we can plan ahead sooner rather than later. And so with that, I'm going to open this up for counsel, comments and input. And it's also, I think our hope that through the BRC there could be some conversations even earlier than we would normally start so that we can address these things sooner rather than later . And so so some good news, but certainly some challenges that we still need to deal with. So Councilman Richardson, who has made the motion to receive and file your first.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and thank you, city staff and Mayor Garcia for including us in this update. Sooner than than normal. And I would just say it is certainly welcome news that we're trending in the right direction. We definitely should be watchful and careful. But I would I would I know that there's a lot at stake here in terms of our public safety and our core services and our frontline, like our rank and file that we don't want to we don't want to have to cut those core services. I want to just check in and just ask our city manager for a quick update. I know that we've had a conversation about and I see that you're tracking the first responder fee and that will have a conversation about a month or so. But how's everything coming so far with the in terms of the first responder fee? How's it looking?
Speaker 1: Well, Councilman Richardson, we had implemented the first responder fee just last month. And due to collection cycles, we don't have any information on an actual revenue received at this point.
Speaker 3: Great. So I'm just looking forward to that. I know that we gave it 60 days or so, so that should come back some time in in in December. Thank you so much for the presentation.
Speaker 0: Okay. Next up is Councilman Andrew. Did you have any you want to speak to your second?
Speaker 2: Yes, sir. I just wanted to let you know that I'm very pleased to, you know, see the item on the agenda tonight and that you've taken, you know, a large step, you know, to see that, you know, preparedness. But, you know, by 17. So thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Vice Mayor Lowenthal.
Speaker 5: Just a quick thank you to Ms.. Erickson and Mr. GROSS for preparing this, but also for ensuring that the council priorities are adhered to and observed. And you're very clear that this council does not want to impact services to the residents or negatively impact our employees. And so I thank you for that, and I thank you for the early notice. That's always I, I feel like this is a first in a very long time that we've had a very early report on what we're looking at. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman Mongo.
Speaker 1: I have so much respect and appreciation for Mr. GROSS and Leia and the work that we have done together over the last year. I am just continually impressed by the thoughtful nature of the work that you do. I know that in the beginning we talked about changing the game a little bit, and I appreciate that the council supported me in bringing greater transparency to our sales tax revenues and our business district impact on the revenue of our city. I want to give a special thanks to you'll notice that the report discusses increases in our sales tax revenue associated with Worthington Ford and human Toyota and their partnership. I want to give a special thanks to the Southern California Association of Car Dealers for coming to the table and talking through opportunities and threats to the industry. Staying in Long Beach, what it means to tell the message of of of the great deal of benefit that comes from buying your car and repairing your car in Long Beach. Also, I want to thank the business associations. I think that the new format of the way that we present the sales tax revenue really helps them advocate for bringing additional business to their corridors. I know it's helped us in the fifth District. And then additionally, I really want to thank my colleagues. I have seen in the last 18 months innovation of of opportunities for Long Beach residents to spend their weekends and evenings in Long Beach learning about Long Beach and celebrating Long Beach. And when we do that, our residents stay here and they spend their money here, and we can earn back that leakage in the sales tax revenue that we had before. We don't have specific other businesses on here, but there are a few who were either thinking of leaving or left for a short period of time and came back. And they have 20, 40, 100, $200,000 per entity of impact on the general fund sales tax revenue annually. And I think that what this this really goes to is a collaboration really led and supported by our mayor and our colleagues that has never been seen before in Long Beach. And I know that it was a tough pill to swallow in the beginning because there's a lot of extra work for our finance department. But what gets measured is really what gets focused on, and I think that we've seen that in the results. So a big win for for the finance department and the council for supporting this additional transparency. Thank you. Thank you so much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And before I open this up for public comment, I want to say and I say this every time we talk about the budget, but I just really think it's important to remember. And for me, it's an important part of our kind of planning for these deficits, is that Long Beach has these small deficits not because we hired a bunch of employees or because we are all of a sudden overspending. But these are employee these deficits are directly related to the larger pension payment that the city is now making and has been making over the last few years. And so I say that because we are what we're doing now essentially is being responsible about paying down our long term pension obligation, which then creates us managing through these additional deficits. And if the city was not paying what we're paying now and reducing the pension, we wouldn't have these deficits. And so I think that that's it's smart planning. I'm glad that the state went once the city had implemented pension reform, the state followed and is now encouraging other cities to do what we're doing now. But it's long term, it's the smart thing to do. And so while no one likes to have deficits, even when they're small, it does force the city to spend responsibly and to invest in the long term health of the city. And so I wanted to make sure that that that was mentioned again. Is there any public comment on the budget presentation? And then after that, we'll go right into public comment.
Speaker 2: Good evening, Larry. Do Kirk has the address? Yes. Mr. GROSS and his staff are to be commended for those figures. And I think it argues well argues well for the city to do what I've suggested a number of times is to get a first rate city manager to manage these very difficult times. We cannot rely on a fourth rate. Peter Principal Manager selected because the more qualified assistant city manager could not be lead, would not be bullied. So we ended up with what we have. I think it argues well, also for going back to what works so well for so many years is a part time. They're selected by the city council. We don't need a globetrotting, globetrotting political hack to how to run the city. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Always instructive. Thank you. Any other public comment on this item? C none members please cast on receive and file. And of course, and thanks again to the finance staff for your work and we look forward to the next presentation at the.
Speaker 1: Motion carry in.
Speaker 0: February. Thank you very much. Let's go ahead and go now through. We have public comment and consent. Let me get a motion for consent real quick. Going to get a motion in a second. There's a motion in a second for consent. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to receive and file a budget update from the City Manager with updated budget shortfall projections and recommendations for addressing the FY17 projected shortfall. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11172015_15-1194 | Speaker 1: Report from Parks, Recreation and Marine Recommendation to receive and file the Howden Park Conceptual Plan District nine.
Speaker 0: Transformative stuff.
Speaker 10: Thank you, Mayor. Council members, we have a report by Parks Rec, Marine Director Steven Scott and project manager Meredith Reynolds.
Speaker 8: Honorable Mayor and members of the City Council. The item before.
Speaker 9: You tonight is to.
Speaker 8: Provide a brief report on the Highland Park Conceptual.
Speaker 9: Plan. This conceptual plan was borne out of the planning process for the Highland Park Community Center, which began a little over a year ago in September of 2014. During the community center planning.
Speaker 8: Process, feedback was.
Speaker 9: Received from the community that extended beyond the walls of the proposed community center, illuminating the community's desire to plan for the park.
Speaker 8: The future of the park as a whole.
Speaker 7: In response.
Speaker 9: To that input in June of this year, the Department kicked off this planning.
Speaker 8: Process for the Highland Park Conceptual Plan.
Speaker 9: I'm now going to turn over the presentation to Meredith Reynolds. Our park development.
Speaker 8: Officer will provide a.
Speaker 9: Brief summary of the community.
Speaker 8: Outreach process and an overview.
Speaker 9: Of the elements of the Highland Park conceptual plan.
Speaker 12: Good evening, Mayor. Members. City Council. The purpose of this planning process was to create a comprehensive conceptual plan inclusive of Howden Park in its entirety, which is a 31 acre site located between Atlantic Avenue, East Harding Street, Myrtle Avenue and Jordan High School. The outcome of this process was a conceptual plan that outlined desired park amenities that are to help guide future investment in the park. This is the first of many steps toward rehabilitation of the park amenities. And to understand the how and park site, we first started with a review of.
Speaker 1: The different aspects of the park.
Speaker 12: This included site access and transportation routes, utilities on site and off site, amenities and opportunities and constraints. Following an evaluation of existing site conditions at Halton Park.
Speaker 1: The first of two community workshops was held on.
Speaker 12: June 27, 2015 at the Halton Park.
Speaker 4: Community Center.
Speaker 12: Over 30 participants attended the first Interactive Community Workshop, which included a presentation of background and site information, a site awareness walking tour where participants recorded.
Speaker 1: Their site observations at each tour stop in a.
Speaker 12: Workbook format. Individual and group discussions of tour findings such as issues and opportunities. Safety, security, parking and activation. And a group design charrette to graphically.
Speaker 1: Express ideas on site.
Speaker 12: Maps. Individual participant feedback was presented to the larger group, and a group design charrette commenced to graphically express consensus for elements of the proposed conceptual plan. The information received at the first workshop was then evaluated and summarized and presented in a draft conceptual plan at the second Community Workshop held on August 29th, 2015, at the Howden Park Community Center. Many of the attendees from the first workshop also participated in the second. Participants were able to confirm that the project team and accurately reflected the information provided at the first workshop. The general consensus from participants was that the draft conceptual plan reflected the desires of the community expressed through the process. Extensive community outreach was performed for both community workshops, including fliers, social media, online presence.
Speaker 1: And also activating networks of.
Speaker 12: Community groups to share information as well as the Imagine Outcome website. The conceptual plan shown here is a result of a community process that arrived at a consensus around the elements listed on the screen in front of you is intended that future rehabilitation projects will be implemented as funding is identified. This concludes my presentation and myself and Steven Scott.
Speaker 1: Are available for questions. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I turn this over to Councilman Richardson.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Mayor Garcia. So thank you and Meredith for the presentation and for leading this process. We've come a long way to get here to be able to consider this conceptual plan tonight. So since the 1930s, Highland Park has stood as a central meeting location in the heart of the North Long Beach community. And I just think it's fitting. We've talked about the Queen Mary. We've talked about a lot of things tonight. Well, now we're talking about Highland Park, which is sort of the the heart of heart of North Long Beach, in my opinion. So this heavy, heavily used park is a common fixture, serving as a meeting place center for activities, a safe route for students walking home from Jordan High on the park's north end. Each year, more than 15,000 youth and teens participate in afterschool and fun day programing to fund April programing. This is the first time since the park's been part since the park was developed nearly a century ago that a comprehensive conceptual planning process has taken place to create a cohesive sense of sense of place and a source of pride in the community of North Long Beach. The conceptual planning process balanced, preserving the green space and the history of the history important to the community with rehabilitation needs of existing amenities, with new amenities needed to serve the population who use the park. The result of this conceptual planning process ensures Highland Park is well positioned for improvements when funding and grant opportunities arise. Our community is excited to begin to begin implementing aspects of this of this plan. I'll just list out a few great things about this plan. There's new parking areas, entry monument signs, a new electronic reader board, fitness stations, hydration state stations, seating areas, a community garden, outdoor basketball courts, additional soccer, upgraded soccer fields, improved picnic shelters, improvements to our baseball diamond preservations of our trees and our green space, additional lighting and user focused bike paths. So by the end of the year, we'll see the installation of our fitness plan and our hydration stations, which are both paid for by District nine one time funds. And the North Long Beach Heal Zone, Kaiser Permanente funded initiative in the ninth District. So I want so I'll just take this moment to just invite folks to join us as we launch this plan while we cut the ribbon on the fitness zone one week from today, December 24th and 9 a.m. at Horton Park, 63 on Myrtle Avenue. So that said, excuse me, November. So that said, I make I move to receive and file the Highland Park conceptual plan and consider a categorical exemption. S.E. 15. Dash 155.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilman Austin.
Speaker 8: Yes, thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I want to take this opportunity to congratulate Councilmember Richardson, the many residents who took part in the planning of this process. I know I took I was a privilege to be early, be at some of the early meetings and see some of the conceptual ideas come come to fruition in this plan . We don't get funding without vision and without having a plan. And so it's great to have a master plan for Highland Park. It is a North Lawn Beach resource. It's the only regional park, I believe, in the north part of our city. We spent the last couple of weeks talking about the need for green space, active green space. I think this is certainly in line with that vision and we'll continue to work together to make this this this plan come to fruition, hopefully sooner than later. Thanks.
Speaker 0: Councilman Tauranga.
Speaker 9: Thank you. The buildings that are there, I know that they house some some programs there. I know that the health department has a family preservation project. And within those buildings, there was also some services provided through the work program there. Healthy Babies, I think was also fun that was working out of there. Is your plan to upgrade the the internal offices in those buildings?
Speaker 8: Honorable Mayor, members of the City Council.
Speaker 9: The facilities that you're speaking of are were not included as part of the conceptual plan. This was more for.
Speaker 8: The park specific.
Speaker 9: Activities. That being the amenities.
Speaker 8: Related to recreational programing.
Speaker 2: Such as soccer field, baseball fields.
Speaker 9: But that facility was not included in the plan. Perhaps, Councilmember Richardson, or perhaps you might want to add sometime in the future, look at some upgrades for some of those buildings, because I've been in those offices and they could definitely use some some upgrades.
Speaker 3: The ninth District field office is in there for many, many years. In that building, we're very familiar with it. It just received some improvements, some paint jobs and things like that. The focus here was about optimizing the park and we'll continue those conversations.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilman Andrews.
Speaker 2: Yes. Thank you, Mayor. I just want to, first of all, congratulate Councilman Richardson. You know, I just see what you guys are doing is just wonderful, especially out there, you know, in the ninth District, you know, I was there in the parade and get a chance just to watch some of the improvements that you have taken to make your nightstick, you know, just look great. And I just want to commend you on that hard work and also for Parks and Rec for getting behind this project here. Congratulations.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Public comment, please, on the item.
Speaker 6: And Cantrell and I. I see they've taken the picture off. I had some questions about what is being done with the soccer field. I see it mentioned that there was going to be a. Rehabilitation of it. Is that how upgraded? And I'm wondering how this is going to be upgraded. Most of our soccer, all of our soccer fields that I'm aware of in the parks have just been. Any place. There's not trees, there's open space, and they've used the grass that's there. And we found out that that really doesn't work with soccer fields. Like the baseball fields, they have to be installed. With a sand. Layered for drainage and because of gophers, there should be galvanized wire put down to keep the gophers out. And then a special kind of turf that will keep that will last with a lot of play. And there is natural grass turf that stands up to play. And I'm hoping that when you. Doing this, redoing this soccer field at Helton that you will consider putting in a soccer field that's going to serve the children that are playing on it. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Mayor Garcia and.
Speaker 5: Our council members, for taking the time.
Speaker 1: To listen to us talk about this great program.
Speaker 6: I want to give a shout out to Rex besides just being just a great idea.
Speaker 1: And much needed in our district.
Speaker 6: Since we're the densest sixth district and probably the district with the least amount of green space per resident. This upgrade is long overdue and it's really exciting to see. But most importantly, I think that's the process that Rex and Shauna and the ninth District staff has been has presented to us to include the district members and the residents. To come in to be a part of it is probably the most exciting thing of all. I mean, we're talking about civically engaging people who have either dropped out and didn't think no one ever cared about them or giving them a chance to learn how the civic process processes. It's been fabulous. It's been really exciting to have architects, big name architects with big contracts come in and listen to you and implement small ideas into big plans. So I'm really happy about the process that has taken on. I'm so glad that you guys are paying some.
Speaker 1: Attention to North Long Beach because we love it. And we're actually starting to feel like you like us.
Speaker 6: So thank you so much.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Speaker, please.
Speaker 10: Good evening. Honorable there. Council members and staff. My name is Dan Pressburger.
Speaker 2: I'm the president of the De Force Neighborhood Association. I'm just speaking to the issue.
Speaker 10: This is a great time for us. It's a lot of excitement for us. Happy to have this happen. Thank you, Rex. Thank you, Al. And I don't think there's needs to be much more said.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Good evening to Mayor Garcia and the council members, especially Councilman Richardson in Austin, helped in part play a major role in providing open space and meeting. And meeting the recreation needs in North Long Beach. The facilities are used by many groups. Including seniors. Our youth and uplifting youth and teen programs. Many different community groups. The park also served as the location for most of the cultural and civic events held in the ninth District.
Speaker 9: And.
Speaker 8: This plan was developed, this plan. Many of the citizens in Long Beach spent time in developing this plan. This is we really look forward to the improvement because the park as I say, the park is very well used and we look forward to it. Thank you. My name is Otis Hogan and I am I am the chairman of the co-chair of the Highland Park Neighborhood Association and a member of the Human Relations Commission. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 9: Howdy. Hey, I'm going to keep this very brief. First of all, I want to compliment everybody here for this. This park. I mean, it's been long overdue. Fantastic ideas. All these concepts in place is fantastic. The way this thing looks like it's. Uh, working out just great. Um, the question that I have is same as what end control we're saying is that there's a concern over the soccer fields, and we're trying to have we're having some trouble. I'm from District five, not from District nine. One of the problems that we're having is we don't know what documents were driving the artificial turf versus grass. It seems like there's a controversy, but there's not a controversy. And so this is kind of what I am going to ask for, is that are we going to have artificial is the plan to have artificial fields over there or is it grass? And what is driving document that that that will be pushing that or will that be something to be decided at a later time? We're having a lot of trouble struggling with this, with this at least a lot of the residents in different districts at this time. And it looks like there's also a big struggle among the city of some sort to to decide that this and we are also having apparently last week there was a problem with an issue where there were a. A developer was saying that the city was telling him that that they needed to have artificial turf, at least build artificial turf. And I'm just kind of wondering where this is coming from. The memo that I saw that was created by the Parks and Recreation before Steve Scott was there by a guy named George, actually was dated, I think, June 15th of this year. And it recommended artificial turf of the, you know, more expensive. I think it was the chrome, not chrome, but it was like a coconut filled thing. And then we know, even though it hasn't been put on the table, there was a chrome rubber, you know, thing. And then I mean, there's been a lot of things going on. But the basic rationale for the. Using artificial turf was. That it was a water issue. And then we have Ms.. Mungo here saying that, oh, water is not an issue. So we have the city in conflict. And I'm just kind of wondering, where are we at in that point now? What do we what do we work? And if somebody could help enlighten me, I'd appreciate that. That's all I have.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. See no other public comment on the Hutton Park masterplan here. Members, please go and cast your vote. There is a motion and a second.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Great. Congratulations to the community. And now we have to fund it. And so now that's the next big challenge. And and we're all actively working on that as well. And so we know that's a big deal to the community. So thank you. Next item.
Speaker 1: Report from police recommendation to receive and file the application of Aroma de Roma Centro for an original application of an ABC license at 444 West Ocean Boulevard, Suite 110 District two. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to receive and file the Houghton Park Conceptual Plan and consider Categorical Exemption CE 15-155. (District 9) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11172015_15-1188 | Speaker 1: Report from police recommendation to receive the application of Smart and final for a premise. Two Premise Transfer of Navy ABC license at the southeast corner of Atlantic Avenue and 45th Street determined that the application serves the public convenience and necessity. Submit a public notice of protest to ABC and Direct City Manager to withdraw the protest if a copy is granted. District eight.
Speaker 0: Councilman Austin.
Speaker 8: So moved those that support this obviously this is the smart and final will go into an empty space and will be a source for for economic development in the big three those area.
Speaker 0: Now, we're very we're actually very excited about this. So it's going to be very, very needed. There's a motion in a second. Councilman Gonzalez, any public comment on the item saying non Castros, please.
Speaker 1: Councilman Andrews. Motion carries. Item 24 Report from Police Recommendation to award a contract to Dell Marketing to provide body worn camera equipment.
Speaker 5: I'm sorry. It was withdrawn. Thank you. 25, please. You all are so impatient. You want to go.
Speaker 7: Home at 12:00.
Speaker 6: Report?
Speaker 5: It's only 915. It's very early for us.
Speaker 1: Report from Public Works recommendation to increase interim blanket purchase order with united stormwater by $350,000 citywide may have. | ABC License | Recommendation to receive the application of Smart & Final Stores, LLC, dba Smart & Final 745, for a premise-to-premise transfer of an Alcoholic Beverage Control License, at the southeast corner of Atlantic Avenue and 45th Street, determine that the application serves the public convenience and necessity, submit a Public Notice of Protest to ABC, and direct City Manager to withdraw the protest if a Conditional Use Permit is granted.
(District 8) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11172015_15-1136 | Speaker 1: Report from Development Services Recommendation to declare ordinance approving an application and requesting the city attorney to prepare and the city manager to execute a development agreement for the River Walk Residential Development Project and Oregon Park Construction read and it as read District eight.
Speaker 0: City Public comment on this item who's come forward.
Speaker 6: And Cantrell and last week when the Oregon Park was discussed. It has been stated that the soccer field was to be artificial turf, but when the developer spoke in his rebuttal, he said he could go either way on this. And so I'm hoping that. As this park is developed. You will consider putting in a a natural grass field. If you put in an artificial field. It will have to be fenced to keep off. Drinks, food, bikes. Cars. All the things that destroy an artificial field. So that means that this will not be open for the children of the neighborhood to play on. There will have to be a locked gate to keep out. Any. This is what has happened in Hawaii and Gardens. If you go over to the field, they're behind the. Casino. You will find that they have a paid worker there to keep out anybody that's not on a team and all the team members are searched before they go on to the artificial sports field to make sure they have only water. The artificial turf is more fragile than a natural grass field. And there are other considerations, such as heat and injury risk, that makes natural grass much more. Usable for a large population of children, not just soccer players. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker.
Speaker 9: My comments are going to be pretty much the same as my previous comment, so I'll keep it brief. The soccer field is another does the same thing. This is going to be a recurring theme with me. Again, I'm wondering why the city is specifying artificial turf. I'm having a lot of trouble with this one is that we have, again, a document that is contradicting itself. There's. At least within the city. We have two people. We have we have a councilperson that stating that is incorrect and we're using the same document, it seems to drive the the need for artificial turf. And the specifications is obviously going through the city and it is being requested from our planning department, whoever is he's getting his information from. If I'm incorrect on that, please let me know. I've also looked at the, uh, the documents that Mr. Parkin has said that drives the. The city has said that they are. The council has said that the the meeting minutes of September 3rd, 2013, was. The Council has decided that. They were that that it was artificial turf was done. I've looked at the video. I've also given it to federal prosecutors who live in California and a judge, a federal judge. And they've looked over the documents. And I'll be I'm just going to quote from what they said is that you have to be crazy to to even think that this is has any kind of intention whatsoever to. To go artificial. And I'm just telling you, this is what they're telling me. I've got 30 years of contract experience and I don't see any place at all where where they said that there was artificial was being driven from there. So I'm just trying to understand. Can you tell me where how I mean, any reason, even the slightest reason, even a phrase that says, look, we're trying to improve artificial surfaces for all of the cities on here. I don't see a single document, a single writing. I don't see a single even thing on the video that shows that. Are we see is a budget that's been approved for the different fields on this particular one. I don't know what's driving it, but I just got to understand, we have a mayor here, great, intelligent, good looking mayor. And he's saying that he wants to to, you know, going green is the way to go. It helps the environment. And now we're we're paving over it with artificial turf. That's what I'm saying. I'm just trying to be as polite as I can and as nice as I can. And I'm just kind of trying to understand the process of what we're going through. That's all. That's all I'm trying to do.
Speaker 0: Thank you. We have a motion on the floor in a second. Members, please go and cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Thanks, man. Motion carries.
Speaker 5: Thank you.
Speaker 1: Item 31 Report from Development Services Recommendation to Declare Ordnance. Finding that a transportation improvement fee credit is due and authorizing the city manager to execute an agreement providing for the Transportation Improvement Fee Credit Read and adapted as read. | Ordinance | Recommendation to declare ordinance approving an application for a Development Agreement pursuant to Chapter 21.29 of the Long Beach Municipal Code; directing the City Attorney to prepare a Development Agreement embodying the application and key terms of the Development Agreement as approved by the City Council; and authorizing and directing the City Manager to execute, on behalf of the City of Long Beach, a Development Agreement with The Long Beach Project Owner, LLC and DEM Investment Company, LLC, for the Riverwalk Residential Development Project and Oregon Park construction, read and adopted as read.
(District 8) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11172015_15-1137 | Speaker 1: Item 31 Report from Development Services Recommendation to Declare Ordnance. Finding that a transportation improvement fee credit is due and authorizing the city manager to execute an agreement providing for the Transportation Improvement Fee Credit Read and adapted as read.
Speaker 5: District eight A motion by Councilman Austin and I seconded Councilman Austin.
Speaker 8: Yes, this is a continuation from last week and I would urge your support.
Speaker 5: Thank you. Sir, any member of the public that wishes to address item 31. Please come forward.
Speaker 8: Provided the Riverwalk residential development can go through. This. This item makes perfect sense, I guess. But one of the reasons I came down here tonight. Fact. The driving reason. It's not because I want to and not because I know whether this development is going to pan out beautifully or be a bust. I don't think anybody knows that. But there is one thing that. Project approvals or any other action by the city is not supposed to do. And that is. Proceed in an illegal or at least totally illegitimate matter with respect to certifying an environmental impact report. Last week you certified an environmental impact report that materially falsified the situation and that has considerable impacts on the necessity or otherwise for mitigations. As one speaker then pointed out, an excuse such as the lack of standards for traffic crowding, residential streets, a lack of standards which you can very well understand, because it's presumed that that development along a residential street will not, in the ordinary experience, have any impact. That's worth writing a standard about that using such a phony excuse. Lack of standard. In order to. Disregard the issues that go into a proper environmental impact report. That. Simply is not contemplated by the California Environmental Quality Act. And I'm here because this is actionable. And if citizens feel that there is a cause for action, they are supposed to warn the other party if they have a possibility of warning them that it is actionable. This will be one of the several resolutions pertaining to the existence of the project that calls for your consideration as to whether you really wanted to certify and in an inadequate report when you could have turned around and you still could then ask for a few weeks whereby a correct report is produced. Thank you.
Speaker 5: Thank you. Members, please cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Motion carries. Item 32 Report from Development Services Recommendation to declare ordinance. Finding that a Parks and Recreation Facilities Fee credit is due and authorizing the city manager to execute an agreement providing for the park fee credit read and adopted as read. | Ordinance | Recommendation to declare ordinance finding and determining that a credit is due against the Transportation Improvement Fee applicable to the Riverwalk Residential Development Project; and authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement regarding credit for transportation improvements made in connection with the Riverwalk Residential Development Project, read and adopted as read. (District 8) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11172015_15-1139 | Speaker 1: Report from Development Services Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code relating to planned unit developments. Read in adopted as read.
Speaker 5: District eight. Councilman Andrews. I'm sorry, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 8: I moved this part.
Speaker 5: Thank you. Public comment, please.
Speaker 6: For what it's worth, Lorie Angel. I live at 458 East Street addressing our representatives of the public. One thing I did want to mention that is I did go through the city council video last week, and part of the basis for approving the project was the fact that the residents were in favor of it. Well, there were 30 speakers, 31 speakers. 14 of the speakers lived in the neighborhood. Six were for it and eight were against it. And of the total speakers it was 2 to 1 against and we didn't bring a bus. So my concern. Is not. Even the issue that we push this thing through when it isn't really all as favorable as it's being lit up to be, is that the concept of a PUD is included in this ordinance and it hasn't been discussed anywhere except in the context of the Riverwalk. The public hasn't had a chance to weigh in. And not only that is what it says in this ordinance is already in direct conflict to the one project that you have in the books. It says that it has to have a driveway. Well, the Riverwalk doesn't have a driveway. So what happens now? They don't have any driveways. Is that okay? Does that get vetted anywhere? Is there. I mean, where the process is really fouled up here? Has anything gone through the planning commission, as they said, that, oh, you have a variance, you don't have to have a driveway and maybe that doesn't matter. I know everybody's tired, so let's just go home and just vote yes. I mean, this is a problem. It's an issue. You're creating something that's going to have an impact on neighborhoods henceforth. And also the ordinance just looks at APD within the context of itself. It doesn't even have reference to anything outside of it, except if a river runs through it or a street runs through it. Well, what about the impact to everything outside of APD? It's not even addressed. This ordinance is not ready to be passed. Thank you.
Speaker 5: Next speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Joe Weinstein again. Oh. Like the other speakers, I have to point out that this this was not properly noticed. To the extent that it could have been said to be noticed at all. It was put in such a way that you wouldn't notice it. Mind you, the last of several resolutions that appear to pertain to all of two parcels in one district of the city, and suddenly something that applies to land use throughout the city. This is patently against the spirit, if not the law of due notice. It's so totally anti transparent. But then let's look at the actual. Zoning option that's provided. It was a. It was a straw man question that people allegedly asked whether this would change zoning anywhere else. No, it doesn't. But it provides options. And what kind of option does it provide? Essentially, it essentially an anything goes. If you have five acres, you can put any you can ask for any number of units on that acreage. It's true. They all have to fit within. There's only a certain number of lots per acre, but you can pile several dwelling units within a single lot and there's essentially no limit. Impost. What you have then therefore is in place of a son of cracker box, which some people derisively referred to this. It's not a son of cracker box. It's a clan of cracker walks. And in fact, the way you try to put it over, it's a clandestine of clan of cracker box. And basically the more honest way to do this is to go to Houston. Houston has got a problem. No zoning. That's honest. This, in effect, says Houston, we want your problem. Thank you.
Speaker 6: And Cantrell last week when it was pointed out that this PUD would affect. Development in other parts of the city are. We were told. No, that's not right. This is only for. Riverwalk. I'd like to read what the staff report says. Use of R one and development standards are not consistent with a new large subdivision or the current goals and objectives with enhanced site planning, unit designs and community amendments. Staff therefore proposes to create a planned unit development PWD zoning district that could be used for this and other similar large scale residential projects currently in the development pipeline or on potential infill sites on suitably large lots. Therefore, this could be used in any one of your districts in the city. It could be used for the city college property. In the fifth district on los coyotes and wardlow. It could be used for c dip in the third district. It could be used any place. There's still five acres left to cram in a large development and create. Density. I'm wondering if you even read the staff reports. Because I can't see how you could vote for something like this without allowing the public to know that this is what is going to happen in their city. True, the developers will still have to go through, get their permits and go through planning and come to you for your blessing on their developments. But now they have the ability to ask for 13 houses per acre where before they did not have this ability. You are changing the whole zoning of the city. Think carefully.
Speaker 8: My name is Richard Ivey, and I'd like to echo the comments that have been spoken here earlier. It was very anti transparent. It looked like it was only relating to River Walk. It was hidden in a bunch of other items. And it applies to the whole city.
Speaker 0: I don't think people are aware of the impact that this items had. Normally we have hearings.
Speaker 8: We have opportunity for input. We have. Public meetings. Throughout throughout the city. We've.
Speaker 2: Looked at zoning and our resident are. Things that we've wanted to and ways that we've wanted.
Speaker 8: To develop our our community.
Speaker 2: And. And this.
Speaker 8: Just totally overrides all of that. I think that down the road we will look and look back at this and say, this is what?
Speaker 2: We'll have the beginning of a very.
Speaker 8: Big change in our city that will not have good effects. Thank you.
Speaker 5: Next speaker, please.
Speaker 9: Hello again. I think I'm very fortunate. At least I have an advantage that I. I was able to speak to the planning department before I came to this meeting, and I spoke to this lady at length. So. I do know that there's been a lot of things that's been vetted in the within the city, and I think Ms.. Mungo's office for at least putting me in touch with these people. But I will admit that this is very difficult language for the average person to kind of understand what's taking place. And I am going to kind of echo what they're saying, but not quite, you know. I will admit that that yeah, this, this, this pussy pudi where the zone is going to increase the density for sure and. Trying to stay on the same subject that I have been. There's going to also be a lot of. Uh. Um. Water usage coming from there and what, 161 people, something like that that's going to be in this unit. They're going to be sucking up a lot of water. And it's going to be more than even the parts that we supposedly made a memo against because they were using water. So we got a little bit of a contradiction in that respect. But I also want to echo what Incontrol was saying regarding this. Many of these there's many zones in Long Beach that it intends to have an institutional zone. And this is going to just make it a little bit easier for the for the. The developers are going to look for these type of things and they're going to they're going to do their best to use this as a template for stamping this thing out. And that's really kind of more the fear that I have is that, you know, we have this land, the property that Encontro mentioned is near my house and it has been tried before it was fought off. Gosh, I don't know, maybe ten, 12 years ago. I mean, I've been in Long Beach in this area for 50 years at least, you know. And so this is kind of somebody left their pin up. Um, this is kind of on. We're having a lot of difficulty. How do you prevent? Is it possible for maybe a council person to say, look, this isn't even though we might be able to choose, can we leave this? This is going to designate this as a like a blue area or something just to let a developer know that it's been marked that way. I mean, I don't know. There might be a suggestion, but we also probably need a map. To locate the different areas that this other developers might choose. At least make that available for people to kind of vet so the council people can bring it out to their public to in fact that so. That's why I have to say good luck. I've still got a water issue, you know, but life goes on.
Speaker 7: Thanks.
Speaker 5: Thank you. Members, cast your vote. No.
Speaker 1: Councilwoman Mongo motion carries.
Speaker 5: Item 35 I'm sorry.
Speaker 1: 34 Communication from City Attorney Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code relating to speed limits. Read the first time and lay it over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for Final Reading District six and nine. | Ordinance | Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by amending Table 30-1 of Chapter 21.30, Table 31-1 in Chapter 21.31, and by adding Subsection T to Section 21.31.020, and adding Division III to Chapter 21.31 by adding Sections 21.31.300, 21.31.310, 21.31.320, 21.31.325, 21.31.330, 21.31.340, 21.31.350, Table 31-8, and 21.31.360, relating to planned unit developments, read and adopted as read. (District 8) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11172015_15-1201 | Speaker 1: Communication from Councilwoman Mongo. Councilwoman Gonzalez, Councilmember Dunga. Recommendation to request the Parks Recreation Marine Department to provide an update on and current cost estimate for previously approved soccer field turf conversion projects at Admiral Kidd, El Dorado and Seaside Park and request report on other appropriate park uses that could be developed at El Dorado Park in lieu of an artificial turf project.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 1: Yes. So first I know that there have been a couple of questions that came up. Ramon, I have the email with your ten questions. I'm glad that you got to speak with Amy Bodak in the building, the planning department, to get a lot of your questions answered. I know there are many more responding to. These will take a bit of time, but I'd be more than happy to meet with you right after the meeting to give you some verbal answers right away, because I know they're important to you. My colleagues and I have inherited a $3.5 million soccer project. I know the question was, when was this approved? It was actually and I don't know if the chair but at the time, vice chair of Budget Oversight Committee wants to comment on that or if you want me to commit me to do it. So under Vice Chair Lowenthal, now Chair Lowenthal of the Budget Oversight Committee, Patrick O'Donnell made a motion that solidified 2.7, I believe, in the original motion for artificial turf soccer fields at three locations identified as Seaside Admiral, Kid and Eldorado Park in the 2013 budget. The recommendations of the committee came to the full council, at which time that council approved them. Over time, we've we've come along with a few different things. One, there was a misstatement by the director of Parks and Recreation that there was a drinkable water savings at every park. What it actually is, is that there's a drinkable water savings at Seaside, an admiral kid, but a reclaimed water savings at El Dorado Park. And that over time, the costs of these programs have increased and some of the grants associated are no longer available. And so what I think my colleagues and I are asking today is that when this item comes back to council for a decision that we have all our options on the table. So I know that we've recently hired a wonderful member of the Parks and Rec team to look at rehabilitating our grass fields. And I think that that's a top priority across our entire park system. We need to look citywide and I think we have an item coming in the next few weeks with me and a few others where we're talking about what that infrastructure rehabilitation of all of our parks would look like because we know we need to do that. And then if we do move forward, which we have not yet decided with an approval of any artificial turf soccer fields, we want to make sure we have all of our options. The state of California is considering doing a study on chrome rubber. We want to be sure that if chrome rubber has any adverse health impacts, that we are aware of those and we'd be able to consider it at that time. And we have a recommendation from the Parks and Rec Commission to consider natural infill of many different sorts and or according to that meeting, coconut husk, which has only one provider. So we want to open it up to potentially all natural fill. And then in discussions with some of our community partners that play soccer on the fields, a majority of the players of soccer in the community don't play on full sized fields. The ten and under, they call them U10 and U12 and U six and U eight. They play on partial fields. They take a full sized field, and they divide it up so that multiple teams can play at the same time against one another. And so what I think this item is doing is saying. When we do need to make a decision. We would like public works in Parks and Rec to bring back all of our options because what we don't want to do as a council is make piecemeal decisions along the way. We want to make a comprehensive decision in the best interests of all the residents and all the stakeholders. So I think with that, if we're comfortable going to public comment. Chair.
Speaker 5: Yes, we can do that. Let me call in the second or the motion first. Okay. Public comment, please.
Speaker 9: I think I'm going to my my talk is going to make it a lot easier for her to say, yes, I'm going to try to make it as easy as I can. In my view, as a person who's played soccer, I was one of the people that started. I got the soccer approved in a morally, you know, there was nobody playing and we had to sneak around and play and then they told us not to. And we ended up working, strangely enough, for the air. So. So. We? I know that a lot of the bodies bodies are buried. And maybe in June somebody asked me to get involved with this. I thought it was crazy. But then I saw this George from the Parks and Recreation angle. He's even crazier than I am. So, um. Basically what I'm trying to say is that, you know, I've done a lot of analysis. I've been involved with contracts, have been involved with sports, being a world class athlete for over 25 years. You know, that was about £15 ago. So what I'm saying is I've actually done a lot of research and I've determined that that when I break out the numbers, we've got about a 40%. You know, grass is about 40% less, 40 to 50% less even than the crumb rubber. The lowest value, the lowest cost, least cost item is what I've done in grass hasn't changed that much in price, but crime has gone up a little bit since the last proposal. And so. You know, all I'm saying is it seems like a lot of people love to play on grass. Everyone I know in soccer would prefer to play on grass rather than artificial turf. And I think Steve actually said that to me when I was at Eldorado Park. That's what they prefer to play on. He knows that. But we have a problem in that. I think, Charles, I'm going to say interpretation of what happened in that meeting. I know you said it. I've read the documents and I've seen the video. And I talk to you about the federal prosecutors that have seen it and the judge. So there's a huge difference between what our local prosecutor is saying versus what experienced, seasoned people who do this and deal with corruption every day know they know what things are said as legal definitions. You can't get around it. You can't just say, oh, this is a judgment call. There are certain things that are yes or no. And there's nothing that says, Hey, look, we did it, you know? So, I mean, the documents have got to show that. They have to reflect it. People have got to do it. So the numbers actually show that the grass is is cheaper for all of us. And I know that, you know, we have District seven. He's looking into it. He's doing a good job. But. I don't. Nobody can understand why we know grass is so much less expensive. And I mean, you can't justify 50% more for something when and it's safer and everybody wants it. Versus versus something that's, you know, 50% less. And everybody I mean, everybody wants to have that other thing I'm getting ready to take off. I understand. Thank you, sir. And, uh, just. Thank you, sir.
Speaker 0: That's all right. Actually, time's up. We won't pass the time. Thank you, sir. Okay.
Speaker 6: And Cantrell. And I appreciate you staying and listening to me. I sent an email today to all of you and recommended that you go to this website. The Dirt on turf. Because it has a lot of good information. Comparing artificial turf with natural grass. As has been said before. Natural grass can be half as much. And the geode fill or the coconut. Huske will. Is much more expensive than chrome rubber. Chrome rubber has not only possibilities of. I'm sorry I'm interrupting your conversation, Mrs. Mungo. Crumb rubber. Gets hot. It has to be cooled with water. It has to be cleaned. And so there's so many problems with it. I'm hoping that when Parks and Recreation and Public Works looks at these. Looks at the. Artificial turf they will also be considering. Putting in natural grass. May I ask is is that going to be part of the study? But natural grass will be considered also. Can I get an answer on that? I guess not. Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I see no other public comment. I'll take this behind to the council now and the rail here and start off with Councilman Manga, the maker of the motion.
Speaker 1: I'll hear from my colleagues.
Speaker 0: Councilman Gonzales to the second of the motion.
Speaker 4: I think Councilwoman Mango for bringing this forward. I know this has been a big issue and I'm very glad that the speakers came up and spoke to us about their passion for this issue. Most certainly, quite frankly, you know, in the first District in Seaside, we just want to park and we just want grass. We haven't had grass for some time. And so it's been. You know, it's it's been a long time for us to have something, and we're just very excited to have the opportunity to look at options at this point. But I'll tell you, my community most, most definitely is very excited about this because they're they're they're they just want something to play on. I think, you know, currently it's been dirt for the last five years, very impacted neighborhood. I think some of our lowest poverty in the city. It's pretty tough. So I just thank you for being open to giving us some options. I know you have been working on this as well, Stephen, with Councilman Mongo and I know Councilmember Suranga and I have been talking about other options and I know he'll speak a little bit about Admiral Kidd, but this is all great discussion and I'm looking forward to seeing what what comes next of it.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Now turning things over to Councilmember Ranga.
Speaker 9: Thank you, Mayor. And I do want to thank Councilwoman Mangal for bringing this forward. You know, this is a difficult conversation to have, frankly, because, you know, we are in the middle of a drought, my my in my district Advocate Park, tons of kids and in the senior adult leagues play there. It's become dirt. I would prefer, obviously, grass just like everybody else. And like it's always been traditional how we've got to look at our options and, you know, the options that we have right now is that we do have this fund, these funds available to enhance our soccer fields. Whether it's artificial or not, you know, but even with grass, you know, there's other infrastructure stuff that we need to look at, too, that can be just as expensive, if not more so. The options that we want the staff to come back with are are viable. We want it. We want to look at them. And yes, when we do get the staff report back, we want to see it all. We want to see what all the options are and they're all before us so that we can discuss them and then take it from there in terms of what we would like to see . There's some research, obviously. And Control brought about that report in terms of what's out there, which is fine, something to look at and to to consider. But at this present time, I think what we need to do at this time is just to direct staff to look at all the options and come back with a report so that we can move forward from there.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Turn this. Go back to Councilman Longo.
Speaker 1: Thank you. I hope my colleagues will support Parks and Rec and public works, bringing back all of our options so we can make a comprehensive decision. I think that the decision to be made needs to be an informed one. So I look forward to that opportunity and the continued public input. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. With that, please cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Okay. Now we're going to go, I think, two announcements. Let me start off I want to start with Councilman Andrews because he wants to close a meeting in someone's honor. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Manager to direct the Parks, Recreation and Marine Department in coordination with the Public Works Department to provide an update on and current cost estimate for previously approved soccer field turf conversion projects at three parks - Admiral Kidd, El Dorado and Seaside; request further report on what other appropriate park uses could be developed at El Dorado Park in lieu of an artificial turf project; and report on when it would be feasible to bid on any such in lieu projects. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11102015_15-1193 | Speaker 0: There's a lot of public interest on the hearing. That's first on the agenda. There's been a request to do two quick items right before we're going to do those briefly. So let me do item 22, Councilman Austin, if you want to take that away.
Speaker 4: Sure. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I wanted to highlight a big event happening this weekend at the Long Beach Convention Center. I want to thank you and my colleagues for allowing me to take a few minutes to highlight this. I'm pleased to once again co-sponsor the second annual Long Beach stepping in the right direction, a black college fair that will take place this Saturday from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. at the Long Beach Convention Center Seaside Ballroom. Last year we had well over 1000 participants from throughout Southern California attend and learn about college opportunities at historically black colleges and universities across the nation, as well as Cal State, Long Beach and Long Beach City College. I see this as one more piece in Long Beach as efforts to ensure the college promise and an opportunity there to expose many students to some outstanding institutions of higher learning. I would especially like to thank Pacific Gateway Workforce Investment Network for their partnership once again to make this event possible. We also have generous sponsorships from the Port of Long Beach and from the McDonald's Operators Association of Southern California. I'd like to introduce Nicole Ford of stepping in right in the right direction. Who is driving? Who is the really the driving force behind this event? And she is quite a spark plug. And she she's and you're here to tell us a little bit about the event.
Speaker 1: Nicole Yes. Thank you so much for having me tonight. I'm really excited about the second annual Long Beach Black College Fair. Last year was my first opportunity to really get into Long Beach and be part of the community, and I actually love it out here. I've had the opportunity to work with Councilman Austin's office, who has really been very supportive, as well as working with the Long Beach Unified School District, Long Beach City College, as well as Cal State Long Beach as well. Last year was amazing. We had again well over 1200 people who actually came out to the event. We had McDonald's there giving out smoothies. We had over 60 historically black colleges and universities present as well as we had about 20 organizational resources that were there. This year, we're going to have even more schools, more resources, as well as we're going to make sure that we also have workshops that are going to be provided in the science, technology, engineering and math programs, which is a really big thing right now in most of our high school students going into college because they give lots of scholarship money if you go into those areas. So we are really excited about, again, having the program here this year. Again, we hope to again do it for our third annual next year as well too, because this city is awesome. We've partnered with the Hyatt Pike across the street from the Convention Center, so we're going to be having a mixer afterwards for all of our alumni recruiters who are going to be coming out to the event as well, too. So I just want to thank again the city of Long Beach City Councilman Al Austin for really believing in this program and supporting me and my vision and helping a lot of our minority students go to college into higher education, because without higher education, what are they going to really be doing? And so, again, thank you so much for inviting me here tonight. And I look forward to having everyone come out this weekend, Saturday, from 1 to 5 p.m. at the Long Beach Convention Center. Again, thank you so much, Councilman Ellis.
Speaker 4: And thank you, Nicole. Let's give her a big round of applause. Nicole is also joined by Tasha Hunter of Long Beach City College, who is the coordinator for the development African-American professionals. We have a number of students who will be volunteering at our event this Saturday. So I want to thank you for your your support of the event in Long Beach City College, as well as we have Sarah Richmond from the McDonald's Professional Operators Association. Thank you for being here as well. Casey, did you guys have something you want to add?
Speaker 1: Yes. I wanted to say thank you for having us. And I wanted to let it be known that this is something very important for our students. I work at Long Beach City College and the outreach and recruitment department, but particularly the visor of deaf, which stands for developing African-American professionals. And this is very important for our students to recognize the resources that they have at Long Beach City College, at Cal State, Long Beach, and also have the opportunity to have HBCUs right here in Long Beach for them to see all the different opportunities that they have. So I'm thankful that Councilman Austin for bringing this in the second year city of Long Beach and to Nicole Fort.
Speaker 4: And not only do we have these wonderful organizations and many other community partners, I wouldn't be remiss if I did not give a shout out to my fraternity, Alpha Phi Alpha, who will be in the house, as well as Rex Richardson and many other elected officials who will be joining us, as well as support of this event . We want to see it grow every year. Thank you very much. We look forward to seeing you Saturday.
Speaker 0: Well, thank you all very much. If there's no other public comment outside the presentation. Okay. See now.
Speaker 7: Yes, please. Before.
Speaker 5: Thank you. Just wanted to say a quick thank you as well. To echo Nicole and Natasha's sentiment. Thank you to Long Beach into Councilman Al Austin on behalf of the Southern California McDonald's operators and specifically those here in Long Beach. Of course, very important for McDonald's to be able to to provide materials and opportunities and resources for ethnic students who may not have them, you know, otherwise in pursuit of higher education. So, again, thank you. We're very excited to be back and thank you for the opportunity.
Speaker 0: Well, thank you. Thank you very much. There's a motion and a second on this item second. But Councilman Richardson and I may turn over now to the second, Councilman Richardson.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Councilman Austin, I just want to say what a fantastic job you're doing with this. There's a you know, I've heard great things about this program I wasn't able to attend last year. I'm going to do my best to make it this year. But I just want to say to and I think they're leaving, but I want to say to the the guests there, you know, it may not look like it now, but maybe £60 ago I was stepping stepping in the right direction. I only do it now to entertain my my ten month old daughter. But but likewise, I'm a partner to Councilmember Alston, so let me know whatever support you might need. Moving on. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Councilwoman Gonzales.
Speaker 5: I too. Before you leave, just wanted to say congratulations and to Councilman Austin for doing this. Will be pushing this out in downtown, in the first District to make sure that everybody knows about this. So great work. Thank you.
Speaker 0: And finally, Councilmember Ringo.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mayor. As a 14 year former community college trustee. I really love the importance that Councilmember Austin is putting to this. Education is is a big issue. It's obviously our future. And I want to thank him and everybody who's going to be who's helping him in putting this together, that it's a wonderful event. I'm looking forward to it. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Great. Thank you. With that, there's a motion and a second receiving part of the report. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Me. Vice Mayor Lowenthal. Councilman Andrews. What about motion carriers?
Speaker 0: Okay. I am 19. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to receive and file a presentation on the 2nd Annual Long Beach/Stepping in the Right Direction College Fair to be held on Saturday, November 14 at the Long Beach Convention Center's Seaside Room. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11102015_15-1087 | Speaker 1: Report from Public Works. Financial Management and Parks. Recreation and Marine recommendation to award a contract to Ford SC for the DE Forest Wetlands Restoration for a total contract amount not to exceed 5.8 million districts eight and nine.
Speaker 0: This was the second item. There was a request for Mr. West. We can do a short presentations and get to the motion.
Speaker 11: Yes. Presentation by our public works.
Speaker 9: Director Arthur Malloy, and our city engineer.
Speaker 7: Sean Crombie.
Speaker 4: Honorable mayor, honorable council members. The item before you is an approval for for a contract so the city can enter into a contract with Ford E C Inc. for construction of the forest wetlands restoration. The project is too big to be done. Consist primarily of ecological restoration of approximately 39 acres of detention and storage base and along the east side of Los Angeles River, between the Alamo Boulevard and Osgoode Street. The basin is owned and operated by the Los Angeles County Flood Control District. Specifically, construction will consist in the removal of excess material resulting from grading modification, improvement of storm drain hydraulics through sediment removal and regrading of the lawful channel wetlands creation. Grading of the floodplain where feasible with habitat enhancements, construction of instream structures for grade control and habitat, including step pools and water control. We are structures removal of non-native vegetation, creation of the vernal pools, including grading and installation of pond liner, procurement of stock plants and maintenance for planting with native species, planting of native species, hydro seeding and hand seeding design and installation of an irrigation system and soil testing. The total construction cost is approximately $4,872,000. We are requesting a 20% contingency for unforeseen conditions conditions of 974,000, totaling an in 5,000,848 $47,000. The construction will take place between January 2016 and probably will end end of September of 2017. This concludes my comments, and we're here to answer any questions you may have.
Speaker 0: Thank you. There is a there's a motion and a second for this item. Councilman Austin is making the motion.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I move in support of this motion. I'm excited about this project because it has been a long time coming. The forest wetlands will be a transformation of nearly two of a two mile stretch in North Long Beach from encompassing a number of neighborhoods the Sutter Nature neighborhood, the Virginia Village area up to the Forest Park. We're adding 39 acres of open space along the L.A. River to provide passive recreation, including walking, biking and equestrian trails. We'll also be creating habitats for numerous wildlife species, as well as recharging groundwater supplies like the Dominguez Gap wetlands that are south of the Alamo. The forest well as will become a destination for nearby residents, as well as nature lovers, tourists and anyone looking for a great place to take a stroll and enjoy a little bit of our our nature in our city. From dilemma up to Long Beach Boulevard, the overpass there. There will be a variety of habitat types, including vernal pools, native grasslands, coastal scrub, oak, sycamore and woodlands. There will also be a bicycle staging area beneath the L.A. I'm sorry, the Long Beach overpass to connect the wetlands with the L.A. River bikeway. I'm really looking forward to getting this project underway. But just one question. Mr. Malloy in it says that the project will be completed by September 2017. Is there any way we can get this done any sooner? This is a very large project. If we can entice the contractor to finish the project sooner, we will do that. But it takes time to do the lot of grading and a lot of structures have to be constructed. So I would think that it's a reasonable time period for a 39 acre project. Well, I for one, I can say that I think I've had monthly briefings with public works as well as Parks, Recreation and Marines on this particular item. Since I was elected three and a half years ago and watching the progress to finally get to this point is a real accomplishment. I want to commend both you and Mr. Scott. Scott, I'm sorry for their for your for your efforts and your department's hard work on this. I know that there was a lot of collaboration with other other agencies to get us to this point. And this is a real victory for North Long Beach and the city of Long Beach as a whole. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Richardson.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I also want to join Councilman Austin in these remarks. This is truly a historic moment for North Long Beach, and it's difficult to really understand how much time and how many years have gone into this. So so to help sort of illustrate that, we do have we invited the last three generations of council people in District nine to come down to speak about this. And and I'm happy to say that we do have member Val Large here. I want to I want to just if if you allow Mr. Mayor, I'd like to allow councilmember former vice mayor to just give some remarks. From a historical context, I got a chance to serve as a chief of staff for a previous ninth district councilmember. And when we came in, the project was already ten years old when the last councilmember came in. So I'm hoping a councilmember version is give a little historical context for us.
Speaker 0: Perfect. Well, it's perfect. We're going to public comment now on it. So our former vice mayor will be the first one to speak.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Councilmember. Mr. Mayor. Members of the council honored to be here. It's two weeks in a row now. I feel like I belong back behind her. Dias. I just couldn't escape. 35 years ago. A community known as the Forest Park community had a dream of making a. Nature trail between the gap of the Forest Park and the Los Angeles River banks. My predecessor, Mr. Schulz, before he was on the city council and the community went out and got a nursery to donate over 300 trees. And as a community, we planted those trees along that gap. We call it.
Speaker 9: The the forest. Forest Trail. The forest bark trails.
Speaker 4: Now, remember, that was 35 years ago. I was much younger. Everybody in that community was much younger. Some of you on this list.
Speaker 9: Were just starting.
Speaker 4: School. We worked hard. Every couple of months we would go into that area and we would clean it out. We'd place the trees. But there was no city funding, no county funding at all for the maintenance of the trail. When I came on council in 2002, I worked with council member Frank Colonna, who was a member of the Mountain, a conservative river conservancy. And in 2003, we got $3 million from that organization to get the plans together. That was 2003, but 2004 we had plans and those plans for the wetlands have been.
Speaker 9: There ever since. So I'm grateful.
Speaker 4: And thankful that we're finally going to see after 13 years of actually having plans, we're finally going to have the wetlands of the forest wetlands again. If you guys can hurry it up, I'd like to see it. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you for your time. It's been a long 35 year process for the city, for the community of the Forest Park. And we're looking forward to be able to walk the trails and safety over the next couple of years. Thank you. Mr. Richardson. Thank you, Mr. Austin, for finally bringing this forward in cabinet come to fruition. And I thank the council again. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Good evening. Laurie Angel. I live in North Long Beach for 58 East Platt Street and I was involved in redevelopment for about 16 years. And this is a continuation of the Dominguez gap, which is something that we all were interested in, as well as the development along the L.A. River. The only thing I want to mention, I mean, I'm really looking forward to the project. I think everybody is. I think it's going to be a huge improvement for the area, make it much more appealing for people to go out there. But you have equestrian trails that was mentioned, but they stop at the Alamo. So the actual trail that's supposed to continue through and go all the way up to Sacramento or up to San Francisco, wherever the heck it goes, it stops at Del Amo because the trail doesn't go through. So if there is a way to put in some kind of a signal for the equestrian folks so they can actually use the trail, they're kind of a forgotten group and they need to have some representation, too. So if that could be considered, that would be great.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Mm.
Speaker 12: Good evening. And Cantrell and I first discovered the DeForest Park Trail with the El Dorado Audubon. We found a lot of rare and unusual birds there. And and hearing that you're going to be taking out non-native plants. I hope that doesn't include the old growth trees that are there, even though they're non-native, especially like the eucalyptus. They are well used by birds for foraging and roosting and nesting. Also, I heard that this is going to start in January and I know you're anxious to get this started, but I would like to remind you that the birding season is January through September. And so if there is any removal of trees, this would. Interfere with the. Birdy breeding time for the birds. So I hope that's been taken into consideration. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Good evening, everyone. My name is Darlene Groom. I live in the Forest Park. I am Hispanic. They speak about the 13 years it's taken to get this program underway. Well, I've been here living in the Forest Park for 13 years. I understand a lot of the things and the problems that some people are having. But I live there. I see the wildlife that walks through the streets. I can look out my window any morning. I may see a a.
Speaker 7: Vulture.
Speaker 1: Rabbits, all of those there walking down the street, but they're walking on the concrete. What a great idea this is to reinvent our the forest wetlands, bring it back to life, make it what it should be, and give our children here in Long Beach something other to look at than the concrete. We need to.
Speaker 9: Give them the.
Speaker 1: Experiences that they won't otherwise have.
Speaker 7: If we don't do these things.
Speaker 1: I thank you for your time, and I appreciate all that you do for us.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And our last speaker, please. But we have another one coming.
Speaker 10: Good evening. My name is Dan Press Burg. I'm the president of the de Force, the Forest Neighborhood Association. Good evening, honorable mayors, mayor, council members and staff. This is a great opportunity for us.
Speaker 3: This is a great.
Speaker 10: Plan that's going to be happening here. We love the idea. I remember when we I had hundreds of meetings with Val and Frank Callaghan over this and just trying to get money for this. It's an amazing thing. Everybody that I know of in our area is ecstatic. We're looking forward to it. Can't wait to break break ground. Hopefully it'll be in December before nesting time. So anyway, we'd like to thank you and thank you for all you do.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Please.
Speaker 1: Good evening. My name is Renee Lawler. I live in the seventh district. I have spoken previously in out for the equestrian community and so I won't review all of the comments that I've made on October 20th and November 3rd, but I do encourage you to review those detailed comments in support of the equestrian community and the historic trail preservation and our needs. And for those of you who are here, who have not heard me speak in the past, I encourage you to review both that verbal and written comment. I'm here to supplement those comments and just encourage that with this project and every other project along the L.A. River that there be detailed review and concern or address and of the equestrian community's needs. There continue to be deficient connections for a continuous trail experience. So you have impacted a cumulative negative impact on the mobility of the equestrians in a safe, continuous ride experience. And as another speaker mentioned, there is not a connection in this plan to tie it with the prior Deming ESCAP Wetlands Project that was completed. So what you end up with are or corrupted interrupted segments of trails that are not being adequately addressed. I've touched in the past and I won't go into detail about it, but these are trails that date to the 1700s. You have new state legislation AB 530, which addresses the fact that the L.A. River Master Plan is 20 years antiquated and needs to be reviewed. And one of the biggest review deficiencies of the L.A. River Master Plan, this particular project, the DeForest Wetlands and all of the other related projects in the River Recreation Area, is the fact that the equestrian community and all the impacts these projects have are not really completely being addressed. There's safety signage that needs to be included. We've discussed that on one project, but it does need to be incorporated into this project. And I support wetlands and I support open space and I support development that's planned and and done thoughtfully. But this particular community has continued to be ignored and not heard. And even though we are a small number, our numbers continue to dwindle because of the fact that we have not been included in projects both on a large scale and individually on a small scale. So I request that you consider my comments from the past and do incorporate better planning for the equestrian users.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Mr. Good, you are good.
Speaker 9: You click as the address, which is not in the ninth district, but I fully support it. I pass and look at that area every time I go up and coming down on the blue line. And I think it's a fantastic project. And I would hope, I would hope that to take into consideration the views of the good and curtail content drought control relative to the bird season. It would be a shame to throw the baby out with the bathwater. And I'd like to think that we've got the competence and the the energy and the understanding sufficient to move forward with that without destroying that habitat. An interesting thing that I never knew about, one, it was just about, as a matter of fact, eight weeks ago when the going down on the blue line, somebody who's apparently lived here for a long time, told me way back when that they used to come up and do and catch lobsters. In those waters. And this was before. And the point was just before or just. About 2 minutes before the Wardlow station down there. So it'll be really interesting to see if we can bring it back to something approaching that state.
Speaker 4: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Okay. We're done with public comment. Councilman Richardson.
Speaker 3: So just one more thing I need to do. I want to make sure that we do acknowledge and publicly thank the funders. It was a funding funding that took all this time. So San Gabriel in Lower Los Angeles, Rivers, the Mountains Conservancy, Los Angeles County Regional Parks and Open Space District, California Natural Resources Agency and the State of California Coastal Conservancy. So important that we acknowledge them. Just to state we're breaking ground December 1st. So as before the nesting season and the reason we have two years construction is because that was taken in consideration as well as establishment periods. So all those things have been taken to consideration. I hope to see you all at the groundbreaking. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. With that members, please, Gordon, cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Absolutely. A round of applause. Thank you all for that. And we're going to go we're going to go straight into our hearing, which is which is which is at the top of the agenda here. So just as a reminder of what the hearing looks like, because it's different than than a council item will have the | Contract | Recommendation to adopt Plans and Specifications No. R-7021 for the DeForest Wetlands Restoration; award a contract to Ford E.C., Incorporated, of Los Angeles, CA, in the amount of $4,872,567, and authorize a 20 percent contingency in the amount of $974,513, for a total contract amount not to exceed $5,847,080; and authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to enter into the contract, including any necessary amendments thereto, and consider Categorical Exemption No. 15-115 (15301, Class 1). (Districts 8,9) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11102015_15-1131 | Speaker 1: Report from Development Services hearing to consider the land use entitlements for the River Walk Residential Development Project for a new 131 single family home subdivision located at 4747 Daisy Avenue in the eighth Council District. This hearing requires an oath.
Speaker 0: Those that are planning on testifying to the hearing. Please, please stand up. Okay. If you plan on testifying at the police, stand up. Okay. The clerk revealed.
Speaker 1: 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: Okay. Thank you all very much. So I'm going to turn this now over to city management, who will introduce the item and begin the presentation.
Speaker 10: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Members of the City Council.
Speaker 7: The staff report will.
Speaker 9: Be given by Amy Bodak, our Director of Development Services.
Speaker 6: Mr. Mayor. Members of the city council, thank you for your indulgence tonight on this very important public hearing. As the mayor indicated, we will be doing a staff PowerPoint presentation, which will be followed by a PowerPoint presentation from the city's secret consultant. Joe Power of Rincon. Once staff and our secret consultant have concluded their PowerPoint presentation, we will like to turn it over to the applicant who is represented by Ed Gallagher of Integral Communities. After his brief presentation of the project, we would turn it over to the City Council for questions and or public comment at your discretion. So with that, I'm going to walk you through this PowerPoint presentation and orient you to this site. This is an approximately 11 acre site in North Long Beach and District eight. It is currently a vacant, undeveloped land, but was previously used and owned by the Boy Scouts of America and is colloquially known as the Will Jay Reed Boy Scout camp. The project that you're going to hear about tonight is called River Walk. It includes 131 new single family detached homes in a gated community, which would also include a recreation center and a tot lot on site, and then also a an additional turf area that will be used for environmental remediation purposes as well. On the on the project site, this is the current design that has been recommended by the Planning Commission for the 131 units. It is a single entry point with a gated entry. All private streets within the project, around a circle, two story homes towards the north end of the site, and then three story homes in the middle and towards the south. The southern boundary of the site abuts the existing UPR railroad embankment and the western boundary of the site actually abuts the Los Angeles River embankment. It is accessed through Daisy Avenue as the main point. There is also emergency access through another point on Oregon Avenue. This is an example. This is a representative example of the design of the turf area that will be used for infiltration, as well as the recreation house and the pool and spa area that would go with this community. As I said earlier, all streets and drives within the development will be privately owned. Each house is going to have their own private two car garage. Guest parking is required as part of this project and would be provided on the main circular road. Additional guest parking above code requirement has been provided. Guest parking is not allowed to be used for storage of excess cars or trailers. There will be a homeowners association that will have conditions of approval that will require the property owners to park their cars in the garages, not park in the in the guest spaces and not park in their driveways. This is a representative example of the layout of these cul de sac streets around the ring road where each small street is basically a cluster of six homes in a very neighborly like setting. And all of the entrances front the street, as well as the driveways. We were we worked quite a bit with the developer in honing and refining the architectural style. When it was originally submitted, there was multiple architectural styles as well as I'd say, 11 different floorplans and we were able to narrow that down for a more cohesive neighborhood environment and worked with the architects on the high quality architecture that they are going to be proposing. So this was a representative example of their different plans for two storey homes and then also their representative plans for three storey homes. We spent a lot of time working on the architecture, making sure that the massing and setbacks for the homes were appropriate, that there was a lot of light and open space with the homes, as well as clearly no blank walls fronting the streets. This project does require a number of entitlements. First and foremost is the certification of an environmental impact report. This project includes a general plan amendment to change the general plan designation of the Boy Scout site. It also includes a general plan amendment for a community park that would be developed outside of the projects boundaries. This would allow the city the ability to have the park at Oregon and Alamo constructed, which was a former redevelopment project. I'll get into that in a little while. We're also asking that the city council consider a zoning amendment to create a new planned unit development ordinance, as well as a zone change for the River Walk site and the Oregon Park site. This also requires site plan review, which the Planning Commission is recommending vesting tentative tract maps that the property can be subdivided for individual ownership, and then a statutory development agreement, which is quite critical to the the development of this entire project. I want to talk a little bit about the zoning because this is a little bit new for you as a city, as a city, a seated council. We do have areas in the city where we have developed this type of housing, but they are not known to be developed under the PUD term, which is a technical planning term. But the creation of a PD allows quite a bit of flexibility for the city in how it works with developers in laying out traditional development sites for residential property. Tonight's action, I want to make it extremely clear, is site specific only? There have been numerous blogs and Web posts indicating that your action tonight would clear the way for this zoning to apply be applied to other institutional zoning districts citywide. And that is categorically false. Tonight's zoning request would allow the creation of a brand new zoning district, but it is only being applied specifically to tonight's site. If anyone else in the city that has a property that is currently zoned institutional wishes to take advantage of this, they must go through the traditional process of a rezoning with public hearings and public input. A plan development unit also allows us to configure densities like like allowing three story units in the center of this project and two story units on the edge of the project. This is very similar to how Spinnaker Bay was developed in District three, although that was developed under sea dip many years ago. It has a similar look and feel. This is also similar to the Crown Point project in I believe it's in District seven now, right near Los Cerritos Park, off of Del Mar Avenue that has a similar look and feel as well. With that pad and those densities, we are able to achieve a higher quality development through the use of this pad. When you're dealing with a large subdivision and so we are asking for your consideration of doing that. The pad that we have selected has been also the subject of quite a bit of discussion over the last year. The developer had looked for higher density than the city staff was comfortable with and we eventually settled on a density of approximately 13 dwelling units per acre. To give you a reference point, the The Crown Point Project on Del Mar Avenue has a higher density than 13 units per acre. That's actually at 14.5 units per acre. So that's the one that we were able to find that currently exists that's most applicable to this project, although that one has higher density. The development agreement is a tool that we are allowed to utilize under state law. So this is a statutory development agreement which gives the city the authority to enter into a long term contract or agreement. We have previously entered into development agreements for most notably the Douglas Park Project with Boeing, and we also recently entered into a development agreement for the Golden Shore Development Project in the downtown. So this would be a similar type of contract. It provides the city the opportunity to negotiate benefits for the city. Above and beyond those are which are normally allowed under traditional planning entitlements. This project and this development agreement would be a ten year contract. It would reserve the rights to the developer for this zoning designation for that entire period of time. It does, as I said, allow the city to to accrue benefits, if you will, to the city in exchange for higher density. In this case, we are looking at significant public improvements, including the construction of a park at Oregon and Alamo, which has been stalled due to the dissolution of the redevelopment agency. In addition to the public improvements which will detail later, the developer will also commit $100,000 in cash to the city to be placed in a traffic mitigation fund that will be used at the discretion of the city engineer, the city traffic engineer in order to mitigate ongoing or future neighborhood traffic mitigation issues that may arise. Additionally, since the developer will be constructing a number of public improvements for the city, we are requiring a performance bond that is 115% of the total amount of the public improvements. We have pored over this project, as I said, and have a number of conditions of approval, which I think are valuable in protecting the city and ensuring that this project will be the quality project that we expect it to be. There will be a construction management plan that is going to manage construction traffic throughout the entire time of construction. There will be a new minimum of six foot six, but up to an eight foot block wall that will surround the site. And we have the ability to to go higher if that is the desire of the city council through a zoning administrator process. We are asking them to bring adjacent streets and sidewalks into ADA compliance, do significant public improvements along the adjacent streets, including Daisy and Oregon Pacific, 48th and 49th streets. We will be asking them to either grind an overlay or to slurry as determined by the city's director of public works. A number of streets in that area, and that includes 48th Street, Pacific Avenue and 49th Street. I believe the developer has an exhibit which will show the extent of the offsite improvements that the city is requiring as part of this project. I am going to momentarily turn this over to Joe Power of Rincon. He's going to address the Environmental Impact Report and the process that we went through in order to get to where we are today. If you could bring that PowerPoint back up, it's the same PowerPoint that Joe will be using that I was just referring to.
Speaker 4: Okay.
Speaker 13: Thanks, Amy. Again, Joe Power from Rincon Consultants. We assisted the city in the preparation of the Environmental Impact Report. I'm here tonight with Greg Martin. Our project manager will both be here to answer questions, if any come up later tonight. I'm going to quickly talk about the process and then I'm going to talk about some of the air findings to begin the process. The city issued a notice of preparation of the draft air back on September 4th of of 2014, that there was a 30 day comment period in which you were taking input on the air scope that ended around October 3rd. During that 30 day period, the city also held two public scoping meetings. Those were on September 24th and September 30th. We had a number of attendees and got a lot of input from the community regarding their concerns for the project. And then most recently, the draft IRR was circulated for the required 45 day public review period in May. The final air on the air includes responses to 23 comment letters that the city received during that 45 day public review period. Those included four letters from agencies and 19 from individuals, mainly folks living in the neighborhood, the adjacent neighborhood. The final air also includes the draft air text with some minor eddies, mainly requiring involving some clarifications that were that came up in the responses to comments, as well as the mitigation, monitoring and reporting program. The final year determined that with all recommended mitigation measures, impacts associated with the project could be reduced to below a level of significance. Here's just a very quick overview of the process. I mentioned that notice of preparation and up at the top. That's where we got input on the air scope. Then the draft air was circulated for public review. With those comments, we responded to all of them, prepared the mitigation monitoring program and the findings and all that is before you tonight where we're ready to make a decision on the project. Now the environmental impacts are identified in the air. We had no Class one or what we call significant and unavoidable impacts. There were a number of impacts that we identified as significant, but that could be mitigated to below a level of significance with mitigation measures included in the air. Those were in the areas of air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology, land use, noise and vibration and utilities and service systems. Now just a quick overview of the impacts that we found to be significant, but medical for air quality, this related to construction emissions. And we had two mitigation measures to address both dust and emissions associated with construction equipment. And with those measures, we could bring the impacts to below a level of significance for biological resources, the impact that we identified significant related to potential impacts to nesting bats and birds, and that's addressed through a pre-construction survey and as necessary avoidance of any nest that are identified during that survey. For the area of cultural resources, we found potential impacts related to archeological and paleontological resources. There are no known resources on the site, but the mitigation is there to address as yet unidentified resources that may be uncovered as grading occurs on site for the area of geology, the impact related to liquefaction and settlement. And we have a mitigation measure requiring placement of properly compacted fill, as well as another measure requiring the building foundation to be properly designed to address those kinds of impacts for land use and planning. The impact relate to local policy consistency, and this impact is really addressed by mitigation measures found throughout the air in such issues as noise, air quality and the like. And then lastly, for utilities and service systems, the impact related to wastewater infrastructure. And we have a mitigation measure, measure requiring the applicant to submit a sewer study and if necessary, upgrade the sewer system to provide needed capacity. Now again, just to reiterate the opportunities for public comment, there have been a number of them that in OPI that I mentioned previously, back in September of last year, there were the two scoping meetings also held in September. The draft IIR public circulation. From May 5th to June 18th. There was a planning commission study session during that public review period on May 21st and then a planning commission hearing on October 15th and of course, tonight's hearing. Now, in addition to the significant impacts that we identified, I want to touch on a number of items that the community expressed concerned about. And in some cases, we identified significant impacts in these areas. And in others we didn't. One that I'd say was the top concern that we heard from members of the community was traffic in specifically cut through traffic on Daisy and through the residential neighborhood adjacent. Air quality was a concern. Land use and zoning changes. Amy touched on that a little earlier. Noise was a concern. Parking and soil stability and seismic hazards are going to go through those very quickly. For traffic. There were concerns both about construction traffic as well as operational traffic for construction. The grading phase would generate about 236 daily trips. Those would be spaced out over the course of the day. Generally, we think avoiding peak hour times building the building construction phase would generate the highest number of peak hour trips by employee trips with about 54. There was a traffic analysis done of the construction vehicles and how they would affect the system. And it was determined that that the level of service standards of the city would not be exceeded by construction traffic. Nevertheless, as Amy mentioned earlier, a construction management plan is going to be required to ensure that traffic is managed during construction . With respect to operational traffic, the project would generate an estimated 98 Olympic hour trips and 131 peak hour trips. The impact would not exceed the city's level of service standards at any of the study intersections. The larger concern was about that we heard was an increase in traffic on local streets, in particular Daisy Avenue. I will say that there was would be in percentage terms a pretty substantial increase in traffic going from an estimated, I think it was 75 daily trips to over 1200. However, the city does not have a specific significance threshold or standard for trips on residential streets, so we did not identify a significant impact despite that pretty substantial increase in percentage terms. Air quality. This was about both construction and operational emissions. We did the modeling based using the standard procedures based on South Coast Air Quality Management District guidelines. We did not find any operational impacts that would be significant or that would exceed AQ MDA thresholds. Project construction, as I mentioned before, would generate emissions exceeding thresholds. But with mitigation measures, recommended impacts could be brought below significant. Next slide noise. There were concerns about both construction noise and operational noise. Construction noise would be temporary and would occur only during daytime hours, so it would not be significant there, although there clearly would be an increase in noise and does not exceed the level of significance. There's really not anything unusual about the construction noise. It would just be it's just going to be loud as construction is. With respect to operational traffic noise, we did model traffic noise based on the air traffic study and found that though there would be an increase in noise on a number of streets, Daisy Avenue in particular, that increase would not exceed city standards or thresholds. With respect to parking, the air does recommend that construction management plan that I mentioned before to address parking concerns during construction. Within the long term, the project includes 302 parking spaces, including 260 private parking garage parking spaces and 40 on street guest parking spaces. I will just mention as an aside as well, parking really is not a sequel issue per se that was removed from the the secret guidelines about five years ago. So it's not an issue we typically are looking at as a potentially significant impact. In sequel terms. Soil stability. The issue that we heard about was a concern that the site may have formerly been used as a landfill. We did not see any evidence of that particular issue. There was a phase one environmental site assessment done for the site, and there was no historic record of there being a landfill there. I skipped over the first concern. A number of folks expressed concern about there maybe being a fault trace running through the site. Again, we've seen no evidence of that based on local or state maps mapping. Fault zones through the city. We do have a number of soil stability mitigation measures to address potential concern. There was the landfill concern was largely about the potential for settlement and how that might affect the project and adjoining neighborhoods. We do have these measures that I mentioned before. Excavation, too adapted for people of existing grade to address foundation concerns as well as the recurring foundation systems to use specific items to address this impact. No alternatives. We didn't study for alternatives. These are required by secure. These were the no project alternative. That one is required under Sequoia and assumes that this site would remain in its present condition. The second one is what we call the reduced density alternative, and that would essentially comply with the current zoning for the site. About 65 units total for about half of what is proposed. We have an alternate alternate site alternative that would put all of the residential development on the Oregon Park site that is proposed for a park that was one that was suggested by the community. And then the revised access alternative, again, this was suggested by the community during the scoping process would involve two points of access, one at DC and another at Oregon. With respect to the alternatives, we really didn't find that they would eliminate any significant impacts. The revised access alternate, for example, would we think, move some trips perhaps up to Oregon Avenue. But as some of you are aware, north of 48th Street, Oregon really narrows. And we think that's going to be difficult for people to pass. And they're probably going to go right back to D.C. and use that to get out of the neighborhood anyway. So we don't think there's going to be a substantial change in the traffic pattern based on that alternative. As I mentioned before, the EIA, the project does not have any significant, unavoidable impacts. So of course, the although the all of the alternatives may incrementally reduce impacts, they would not avoid any significant impacts that that would have under the project anyway. Back to Amy.
Speaker 6: Thank you, Joe. So the planning commission did hear this in a study session in May. They made comments and got a briefing on the air, which was in circulation. They then held a public hearing in October and did recommend that the City Council certify the air and grant all of the entitlements. As I said earlier, it's an extensive list of entitlements and so I'd like to walk you through them. Some of these are a little bit less common for you to see. The first one is your standard resolution certifying the air. That is something that you are required to adopt should you choose to move forward in certifying the air the section. The second action is to adopt a resolution amending the land use element. This allows us to change the land use designation for the Riverwalk site from Elwood 11 to Elwood three. A It's essentially from an open space institutional zone to a residential zone. We're also asking you to adopt a resolution amending the land use element for the for the Oregon Park site. The Oregon Park site has been approved. It has its own environmental document. However, the amendment to the general plan was never done due to the dissolution of the redevelopment agency. So we are asking for your consideration of changing the land use designation from Elwood one to Elodie 11, which would be open space. We're asking for a zone change on the River Walk site from Institutional to the RPE 13, which is our new PUD zoning classification. We are asking you to make a zone change from institutional to park to allow the construction of the park. We're asking you to declare an ordinance allowing the city manager to execute a development agreement in substantially the same form that is presented to you tonight. Also investing tentative tract map, which would allow for the subdivision of the 131 homes into individual parcels for sale. Clearly a review of the site plan. Then the next ones are a little bit less common for you to see. We are asking that you consider an ordinance to allow a credit against the transportation improvement fee. The staff report details that the developer expects to expend at least $1.65 million on traffic improvements in the immediate neighborhood. And there is a credit that we would be asking you to consider in that they would normally be paying a traffic improvement fee of $147,000. So we're asking you to give them a credit for the $147,000 in exchange for the $1.65 million in improvements. Similarly, they would be required to pay a Parks and Rec facility fee in the amount of $604,308. Instead, we are asking that you give them a credit and instead accept the construction of the Oregon Dilemma Park, which has a developer value of approximately $2.25 million. So again, instead of accepting $604,000 in cash, we would instead be giving them a credit in exchange for $2.25 million in park improvements. Lastly, we would ask that you declare an ordinance allowing a zoning amendment for the creation of this new PWD ordinance that would allow this new zoning designation to be in place. I have two items of correction that I'd like to make. One is that the resolution granting the credit for the transportation improvement fees did not include the correct dollar amount. So we would ask that you allow the city attorney's office to provide the correct amount of the traffic improvement fees in that ordinance at $1.65 million or more . The second thing that I would ask is that in the development agreement, we would like to add a clause that would give discretion to the director of public works to determine whether the streets in the surrounding area need to be slurry sealed or whether they needed to be have a full grind mill grind and overlay applied to it. This will allow the the director to have discretion to say a portion of this street is eligible for salary seal, but the other portion of the street must have a full overlay constructed. The developer understands that request, and that would be to Exhibit C of the development agreement. No other changes to the development agreement are expected at this time, but we do have in the ordinance authorization for the city manager to execute the development agreement in substantially the same form that you have it in front of you tonight. I'm happy to answer any questions at this point, or we can take public comment at your pleasure. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I believe we're going to go through the applicant the applicant part of the presentation.
Speaker 6: I'm sorry. Yes. We would like to introduce the applicant. This is Ed Gallagher from Integral Communities. He has a presentation that we would like to bring up. And so with that, I'll introduce Ed Kane.
Speaker 0: We're putting another applicant who requested. Well, two things. One. Mr. Mays mentioned me. The applicant requested 15 minutes for the presentation, and then the applicant also requested an opportunity to do the five minute at the end rebuttal. If there's anything that he wants to to rebut. Is that correct, Mr. Mays?
Speaker 13: That's correct, Mayor.
Speaker 0: Okay. Just for that, for the hearing process there. So with that, Madam Clerk, I can just make sure you set the time for for this and please begin.
Speaker 14: Mary Garcia, members of the Long Beach City Council. My name is Ed Gallagher with Integral Communities in Newport Beach. And we want to thank the staff for the amount of hard work they've put in and all of the all the negotiations that we've done. And I think that the the the we have a vision we had a vision of what we wanted to see with the development and we worked with staff for it's been over two years now and we think we have a community that's a, a great community and we think that the staff has, has enabled the city to get a lot of public benefits out of this. And we completely concur with that. Um. We started this in December of 2013, and here we are today without going through all the steps which aren't necessary. I think we want to focus on a couple of things. One is that we have really think that we've made a really strong effort to engage the community in what we've been doing all throughout the process. Our first community meeting was in November of 2013 at Mike and Diana Julia's house, who live on 48th Street, the back up to the project. We then had another neighborhood meeting once the project was fully designed and had gone through a conceptual review and comment by the city. And we came up with a plan that you see before you tonight. And we had another meeting on on July 30th at the George House. And I want to thank them so much for being accommodating. We then had a meeting in mid-August of 2014 at the Del Amo Mobile Home Park to address concerns and questions that the mobile home park residents may have. And as as was said by Rincon, we had a scoping meeting in September of 2014 to meetings in September of 2014. And we heard what the residents had to say, and we've tried to address those concerns. We finally had another another neighborhood meeting, adult elementary school in November of 2014. As we've gone through the process and the EIA, the draft here was was out. Do we Amy, could we play the video?
Speaker 6: Yes, Jeff is.
Speaker 14: We have a little video that we'd like you to see that kind of capsulize.
Speaker 1: For what.
Speaker 5: Community? A planned community is in the neighborhood bounded by Del Amo Boulevard, Long Beach Boulevard, the Los Angeles River and the Virginia Country Club. Oregon Park today and Oregon Park in the future. The development of Oregon Park, which will have a multi-use artificial turf field, will take place simultaneously with the development of River Walk, transforming this vacant lot into a beautifully landscaped and active destination for the neighborhood. It will have a large parking lot surrounded by picnic areas, a playground with state of the art equipment, fitness stations and also modern restrooms. The park will serve the city of Long Beach and the families who live not only in this neighborhood but other neighborhoods as well . Today, Riverwalk is vacant land that will be converted from unused property to a new home planned community with a dramatic entry supported with quality architecture. Next to the secondary exit gate at the terminus of Oregon Avenue, there will be a tot lot serving the children of the Riverwalk community. As we enter the community, we pass through the entry gates, pass the recreation center and travel the street that loops completely around the community delivering the homeowners to their new destination. The homes are designed with variations of the Spanish theme, all with two car garages and fenced rear yards. The entire community.
Speaker 6: Including the streets.
Speaker 5: Interior landscaping and the new landscaping on Daisy and Oregon Avenue, will be managed and maintained by a professional homeowners association. What a beautiful community and what a great addition to the neighborhood.
Speaker 14: Thank you. When bringing the application before the city of Long Beach and the Planning Commission in the City Council. And I think.
Speaker 9: We're.
Speaker 14: We want to kind of capsule8 the the what we think are public benefits and how we feel as a public private partnership to to develop this community and to to create benefits for the city. Obviously, you've heard a lot about Oregon Park, and it's a 3.3 acres. It's got a an athletic field that accommodates a regulation soccer field and it accommodates a couple of other things. Amy, can you put those on the screen? The park alternatives. It'll accommodate to youth soccer fields. It will accommodate a two softball or little league diamonds, and it will accommodate a star in the video yet. But it will accommodate a miniature football field 70 yards long. Um, and we're, we've in the development agreement, the details of the park improvements are have been enhanced quite a bit to the tune of about an additional $400,000. So that 2.25 is more like 2.6 to $3 million. We have state of the art restrooms and restrooms have grown have grown to be twice as large as they were to begin with. We have six fitness stations instead of one. We have play equipment for two different age groups instead of one. And we have state of the art lighting that went from 15 to 20000 a night to 60,000. So I hope these lights are really good. And so I think that the the the park itself is is a is a it's a it's going to be a it's an a great location and it's going to accommodate not only people in this neighborhood, but other children and people in other neighborhoods. We want to put that one back up, Amy. The next thing I wanted to go through is the off site street improvements that were that we're doing. And you can see by this map behind you, it's pretty hard to read, but I'll go through it quickly. You can see that there is a traffic signal that's at Del Amo and Oregon Avenue. If you come down, you'll see that there's full street improvements from 48th Avenue South on Oregon and 48 Avenue South on Daisy. There is a Oregon Avenue frontage improvements right in front of the park with new curbs and gutters and sidewalks and landscaping. Then from 48th Avenue there is grind and overlay and new ada handicapped ramps on the three intersections of 48th and Oregon and Daisy and Pacific. In addition, you can see in the blue that those streets which are Pacific 49th and 48th Street, we are we are replacing the curb and gutter on those streets as applicable, which probably is going to be a lot. And then we're either going to slurry or we're going to do grind and overlay, depending on the condition of the street and what the street will handle physically. So we're doing a lot of road improvements that are necessary, and we think that the community is going to benefit but is really going to look sharp. You'll also see on the map that there are two access points to the walking path that are next to the Dominguez Gap wetlands, one from Oregon Park and one from the subdivision, too, to to allow access through the public, through the public and the private community. And as Amy said, we're in the 1.6 to 1.7 million for those street improvements. I think in addition to these improvements, there are other benefits to the city. Property values are obviously going to go up. The property taxes just from this community will generate about $900,000 a year in increased property taxes. Local businesses are going to benefit by business generated from the residents of this community. Jobs are going to be created. And we we.
Speaker 9: Are.
Speaker 14: Giving the city about one point, a little over 1.4 million an impact fees and the school district over 1.6 million and school fees. And we think that this community and this development, both the community itself and the park, is creating increasing opportunities for youth activities, enhances the existing neighborhood, and it's making an economic reinvestment in this area . We we realize the temporary inconveniences to our neighbors and an effort of that consideration. We've reached out to Daisy residents and offered to enhance the neighborhood. The neighborhood? So far, what we've done in that neighborhood is and I'll try to go through it quickly, it's a big list, but we've painted 39 houses, we've installed 19 fences painted , six fences painted. We planted drought resistant yards, we've installed window blinds. We've removed 42 tons of trash, installed six security lights, port two driveway pads, repaired four walkways, and the list goes on and on. And we've spent a lot of money doing it because we feel that the neighbors deserve it. And we want we want the neighborhood to feel good about this development. I think that I think that we're we're really excited about developing the site and hopefully the city council will be just as excited as we are. I'd like we have some supporters in the audience and not every single one of them is going to come down here because we want to go home sometime tonight with our supporters. Please stand up. Don't be don't be bashful. Thank you. And you know, if you have any questions, I can answer some now or I'll be around to answer any questions that you might have down the line or or answer objections or positive notes from the audience.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. We're going to keep the hearing going, so thank you. And then you'll have a few minutes at the end, okay. For for any other additional comment. So moving forward, we had the applicant presentation. So now we're going to public comments. So if you're going to comment on this, please come forward. The clerk will set 3 minutes for public comment. And just please make sure you say your name for the record and then begin, sir.
Speaker 9: Kenneth Kern, 474 Virginia Avenue, about two blocks away. You look like common sense people.
Speaker 3: Although D Andrews is in here, so I hope he abstains.
Speaker 9: From the vote. Before certifying this EIA, please ask staff the following four questions How can it.
Speaker 3: Be justified in the.
Speaker 9: EIA using the Long Beach average of 2.8 persons per household? While these include tens of thousands of one in ten, one and two bedroom units, while the well, what they're going to build, they're going to be three and four bedroom units. The U.S. Census report indicates 3.6 persons, which is a 29% understatement of all impacts. Second, why are they using 2.0 vehicles per household when the U.S. average is 2.3? This understatement equals 40 additional vehicles for which there is no room to park and the development they will have to park in the already crowded nearby area. Third, why was the fact that Oregon, which is only 18 foot wide and the Daisy and 48 Street, which are only 30 foot wide, was omitted from the report. Doesn't even mention it. Recommended street widths are 36 foot, with 32 foot being the minimum. Will this not create even more unsafe conditions with this increased traffic? Fourth. What specific street do they intend to use for the projected 2064 dump trucks of dirt? If any of these mentioned streets are to be used, how are the vehicles going to pass each other? They can't get through. The air is flawed and biased and should be rejected because all impacts and mitigation measures are underestimated. Adoption of the reduced density alternative allowing 65 homes.
Speaker 3: Will be the the need to revise.
Speaker 9: The R and B in keeping with the current zoning. You are inviting a lawsuit under the California Environmental Quality Act.
Speaker 3: If you certified the sea air and approve these 131 homes.
Speaker 9: I beg you to ask those for common sense questions. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 9: Good evening, Mayor and council people. My name is Don Hobson. I live at 4965 Pacific Avenue. I didn't come with a speech tonight. I've lived there 27 years. I've witnessed many accidents at.
Speaker 3: The intersection of Pacific and Alamo, which is not signaled.
Speaker 9: The majority of the traffic in the neighborhood use this Pacific Avenue because it's wide enough that two people can pass each other going opposite directions. Daisy Avenue. That's not possible. It's a give and go situation and they're talking about increasing the traffic load to 1200.
Speaker 3: It's it's impossible. But nobody has addressed the.
Speaker 9: Comments that have been put forth on the air other than to say that.
Speaker 3: There is no problem with the road widths. But I beg you to go out and measure them and drive them and.
Speaker 9: Try to try to pass each.
Speaker 7: Other on those roads. It's impossible. I'm just concerned about.
Speaker 9: The long term traffic that will be impacting our neighborhood and running into the ground in the long term. Please reconsider the air on.
Speaker 3: This and look into some of the statistics on it, as was.
Speaker 9: Mentioned earlier, and see if there isn't a better way that we could improve this community. I'm in favor of it, of building.
Speaker 3: Homes, but 65 homes would be a lot less impact and more.
Speaker 7: Tolerable.
Speaker 3: Than 131. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 12: Good evening, Ann Cantrell. There are so many things wrong with this development. I don't have time to address them all. Density, parking, traffic. Air quality noise. Water bill availability. Lack of solar artificial turf in the Oregon park, the PD and adverse biological effects on the project site and the nearby Dominguez Gap. The mitigation for the birds and the other wildlife is inadequate. Putting a 25 foot zone, a buffer zone around a nesting site is not going to help the birds with the construction noise and the people that are around there. It was stated that the project would not have a substantial adverse effect on any repair and habitat, federally protected wetlands or any other sensitive natural communities. This is 200 feet from the defense gap. How can they say that the noise of the construction and the traffic will not have an effect on the habitat of the Dominguez gap ? Also the pod's zoning is, uh. We've tried increase density before with cracker boxes in the 1980s with disastrous results no available parking, increased crime and deteriorating neighborhoods. Staff calls this good urban planning. Anyone familiar with the rat and mice studies of John B Calhoun would disagree with this. He saw a breakdown in social structure and normal social behavior when rodents were crowded together. They were given everything they needed except space. As the population increased, the behavior deteriorated until finally the population quit breeding. High density doesn't work for rats and it doesn't work for humans. Instead of changing the zoning, the developer should change the project. And if you insist on allowing this flawed project to proceed. Do not make this a one size fits all zoning by allowing similar crowded conditions in other projects around the city. In addition to space, the city does not have the water nor the infrastructure to continue to increase its population. Please deny this disastrous plan.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Good evening. My name is Nancy Embry. I live at 4125 Linden Avenue. I'm concerned about this project. Most specifically, I think that a lot of the things that have been mentioned are problems, but the most specific ones are traffic and land use. Stacy Avenue is very narrow. I've taken it with my son who goes to school in Carson. Also, Delano is very congested, very difficult to get through on Delano. And because of the river and because.
Speaker 1: Of the freeway, it's it's hard to get across from Long.
Speaker 5: Beach to anywhere to the West except on board Lower Delano. And now we're going to add to that congestion. In addition to the land use, changing.
Speaker 1: The from open space.
Speaker 5: And park to townhomes is just a big mistake. In the northwest part of Long Beach, we're very much underserved with open space and parks.
Speaker 1: If you'll recall, the other parts of the city have recreation park, which is in excess of 300 acres. We have El Dorado.
Speaker 5: Park in excess of 300 acres. Hartwell Park in excess of 200 acres. What have we got in the northwest? You know, a.
Speaker 1: Few acres at Oregon Park is hardly.
Speaker 5: Compensation for doing this high density development in our neighborhood. Really what we need is more open space and more parks, and that's what we should be doing with this property. So I am absolutely.
Speaker 1: Against specifically adopting the.
Speaker 5: Resolution to amend the land use element of the general plan from DE 11 to D3. It's just wrong. So I urge you to vote against this.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 9: Yes.
Speaker 4: Thank you for hearing my vote on my comments. My name is Richard Reason. I'm a resident here of Long Beach. I think in this area of this part of North Long Beach, I consider it North Long Beach with the.
Speaker 2: Beginning.
Speaker 9: Of the.
Speaker 4: Agenda of the area that you were talking about earlier, about the wetlands and so forth. This is going to go great with the Oregon Park area. It's also going to bring jobs. It's also going to bring more, better living status in.
Speaker 9: The area.
Speaker 4: And upgrade the area of.
Speaker 9: That neighborhood of.
Speaker 4: Between Oregon.
Speaker 9: Daisy and Pacific.
Speaker 4: The contractors and people that are working on this project have nothing but positive attitude toward this thing, and I know they are out to do the best for that neighborhood. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Next speaker, please.
Speaker 7: Yeah. Joe Sopko, fifth district. You have my address. Mayor City Council member. Staff I've been selling real estate in Long Beach for over 30 years, and so I drove that area where the project is proposed and. The whole infrastructure. I mean, all those streets, everything is it's not going to take the traffic at all of those streets to need to be replaced, like much of North Long Beach. It's been neglected. It's been second or third on the list. It's it just it needs a lot of help. Now, that presentation was very nice. But it was like putting lipstick on a pig. You know, they didn't point out the railroad tracks right on one boundary. I live in a two story house and believe me, it takes a while to get that second story. And they're going to build some three story homes. You know, I've never heard of a three story house. I don't live in that. I mean, you'd have to have an elevator in every one of these houses. If if I took one view after this project was built as a client to take a look at this project, you'd say, turn this car around. I will not live here. And this developer, Mr. Gallagher, seemed like a nice fella. But someone should have told him back in December of 2013. It's not here. It it doesn't work here. Education's real important. All of you that have had children or grandchildren, you know how important education is. And you want your children in the best schools that you can look up on. Look on the Internet and you can judge schools. It's terrific. And you've got a you've got a2a3 and a five rating on schools. That's just totally unsatisfactory. No one would move there if they had children. No, I don't know. No prices were quoted, but I've heard $600,000 for one of these units. That's you're not going to have a homeowner or someone with children wanting to live there with those low ratings on schools. God bless the schools. I'm sure they're doing the best they can do. But anybody who's going to invest 5 to $600000 in that area would have to have better schools than that. And they certainly are not going to send it to private schools because we just can't afford that. So. So I would tell you, too, that in the eighties, when I was selling real estate, I always wanted to testify against a project that was destroying the community again. And just project zip is like the cracker boxes in the eighties. Please don't do this to the community.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Good evening. My name is Renee Lawler. I live in Wrigley on San Francisco Avenue. And you hear a consistent theme in my message regarding equestrian. And this is another project that is in the L.A. River Recreation area that does not address adequately the negative impacts to the equestrian community and the historic trail. So this this project does have a Class one issue where the equestrian community has not been addressed. Not only do the Wrigley equestrians rely on the trail that's directly adjacent to this project subject zone, but also the stables in DeLand, Alamo, and any equestrian that use that uses the trail system is potentially negatively experiencing a negative impact . You have a high density development which is directly opposing what the equestrian experience is all about, and to put a high density development right on top of the historic trail without including and incorporating setbacks, without incorporating safety signage, when when you're having all of those new homeowners access and cross over the trail. Again, I reiterate the dangers and concerns that that are not really being addressed for that equestrian community. You have existing zoning law here in the city of Long Beach. You've got an equestrian overlay document which is applicable to the Wrigley Equestrian Zone. But there are certain guidelines within that horse overlay that talk about setback with respect to residents, with respect to anything that is adjacent to, you know, that is residential adjacent to an equestrian existing equestrian area. And and that that zoning overlay should have some application to this project. In addition, you are basically inhibiting and eliminating the continuous mobility of the equestrian user groups. If you proceed with the construction of this project during the time of construction, I understand that there's going to be about a two or three year period of construction with the contractors intending to utilize the the river easement and or trail area for for construction vehicles and equipment and access. So you have disrupted the trail not only from the Delano users coming south, but the equestrians in Wrigley going north. And you've provided no mitigation plan for alternative route for that equestrian trail and the users that are currently dependent upon it, it's our lifeline. It's the only access we have for exercising our horses and we need to be considered. And I oppose this. I ask you not to vote for this project.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Good evening. My name is Dody Soto and my address is 4784 Virginia Avenue. I've lived there for 40 years.
Speaker 0: Daughter Would you mind just pulling your mic?
Speaker 1: Do you. Can you hear me better? Okay. I've lived there for 40 years. That's hard to say these days, isn't it? And I'm an angry resident. I'm sorry you have to see this side of me tonight. But my concerns for the Riverwalk housing project led me to petition against it as well as other my other 250 neighborhood residents. My blood pressure is up in my thoughts for peaceful retirement. I don't imagine squeezing 131 homes and ten acres. Of land that is just incomprehensible to me. I will also add that not once during the planning committee meeting was the possibility of a reduced density alternative discussed or debated. This would at least lessen the number.
Speaker 8: Of homes to.
Speaker 1: 65 that could be built. Because of the number of petitioners who could not attend this meeting and have their voices heard, either due to their work schedules this evening or the availability of free VIP bussing to City Hall, such as was provided to selected residents only by the developer this evening. This seems to present a very biased situation. We have been an unheard group of residents, even by our eighth District Council member, Mr. Elston, who never wanted to share our grievances and the impact of this project with us. But come election time, Mr. Austin, you will feel the impact of the voters. It appears your goal is to build a park at Oregon and Delano and generate more tax revenue. Great idea. But did you have to trade off to the Will Rogers Boy Scout camp to accomplish this? Parking issues. Traffic noise, more pollution. I plead with the council. Is this what you would want? Your neighborhood? You want to Disneyland in your backyard? I think not. Council, can you please tell me one question? Are petitions still do they still hold a voice in today's public? Is it a waste to go and have petitions? I have 250 petitioners here, local residents that have lived there as long as I have. We're mortified with this. We do not want this in our area. It doesn't fit. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Hello. My name is Janice John. I have been working in this area and.
Speaker 0: Just make sure if you can just name and address or neighborhood for unless you have it on file.
Speaker 1: I'm I'm sorry. I live in this Long Beach area and I have been working out here as well. And I see a lot of good coming from this project, a lot of benefits. I think the park is awesome because there's not a whole lot of that in that area that is available to the children, in the family , in the community. I do see with the project itself a very beneficial, um, can I say an increase in quality of living being introduced. And I think that also impacts the schools. I have been working in schools for several decades and I have also started out in schools that have been on the lower end of the rating having difficulty. But I've also seen when there has been an introduction into the community with a more, uh, increase in quality of living, you tend to get more involvement in the schools as well from the families. That in turn also increases the quality of the schools. I am definitely in favor of this project and I do hope it goes through. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Hi, I'm Hayley. Argo and I live in the north Long Beach area and I work in the Bixby Knolls area. And personally I think the project, um, it, it's a good project. It will create more jobs in the area and I think that's important. Me as a college student, that's a big concern. And, um, I just think having more jobs in general is great, especially in that area. I think it'll boost the economy. I think it to me it sounds as though the developers are very interested in not only making the quality of life for the development and.
Speaker 5: The project itself. Um.
Speaker 1: I guess, bringing the quality of it up. But the surrounding areas as well. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Yes, hello. My name is Randy Wise. I live at 200 West 48th Street on a corner of Portland, Oregon. First of all, mayor, to you and the count and to the council chamber. And also, I like the knowledge of my vet, my fellow veterans and their families. You know, thank you very much for your service. I am a vet as well and I'm a disabled vet. I'm really totally against this project because when they first had to preliminaries, had contractors coming and cutting down trees, as the trees were hitting the ground, cracks was coming all out to my house and me and my wife . We still went into this day. If this project began, how would it affect our house? Because of trees can fall and hit the ground cause cracks like that. And we're like, who's going to fix this? Right now we face what cracks unbelievable in our house because of the impact of the trees in the ground. No one gave us warning. No one mentioned anything about the contractors coming in. But now we're faced with cracks. All of our house. Some of these cracks look very I mean, it's really frustrating. So if if those cracks are from trees, once they start shifting to Earth, what's going to become of our house, not just our house ? What about our neighbor house who's elderly? Can't speak. What about the neighbors down the street? You know, I think it's great that the city of receiving revenue, I'm I'm totally with that. But it shouldn't be done at the expense of somebody losing their home or home caving in. They come home. Major problems at home. Who's going to fix this problem? You know, we're faced with problem problems right now that we trying to wonder who's going to fix this? No one. No one young lady gave me her card, told me to call her by the name of Miss Diane Ripley, sent her email. That was like four weeks ago. And she says, You call me in two weeks. Never heard nothing back from her. That's great that they fixing up the neighborhood on paint jobs and all that. That's a blessing. But what about the people who homes are affected once they start shift in the dirt? I'm right in the eye of the storm. So once this happened, what's going to become of my house? Is it gonna cave in when I come on? One day, me and my family are going to be in danger. We'll be sleeping at night here, crack. Next thing, the whole house caved in on us. What's going to happen? That's a good question. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 7: Hi. My name is John Sloan and I live at 163 West 48th Street, right across from where the new development is going. Going into it, going into I happen to support the new development because of all the positive changes it's bringing about in the neighborhood. Because you can see my neighbors are all here. This is the first time I probably met some of them, but I fully support it just for the fact that it is bringing positive change. I like my neighbor, Randy. I'm on the front lines. I'm right across the street from the development and being right across the street from that development, I've dealt with a lot of crap that's going on in our neighborhood. And what I mean by a lot of crap is I'm constantly over in the Ian where Organ Avenue ends, picking up trash along with three other my other neighbors and including that trash that we pick up. We're picking up condoms, we're picking up just trash, weed, weed bottles and all that other stuff. So I do support positive change that's coming through the neighborhood. The reservations I wanted to bring, what I want, what I wanted to bring up is I do have a few reservations with the increased amount of traffic that's coming in the neighborhood that's going to again, that that kind of it scares me already. We're having difficult issues parking in the neighborhood and we get the traffic from Dilemma Avenue during the busy, busy hours. And, you know, we just get a lot of people speeding around that corner where I live, and it creates a problem for me and my neighbors. Other reservations I do want to mention, my neighbors are just right, I'm afraid for them as well, especially the neighbor, the neighbors that are in that cul de sac. Because I do see their street is sinking. I'm concerned for them. They are good neighbors. I love my neighbors in that area and I don't want to see them have to move just because or get hurt just because what the new development may bring. So there are some reservations, but all in all, I do support this positive change. I do I mean, I do wish that they consider dropping the amount of homes from 131 to a little smaller amount. But all in all, I do support what goes on in that community. I do support what Al Austin is doing in that community. Fantastic job. And I just want to say thank you and thank you for my neighbors are coming out here and carrying.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. I like your jacket and let's go pitch next speaker.
Speaker 5: Segway I got my name is Tammy Bennett and I am immediate neighbor on two on one for you eighth street. I'm nervous because this is very dear to my heart. What's going on? I let you know where I'm coming from. I am very proud of my city. I'm proud of the work that all of you have done, especially tonight with approving the development of the Forest Park. I moved here from Northern California just to go to Cal State, Long Beach, go Beach. And I. I am proud of where Long Beach has gone. I'm proud, Mayor, that you have been working really hard with all of us, with the river uplink as well. I agree with Richard, who commented that the forest that will blend with my neighborhood at the Dominguez Gap. I do not agree that this project will blend with my neighborhood and the Dominguez Gap. This I have gone to all the neighbors that at all the neighborhood meetings that I had mentioned. I went to the scoping meetings. I have studied the reports, kept up communication with the eighth District Council office, made public comments, reported code and ordinance violations to this city. That has happened with integral communities. I have attended the public hearing. I've been speaking up and I have searched through the legislator appendix and findings that you all received. And I am not confident that what Ed says they've been trying to work with with the community. It's not showing up for us. We we want to know that off site traffic studies will reflect what we brought up as a community of the scoping meetings with the width of the streets, all the streets in and out of that area. My my neighborhood does have a distinct character. It has the eucalyptus trees that line the perimeter of the property. They sway in the breeze. They attract the birds who live near the Dominguez gap, and they absorb the noise pollution from the metro line, the Union Pacific Freight Lines. They are blowing their their horns last night, mid midnight, mid-day early morning. The buffer zone that they want to put here with this particular project has only 20 feet high. Freeze. They will not. If I fear they will not give the privacy to to my neighborhood and keep the the the quality of life that my my neighbors and I have been able to go. I want to be proud of of my neighborhood. I, I deal with the blight. My neighbors and I deal with the blight in and out. We use the Go Beach app to get the trash cleaned up off of the 48th Street berm Union Pacific. I want to know what you would be proud of. This project doesn't reflect that.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Hi there. My name is Gabrielle Weekes.
Speaker 1: I'm a resident of the second District, but I'm the elected chair of the Sierra Club for the 11 cities in and around Long Beach. So I represent members in all the council districts. You guys got a letter a few weeks ago from one of our volunteers, Justin Ramirez, suggesting that some other things happen with this property because Long Beach has been such a leader with union issues as well as environmental issues. We were surprised that this didn't call for a union labor to build these things, but also that we lost an opportunity to be environmental leaders here. There are developments going in in a lot of neighboring communities in Southern California that require for large developments like this that they have solar on the roof, that they have gray water, drought tolerant landscaping. I heard tonight that the developer is gifting drought tolerant landscaping to the neighbors to to buy their, you know, support for the issue . I'd like to see some drought tolerant landscaping on this actual development. Maybe some other environmental components like, oh, I'm sure increased insulation that that would require less air conditioning and heating in the seasons if they did more than just the bare minimum that's required by law. So there's a lot of things that with a large development like this, whether it's 60 some odd homes or 130 that you guys could have this really be an example for what transit oriented development. Make a special bus stop there or as well as just environmentally responsible development could look like. And so I hope you guys will maybe search through your emails and look for that letter from just a Ramirez. It had a few ideas, I'm sure there maybe even some more. If you guys want to make that, hold that to the same standard that like Signal Hill and Irvine are now doing for large developments. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 10: Good evening, mayor and council members. My name is Kobe Sky. I'm a second district resident. My address is on file. I'm also an environmental engineer. I'm on the Sustainable City Commission and a board member of the local Sierra Club as well. And I know that often Sierra Club is painted as opposed to development. And I just want to make clear that we're not opposed to development. But we have spoken out at council meetings before in opposition to the development that has a significant negative impact on the environment, on the quality of life of residents, on developments that don't have redeeming qualities in terms of environmental mitigation, affordable housing, other criteria that we as a city hold are important and developments that have terrible precedence in terms of land use, in terms of secure, in terms of the environmental impacts. And this project hits all of those. And so I won't repeat comments that have already been raised, but I think that, um, we're very concerned about the way this project has been moving forward, and we hope that the Council send it back for further consideration. Also, just to echo comments that were raised earlier, I think further vetting of projects like this, especially at this scale, we haven't seen a project of this scale, a residential project in many years. And we have a great Sustainable City Commission with a lot of really great expertize, and we'd love to see projects of this scale come to that commission so we can help the developers get some of the environmental issues that are raised. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Hello, I'm Joel Weinstein. I live in District eight. I walked out to this site just a couple of days ago. I drove to the Gateway also to get a real feel for this. What strikes me is that what you're being asked to do tonight, the whole list is illogical. You're being asked to designate a new zoning. When this is not even part of the menu that you're able to do legally. And then later you're being asked to approve this new zoning citywide. There was a comment, I think, from his body that no, it really wouldn't apply citywide. But if you look at the language, it would it just is that apparently her department doesn't intend to immediately invoke its provisions because there aren't projects immediately in the pipeline to apply it to. Now, if, in fact, you think you can pass a new ordinance for which there's been no due notice, I think you have something to think about. The process is probably illegal and is for sure illegitimate. It is unfair. There has been no public discussion of a citywide policy. Every call, every call to these hearings emphasized that this is about River Walk About or Oregon Del Amo Park about that neighborhood. So there's no clue to residents except that there's no clue to residents of the city. What's really at stake? It's citywide. Now, is the news possible new zoning a good idea? Well, I think if you look at this project. Well, first of all, the new zoning is a catch all because it's not only R.P. 13, it could be R.P. anything. In other words, it's total flexibility, which is regarded by the proponents as a good thing. Actually, you have zoning regulations not to permit total flexibility, but to have constraints. So really, this is kind of an anything goes new zoning with a particular case of our P 13. And you see what that case may mean when it's played out at this project site. This project essentially has been designed as a high class ghetto. It has a one gate. I'm on like the planning documents of ten and 20 years ago in the city, which said, let's have higher density, but let's put the residents along transit corridors and business centers so that they can be well-served by good public transit to get to their jobs and they can patronize businesses there. This is not it at all. Rather, what it reminds me of is my father's memoirs. When he came to the USA. They passed through Warsaw on their way from the Ukraine and they lived for a couple of days with relatives in a Warsaw tenement. One gate served hundreds of people. There were tenements and then tenements and tenements. And of course, 22 years later, that became part of the Warsaw Ghetto. That's sort of what you're acting for if you go with this. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank your next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: I'm not a public speaker. So I wrote this down. My name is Diana Drew, and I live at 116 West 48th Street. Um, our house is directly adjacent to the proposed development that would literally be in our backyard. When we chose our house, we chose it for a lot of reasons, one being the privacy that we had. The Boy Scout Park was back there filled with acres of trees and it was really nice. But things change and we all know that they're going to change. The Boy Scout Park is not there anymore. That land is going to be developed by somebody somehow. So. We need somebody that's going to make it better, not worse. We think that with this property going in, this development going in, it's going to increase our property values. It's not going to decrease them. If this doesn't go in, somebody else will come in and maybe they come in with more townhomes. Maybe they come in with condos, maybe they come in with lower income. And that decreases our property, but it also increases the crime. This group has come out into the neighborhood. They've gone door to door. They've talked to all of us and asked us what we need. Some people answer, some people don't. Some people like to complain. There's nothing I can do about that. But they've asked us. They've helped us. I don't know what more we can really ask. We want our neighborhood to improve. We want our area to improve. They want our area to improve. It seems like our goals are kind of the same. Is it a perfect plan? No. You know, is ever going to be happy about it? No. But considering the possible alternatives that are out there, I think it's a good plan. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Laurie Angell. I live at 458 East Platt Street, which is probably within a half mile of the of the development in real estate. It's location, location, location. Now, I don't have a problem necessarily with density. The problem with the density of this project is where it's located. There's no easy way in and out of that neighborhood. If you picked up that piece, that parcel ten acres and put it elsewhere where people could get in and out of the neighborhood be a completely different story. So it isn't being adverse to density. It's been adverse to that level of density in an area that you can't get in and out of. So it doesn't really belong there. That's the problem. So what you need, you need to reduce the density of that project if you're going to have it there. Otherwise, you're introducing lifelong problems to that neighborhood that's going to impact them for the rest of their days. It's the it's the wrong thing to do. The parking is inadequate. I mean, they don't have driveways. You just have to park in your garage. I did notice that there's a little street parking, but I can hardly see it at all. We were told there's no significant impacts with parking, but there's going to be 1200 increased trips per day through the neighborhood. 1200 increased trips. But the city doesn't have a standard, so it's no problem. The city doesn't have a standard, so it's no problem. Are you kidding me? We're going to allow the increased traffic because the city doesn't have a standard for that and there's no way to mitigate it. It's going to happen. So so what my suggestion is, I mean, I was part of redevelopment. We bought the property for for Oregon Park. We want Oregon Park. I worked on that for years and years and years. Don't do Oregon Park. Don't do the level of improvements to that neighborhood that you're doing that is forcing the developer to have that level of density in the neighborhood. Don't do it. We'll do the park some other time. It's a wonderful little thing to just put in front of you, but the cost to the neighborhood and the individuals and the safety issues on the street are overwhelming. So talking about alternatives, the only alternative we got was 131 units. That's our alternative. Give us an alternative that works better for everybody. So the city and the developer have been working on this for two years. What we got was a fully baked, baked plan with. Absolutely. I mean, you know, the incidental public input that you have to do for these plans without any real anybody really listening to us. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Good evening. My name is Josette Sangria, and I live on D.C. Avenue for eight, six, six D.C. Avenue. And thank you for your time tonight. Pardon me for my vocal chords. Not really functioning well.
Speaker 0: But I'm perfect. No problem. I'm sorry. I said you sound perfect.
Speaker 1: Oh, thank you. I was here on October 15th, and tonight I would like to continue on supporting this project. I am very excited. And for my children who grew up in Long Beach and who also received scholarships, not to underestimate the schools in Long Beach. You know, we have a motto at home that anywhere you go, anywhere, any place you go, the first teachers are the parents. And it is the teaching at home and the discipline at home that helps the children grow. So and we have been to the other in a city in Carson also. Of supporting the project long before the Home Depot. And we were other ground breaking also for that one because we wanted our children to grow in a community to to be part of a community where sports also are emphasized. And this park here in Oregon would welcome the inner cities, too, to give them a chance to make their minds busy. A lot of teenagers, a lot of young people growing up and we know the fact that there are so many, you know, broken homes due to addiction, all that. And we want to integrate our children the education itself. And not only that, sports, too. And for this project, it has really. Given our community like we are? Well, I have been there almost 20 years, and I don't even know some of the some of the residents there. Now it's uniting our community. And it's I think I'm very, really excited and want my children and my grandchildren to be proud that I'm a part of supporting a project like this. Because my children grew up and they had scholarships in college and in tennis, and now they're successful. And now they are also looking for homes in Long Beach. And my other daughter lived in San Diego, moved back and she's she looked at a change and she wants more change, too. And this is a big change. And I'm so thankful for the Riverwalk homes and the developer. Thank you so much for your time. And I am here to support every every step of the way for it. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, ma'am. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 4: Good evening. My name is Edward Giles.
Speaker 3: I live at 240 West 48th Street. I live in a cul de sac on 48th Street that's neighboring.
Speaker 4: To.
Speaker 14: The River Walk project.
Speaker 4: Family lives and homes matter in our community.
Speaker 3: Fans in this community have complained that their homes and streets are thinking.
Speaker 4: They have not received a response to any of the fan.
Speaker 3: Satisfactions from the lobby city officials.
Speaker 4: As soon as a developer.
Speaker 3: Wants to come and totally.
Speaker 4: Rearrange our community.
Speaker 3: We have pending.
Speaker 4: Infrastructure. The Planning Commission approved the Riverwalk project.
Speaker 3: To be presented to the.
Speaker 7: City Council for final approval. During this commission.
Speaker 4: Session, it appeared to this writer that the general consensus of the Planning Commission that it was going to be inevitable that the Boy Scout.
Speaker 3: Camp grounds that is not open area will be.
Speaker 4: Resolved by developers and communities should be happy with the deal that was on the table. I know that this may be.
Speaker 3: True and the committee must make some sacrifices. But to build 131 homes, the 4747.
Speaker 4: Daisy Avenue is.
Speaker 3: Overwhelming and not acceptable. The traffic volume, pollution parking problems will create a major impact.
Speaker 14: To the infrastructure of our communities.
Speaker 4: The neighboring homes to the river project should not have to endure two and.
Speaker 3: Three story homes overlooking our homes, which will eliminate privacy, peace and tranquility. It's one thing to remove.
Speaker 4: Well over 100.
Speaker 14: Mature trees.
Speaker 3: But to lose your peace and tranquility to two. Two. Two and three storey homes will have a negative, negative impact to my family. The developer's efforts to reach out to the community are well noted.
Speaker 4: But all the paint.
Speaker 3: Fences, fences. Pruning of trees. To to affect the.
Speaker 4: Curbside appearances for the residents.
Speaker 3: Close to the entry and exit the daisy and organ avenue would not change the facts. Too many people.
Speaker 4: Vehicles and water drought will still have a dramatic negative effect on the infrastructure.
Speaker 14: Of our community and my family.
Speaker 3: Our concerns were brought to the attention of our eighth District Council member in informal gathering. His response.
Speaker 4: Was, Just ask the.
Speaker 3: Developer for what you want done in the community. Chances are.
Speaker 4: You get it? I shouldn't have to negotiate with the developer for infrastructure concerns.
Speaker 3: I have observed other areas in the community within the district. And sidewalks that are maintained new paved by the city of Long Beach.
Speaker 4: Why does our community have to negotiate with a developer for infrastructure construction concerns? Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 15: Good evening, council members and good evening. I'm Eric Garcia and my name is Virgil and I live in DC Avenue and between 40 and 49th Street and I live there since 1999 and I'm here in support of the Riverwalk project I'm supporting is because this is the continuation of the beautification of the not Long Beach. It's virtually done by your ex-mayor and you as a mayor right now that you're doing a good job in the not long bits. No indication of the alley and the not the Long Beach volleyball road. And the reason why I'm supporting this is because the not Long Beach now is losing a lot of businesses. One hope is that we lost the arts, we lost the rails, we lost the harbor paths and all those small businesses in these buildings and not Long Beach Boulevard. You can see a lot of vacancies, a lot no tenants now. But because of this Riverwalk project, this will help boost the surrounding businesses and all the restaurants and all the gasoline stations and everything will benefit from all this Riverwalk project vacation. You can see the beautification. They really help get behind the surroundings of the Dixie Avenue, Oregon Pacific and about eight and 49 Street. And this is this will continue the beautification project of Long Beach Long Beach mayor and and and others. And I can I can see the big picture that this will really help boost the air and the value of the homes in the surroundings. And also, you know, the traffic that is normal here in LA, in Southern California is it's always there, this tropical wherever you go, especially on grass hours. And I'm pretty sure this project, city project will have a solution to those. That's why they're putting a traffic light. And I also emphasize I think this is better than the leave. This land, idle and useless is better. They have something in there, it's gasoline. Or you going to have a beautiful park where they put the people around the area will benefit and it's good. And the Del Amo that all those cars passing by will see the dedication that's going on in the area. That's why I'm here in support of this project. I can see the big picture and I know that this is will help a lot of things in the area. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. I'm going to I'm going to go ahead. And unless there's anyone else close the speakers list, please just get in line. If you're if you're planning on speaking, sir, move, move the the line down so I can get everybody in there. But I'm going to. Go ahead, sir.
Speaker 4: Hello. My name is Luke Halsey. I reside in 4956 Daisy Avenue on the list on this address for 60 years. To me, it seems like this project is being rushed through by some special interest groups who want to make some quick money. This project, in its present form is too big for the area. The three story home just don't fit in fit.
Speaker 7: In the area.
Speaker 4: The streets in this area. What they said before falling apart, they need to be dug up. The slurry seal doesn't do the job also and it is too much. Traffic on these streets is ridiculous. And also. Maybe by losing development, who was looking at a rusting railroad, bridges all full of graffiti and everything.
Speaker 9: And that bridge was built in 2002.
Speaker 4: And has never been painted. I mean, what an eyesore you and and see what else to do to the project. This development is being cut back by at least a whole bunch of homes. I don't know the exact number. Daisy Avenue would have to be made a one way street between.
Speaker 7: 49th and Alamo northbound.
Speaker 4: Only because two way traffic is a disaster. Coming down the street is just too narrow. And also as far as the park goes. What are they going to do about that park being a magnet for crime, gangs, trash.
Speaker 7: Graffiti and everything else out there that's going to be fenced.
Speaker 4: Off yet to have a post, a guard, 24 hours a day there, that just could be.
Speaker 7: A magnet for crime. And also when we.
Speaker 4: Do get the police, the police are too busy being south of the Pacific Railroad.
Speaker 7: Tracks are all hiding on Bixby Knolls and Virginia Country Club. And when they do come to town, they run it through the.
Speaker 4: Real quick and disappear. So anyway, this is this project needs to be examined.
Speaker 7: More thoroughly before a decision is made. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 7: My name is Richard Ivey. My address is on file. I'm worried that this sets a precedent like we did in the 1980s, where we created all those cracker boxes. We have adjacent property of the oil operator site. We have the idea that this can go on in in other districts without really thinking about this, without having, you know, the proper outreach, the idea of permitting and in fact, encouraging to the point of creating a special zoning designation for a land use form we do not want is baffling. We do not want high density development in most of Long Beach as one of the reasons we live here rather than in downtown L.A.. It is because even though we are an area with a high population, we are spread out. And that's what makes Long Beach the great city that it is. This would be great in the area surrounding city hall, around city hall. This proposed ordinance might make sense where New could replace some of the old, severely outdated projects that do not provide parking and basic necessities like laundry area recreational amenities. Ironically, though, this is probably one of the few areas in Long Beach that other areas in Long Beach that this will encourage to have high density development. The Gaslamp District down in San Diego. There was not the high density that we got with the cracker box houses, and those areas have been able to be restored and regenerated. This is going to set the precedent where, again, like some areas where we have the cracker box houses, I've done property management. It's really hard when you're on a block with something that's overbuilt and you can't change it to try to restore a neighborhood. And this is going to we can rebuild our cities. We're looking at the future. They did a project on the genome in the 1990s and they determined, you know, they were talking all about it was genetics. It was this. We rely on our city to develop infrastructure, to develop the environment we're going to live in, to determine the kind of people and the kind of city we're going to have in the future. And genetics determined to be irrelevant. They determined the most important thing that is environment. And we're setting the future of our city and we're not making a good precedent for environment.
Speaker 0: If you do support before before the next speaker. Just the gentleman. The end is the last speaker. So, Mr. Good, who you already are, were in line. So you called. But the gentleman in the end. Raise your hand real quick there. That's your final speaker there. Okay, so we're just going to close the speaker's list. We got everybody else in line. Sir, your next.
Speaker 9: Thank you. I'm John Bolton. I'm the director of the Long Beach Boy Scouts. And on behalf of the board of directors of the Boy Scouts, I want to thank you for the opportunity of addressing you all. I just wanted to share a few things tonight about about this project and about the process that the Boy Scouts went through in determining what we were going to do with J. Read Scout Park back in 2008 at the downturn, economic downturn, we were seeking ways that we could be fiscally sustainable and manage the assets that we currently had. And we embarked upon a new strategic planning process at Tenet. Most of you might not be aware, but we had a tenant at will J read a long view private school that at its peak at 225 students in it and that closed in 2008. And so as we went through that process, we clearly carefully evaluated all our facilities for current usage patterns, future use of patterns, deferred maintenance, and also what could be a replacement of usage. And we'll do a read scout part kept on coming to the top of our lists to be evaluated in an effort to preserve the site . We worked with nearly a dozen groups, including private schools, other youth groups and community organizing organizations trying to preserve the property. In 2011, we brought in the Trust for Public Lands, a nationally recognized land conservation group. TPL worked for a year and a half to form a coalition to purchase and operate the site by the expiration of the contract in 213, TPL was not able to garner enough interest for a public access facility, and so we decided to put it on the open market, and now that's where Indigo Properties purchased it. So what does that meant to us and what does that meant for the Boy Scouts? The sale has allowed us to invest in our other properties. We lease RC based on a Naples Island. We own a square mile in the mountains, and it's given confidence not only for us to invest in those properties, but confidence for donors to invest in us. We have completed $200,000 improvements at our base and we put $1,000,000 into camp targets and we use very little from the proceeds of the sale for that. That's all come through donations. In addition, we've raised an additional $2 million towards other projects with an eventual goal of 5.8 million to invest in the sea bass in our current service center. I think that the ultimate thing that this will mean is more families for scouts, more families, schools, more families for businesses, and plus a new park. And I hope that you approve it. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Next week for peace.
Speaker 5: Good evening. My name is Carmen Valdez. I'm an eighth district resident and coincidentally, a proud mother of a first class scout. This is just an aside that came to me tonight. Rules and regulations of the Boy Scouts of America, Article nine, Clause six specifically states the Boy Scouts of America shall not, through its governing body or through any of its officers, its charter councils or members, involve the scouting movement and any question of political character. I would like you to take that into consideration when you consider the previous speakers comments. This year, the city of Long Beach ranks as 18th in Park score out of the largest 75 cities in the U.S.. It would have done better if not for the fact that the size of a median park in Long Beach is a mere three acres. Tonight, you can lower our rank by eliminating a park that is three times the medium size by rezoning it. The chairman of the Long Beach Planning Committee mission, Mark Christopher, stated, quote, This property is too valuable not to develop. I asked the council today. Have any of you researched the cost of the city to transform ten and a half acres of already developed land into parkland? Is it even feasible? Excuse me for disagreeing with Mr. Christopher's shortsightedness. Earlier this year, tens of thousands of Long Beach residents went without power for five days. Let me repeat that. Tens of thousands of Long Beach residents went without power for five days. This was followed weeks later with another lasting three days. Have any on this council or the office of the mayor considered that this outage was due to the strain of an outdated infrastructure and the continual development of the downtown area in the last few years? During the Planning Commission meeting. When asked about the additional load to the existing grid, added Gallagher of Integral two communities flippantly replied If everyone's power will be off when the system is taxed, so will those in this development. Tonight, the Council will vote on the countless health, social, environmental and economic benefits of Parkland to a community council member. Austin. Is it your legacy to be that of the council member who thought parks are overrated and not necessary and that cookie cutter homes as ubiquitous as fungus which paint the landscape of Orange County, are more valuable than our health, wellbeing and safety. How about making this land the crown of the divorce wetlands about which you so enthusiastically spoke earlier? Where do your priorities lay? I ask that you reject the rezoning of this land from you. Allowed number 11 to elude. Three. Elude. Three. Thank you for your time.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 5: Good evening, Ray Gavlak, eighth district. And I'd like to ask if you would please listen for comparison. The following Long Beach parks are close to the same size as will Jay Reed, Ramona Park, Martin Luther King Park, Mother's Beach, Los Cerritos Park, Golden Shore, Reserve and Cherry Park. They're all between seven and a quarter to ten and a quarter acres. Now, imagine these parks tucked away in the corner of an underserved neighborhood with ingress and egress limited to only two locations onto these currently overburdened and narrow streets, streets that have not been maintained and are beyond being able to be fixed with.
Speaker 1: A slurry.
Speaker 5: Seal. Now envision that they're within blocks of a large mobile park that serves 131 mobile homes. Their entrance and exit onto Oregon that has no parking allowed on the street and can only support one car in one direction at a time. On the opposite border of this enclosed neighborhood is the Gresham housing project that was built to support Section eight housing needs. The other two borders are the lovely Dominguez Gap wetlands that serves our residents with a quiet, open space opportunity. And the other is Union Pacific Railroad at the top of a 30 foot embankment. And you heard they travel throughout the night. Can you honestly state that you would relocate or suggest to a friend or a family member to invest $600,000 in a home in this type of neighborhood? The Dominguez Gap residential community itself struggles with poor property maintenance, crime, parking issues, abandoned properties and narrow streets. These descriptive words were used at the Planning Commission meeting by people that spoke in support of the project. I'd like to say kudos to the developer for providing exterior paint on dozens of these homes, fixing gates and yards to gather support for their project. But even this act of bribery does not seem sufficient to entice new homeowners to drive to their private gated community tucked in the corner of this isolated neighborhood. Daisy and Pacific are defined as the main entrance off of Delano Boulevard for this proposed development. Driving west on Del Amo, both left turn pockets are limited to two cars maximum. What happens during the high traffic hours in case you don't drive it, it's gridlock. With the approval of this project, there will be an additional 300 vehicles. Council members. You may want this new zoning for other areas like the property being sold at Los Coyotes and Woodruff in the fifth district or the seventh District oil field properties in Wrigley. But even those have better access than what we're talking about tonight. It is a separate issue. And Councilmember Austin, please take the lead on this. You were elected to improve quality of life for our residents, not support negative development that isn't even from our city. Don't allow this to move forward by approving new zoning that will give the developer the opportunity maybe to sell it off now with entitlements back to the community with zero leverage.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Right. Time's up.
Speaker 5: Keep this. Land is open space for the citizens of Long Beach.
Speaker 7: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Next speaker, please. Okay.
Speaker 9: Hello. My name is Mike Driller. I live on 14th Street. My wife spoke earlier. We're right on the property line there. I feel a little funny speaking with all of these good speakers who have obviously done a lot of homework. My homework is kind of. Now let's say it's much less. I talked to Al Austin. Of course, he's a politician. And I talked to Ed Gallagher, who's essentially a salesman in this situation. But I like what they say. I believe them. And I think that the good guys that are trying to do what they can. In the situation. It's not a good one. I mean, there's a lot of. There's a lot of downside to this, but they paid $6 million for this ground. And it's not a Boy Scout camp anymore. It's going to be sold. It's going to be developed. And I'd like to try to do it with that company and the people that have been coming around. I know they're just painting houses and fiction gates, but I appreciate that. And maybe I'm just easy to bribe. But I like Moran. I think I approve of this development.
Speaker 0: Thank you. But after this gentleman, Mr. Good here, you're going to be to this gentleman and the last few speakers. I think he's the last one. So, Mr. Good here. You will go before him, okay? No, no, not before him. Go ahead, sir. Your next.
Speaker 7: Good evening, Mayor. Good evening, Councilman. My name is Victor. I live on Daisy Street, 48th Street and 49th. I'd like to say that the project Riverwalk is is is going to bring a lot of positive and, you know, a lot of progress to our area.
Speaker 2: When buying a home sometime in 2011, 2012, I was discerning where to buy and I couldn't afford Bigsby. And if there's more development in this area north of the railroad and an improvement to the area, I would really like that because it increases the value of my property where I stay right now.
Speaker 7: So I'm.
Speaker 2: All for the Riverwalk.
Speaker 7: Project and there's some mitigation.
Speaker 2: Actions perhaps that have really been touched on, like traffic and parking. But I'd like to thank the the lady Diane, who, who has been explaining a lot of things to the about the project to me and I. I think it's a good project and I'd like to endorse it. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Next speaker.
Speaker 1: Good evening and thank you for your service to the community. My name is Carol Beery and I own a residence at 48th and Daisy. I'm in opposition of the proposed 131 unit project due to the impact of such increased density on the neighborhood and streets that are well below city standards for width. Our 13, 13 homes per acre. That's dense. Yes, the developer has had many meetings, but several of us have been opposed all the way. I've seen how they're improving properties in the area to buy approval and bussing those people into this meeting and last month's commission meeting. Regarding density, this small quadrant neighborhood is mostly single storey residences, yet the developer proposes 131, two and three story homes. These homes are to be three and four bedrooms. HUD states that there is a two person per bedroom policy which indicates actual occupancy will be 6 to 8 persons per household. However, the developer has stated that there will be 2.82 persons per household. This is a 29% understatement of all impacts. Why has this number been skewed and understated? Parking. The developer proposes 131 homes with two car garages and no driveway parking. They have indicated that there would be 40 guest parking spaces. The developer stated that they do not anticipate outside parking of the development as each residents will have a two car garage. However, the number they have used for vehicles is two vehicles per household when the national average is 2.3. Why has this number been skewed and understated, and how many? Two car garages do you know where 2.3 or even two cars are actually parked in them? There's not nearly enough parking provided within this development. These extra 100 plus cars will have to park in the nearby neighborhoods streets that are already crowded with vehicles at night and on street sweeping days. What will happen on weekends and holidays when residents have guests for parties and family gatherings? Regarding the roads, why was the fact that there are substandard streets, substandard side streets leading into this project omitted from the report? For example, Daisy is only 30 feet wide and Oregon is only 18 feet wide, according to the standards published by the University of California at Berkeley. Recommended street widths are 36 to 40, with 32 being the.
Speaker 5: Minimum for two sided parking.
Speaker 1: Regarding traffic, using the national average of 2.3 vehicles per household at two trips per day, this equals 524 additional in and out trips per day on these narrow streets where vehicles already have difficulty passing one another. The condition of the streets is poor and the winds are substandard. Unsafe conditions for residents and pets will ensue. With this increased traffic, how would even.
Speaker 5: Emergency vehicles access this development? The E.R. E.R..
Speaker 1: Is flawed and biased and should be rejected because the facts are distorted. Why should zoning be altered to accommodate? Thank you, Bill. This project would set a terrible precedent.
Speaker 0: MAN Time. Time is up.
Speaker 1: Time's up. West. 65 homes instead.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Actually, sir. Mr.. Good to hear your next. Mr.. Good to hear your next note. This gentleman's lesser. Mr.. Good to hear your next. Okay, then just come up. He wanted to use less of mine, so go ahead.
Speaker 9: I'll be brief. Before getting to my overarching concern, just let me say I share the thinking of Reagan-Bush, of Joe Sabo and Cantrell, and particularly the gentleman that spoke of it reminded him of the Warsaw Ghetto, which comes close to what I was thinking when I looked at that picture. I said to myself, that is certainly, certainly a very fantastic design and looks very good. That would be ideal in a third world country where they would probably, unfortunately, have to put 10 to 12 families in each one period. There is no question this issue puts. Not only the current head, the councilperson for the district has been, but the entire council on a war footing with the rest of the city. If you've tried to follow this paradigm, period. I think it should be cut down, but at least by a third. But I want to now turn to something that you really never even that nobody else has mentioned. I don't think you've thought of the impact that this is going to have. If this goes through and particularly if it if it seeps out to other districts to have on the hotel business and the tourist business, on the business to the the attendance of the aquarium and the Queen Mary. Think for yourself as a parent, as a family member, would you take your family to a city? Where there's obviously something in the tap water, that ginger, this type of damaging thinking period, it makes absolutely no sense. And indeed it does put you on a war footing. I hope you realize that. And I understand that. And that's not just in the ninth District, that's across the city. And that's particularly true combined with the head up the rear decision of having a building here on Ocean Boulevard with having only requiring one parking space per unit period. It's just there is something in the tap water that needs to be addressed. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Final speaker.
Speaker 9: Hello, I'm Richard Gutman. I live at six of 2/37 Street and Wrigley Heights. It said that you would even consider allowing this property be built upon. It's one of our last open spaces along the L.A. River. It could be purchased or even taken by eminent domain for a few million dollars. I'm sure you claim we don't have the money yet. You're able to spend hundreds of millions for a new civic center without making a serious effort to explore retrofitting the current city hall. I watched this item recently when it came before the Planning Commission, over 250 residents signed a petition opposing it, and a number of people came down here and spoke against it, presumably, and uncompensated, just wanting to preserve the character of their neighborhood. I don't think the same can be said for all of the eight or ten who spoke in favor of this project. The developer admitted he planned houses. He painted houses of 23 residents and worked on over 30 homes to improve the neighborhood. Tonight, he gave even larger numbers. It's nice to have the homes fixed up, but this is little different from giving money in exchange for support. So as for executives of individual communities illegally contributing $750 to councilman, you're on this officeholder count. One $750 contribution is the legal limit. The council member returned the money. But are we to believe Integral Communities just gave him $3,000 out of the goodness of their heart? What bothers me more still is that you're wrong. It's like councilman and this same developer is trying to buy the oil operators highly contaminated property in my Wrigley Heights neighborhood, and he wants this same zoning planned unit development to build more sun cracker box homes there. I have an email I obtained on the public records under a public records request from Amy Bodak, in which she suggests that this same zoning be used in oil operators, be used on oil operators property in my neighborhood. The proposed ordinance states that the purpose of a planned unit development is to reduce or eliminate rigidity in traditional development standards. This is contrary to the very purpose of development standards. It does make more money for developers, though. After reading this proposal that this proposal allows houses only 16 feet wide, I made it my own homes frontage. My house is pretty small to 112 square feet, but it's 36 feet wide. A 16 foot wide house is ridiculous. Our neighborhood of standard 6000 square foot lots was the first outside of Belmont Shore, Naples, where the city allowed homes to be built on 2400 square foot lot. Please go take a look at what was done to Golden Avenue, north of Ward Road before you vote on this proposal. These two 400 square foot lots are neighborhood records. No place for kids to play, nowhere to park cars. And they are unbelievably narrow, 25 feet wide, but still wider by five feet than those in this proposed development. The late.
Speaker 0: Start times.
Speaker 9: Say one more.
Speaker 0: One more sentence.
Speaker 9: But the late Ray Robinson accounts for our district, told a developer who had built them, you built substandard houses on substandard lots on a substandard street.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Okay. So we've we've closed public comment. So now the the appellant has an opportunity for a couple of minutes of rebuttal or additional now serve you you use I believe 13 minutes of the last. So if you can just keep us to two or 3 minutes, that would be ideal. Please.
Speaker 14: I'll keep it really short.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 14: Just a couple of definitive things to say. The I've heard some negative comments on several issues and we want to clarify some things. For example, the use of artificial turf on the park is that was what was the city wanted. And we can go either way on that. The gentleman just spoke, said something about 16 foot white houses. That's completely incorrect. That's not true. And I think that the education, the school we like, the schools, I mean, sure, they could get better, but they're not. They just got bad. For some reason, I don't understand it. And for the gentleman who spoke about worrying about if his house is going to fall down, if we do anything on that site to cause damage to houses, we will fix it. I urge you to read the nine letters of support that were delivered earlier. And then there was one comment about about union issues. Well, all the public improvements that we're doing are all going to be paid by prevailing wage. So that will foster the the union involvement. Um, and I think one of the ladies mentioned that we should have drought resistant landscaping that's condition 12, that's requiring of the subdivision drought resistant landscaping. So I just wanted to bring those things clear so that the council understands that some of those things weren't quite correct. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you, sir. Okay. So we're going to go back to the hearing. At this point, we closed the public comment portion as well as the hearing and do the deliberation and any action from the council. Before we get into this portion, I just want to remind the body that there are a series of motions if the council goes in that direction and that the the city attorney has well has laid those out. So those are what's what's in front of us. In front of us. So at this time, I'm going to close it out back to the council and go to Councilmember Austin.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I really want to take this opportunity to thank the many residents who came out this evening to speak either for or in opposition to this. This project has been noted that we have been the city was first notified and the sale went through a couple of years ago. And so this is a been about a two year process. I met with many residents. There have been a number of community meetings in living rooms at the local park. You know, we've we've we've had, you know, impromptu meetings throughout the community on this particular issue. I've heard from a lot of people. And from the very beginning, I think I was I was clear to everybody because I thought that this this project brought opportunity for for the community, opportunity to bring people together. What I'm seeing here this evening, I would say that that was successful. I see people from this community that have never been to city council meetings. I see people who don't know or didn't know their neighbors prior to the conversations and discussions about this project and the the mitigations or the impacts that it would have on their neighborhood. And so with that. In mine. I think we made some progress. Residents, I got to tell you that I'm a bit my tongue throughout this this process, because I heard some very disparaging remarks about what I believe is a great community with good schools and good people. And, you know, I took a tally throughout the public comment and, you know, there were about 29, 30 speakers here this evening. And, you know, and I think there all the residents were coming. I want to thank all the people from outside of the neighborhood who have an interest in this as well, you know, because this is your city as well. But I'm really listening to the residents who live in this community. My ear is there because I said that from the very beginning. There's been a lot of not a lot of opinions is a lot of misinformation has been you know, there have been political agendas, obviously, associated with this. And, you know, I've been very. Patient and I've listened to everybody. I was out walking the neighborhood just last week. I wanted to do my due diligence in terms of listening to the residents, not hearing about it on social media, not hearing about it, hearsay, third party, but talking to residents at their door. And I had an opportunity to talk to some of you even who spoke this evening. My Italian residents who live in the impacted neighborhood. Seven were opposed. Eight were in favor. This is a split community. This is a split community. I mean, the jury is it's not clear whether or not one way or another we oppose it or in favor of it. And a lot of people are indifferent in talking to them. They were indifferent in that. Yes. If we can mitigate traffic, if we can, we can deal with that. The issues that that are that are obvious, you know, we can do that. And they would be in favor of it. I would I want to just say that my mission as a as a council member, I mean, I walked I've talked to many residents over the last three and a half years. My mission has been to upgrade uptown, right, to improve the quality of life in our communities and to take advantage of opportunities that are in front of us. And I see this as a rare opportunity. I want to walk through the the brief history, because I think it's very important to put that perspective for everybody at home. I think the Boy Scout executive director did a good job of it, but I'm going to recap some of it and Will will get read was a ten acre park gifted to the Boy Scouts of America in 1941. And it served our community and served the scouts for many years. And during the mid 2000 there were some talks between the city and the Boy Scouts for a possible land swap for the city to obtain. Will J read? But nothing was ever worked out. And I'm sure I mean, we had some speakers here. We had a former council member here who has some perspective on that to tell us why. I don't I'm not exactly privileged to all of that inner city staff who can tell us more about that. I had a long meeting with our former city manager, and he had some perspective and background on this this property as well. In 2012, the Boy Scouts voted to put Wil J. Scout Park up for sale due to financial difficulties and maintenance costs. In July 2nd May 2012, when I took office, the Boy Scouts voted to accept a purchase offer from 4.8 million from the Trust for Public Lands. However, the Trust's Trust for Public Lands still had the opportunity or had to identify partners to finance the acquisition as well as to operate and maintain it. The terms of the purchase contract with the Boy Scouts provided the trust for public lands. Nine months agreement to find the financial backing. The TPL then contracted. Contacted the department. Water replacement district. I'm sorry. The County of Los Angeles. The City of Long Beach, and other public agencies to request funding partners, but not nothing was available to finalize any agreements. Keep in mind, I'm in July 2012. At the time, TPL was asking for funding. The city of Long Beach had a structural deficit of $17.2 million, requiring major cuts to our police, fire, parks, libraries. In other city city services. The balance our brothers budget. The city, unfortunately at that time did not have the money available to either purchase nor maintain that property. The county wasn't interested. The Water Replenishment District. Was loose, loosely interested, but there was not the the the the the the agreement or the the ability to really put together the resources to purchase that property. And I can tell you that I was privileged to at least five or six meetings during that period of time with TPL as well as other agencies to try to make that happen. In April 2013, the Boy Scouts voted to deny the request of the TPO to renew their option agreement and instead decided to put the property back on the market for sale in October 2013. The Boy Scouts voted to sell the property to Integral Communities for $6 million. This was a private land transaction between the Boy Scouts and the developer. And I will just emphasize that enough. I can't emphasize that enough. There's a lot been said about, you know, keeping it park space. It was never park space. If you look at the maps of greenspace and parks based in the city of Long Beach. Well, Jerry was is not on there. It's clearly not there because it was public. It was private land and always had been. In November 2013, after Integral Communities purchased the property, my office received some calls and emails from for residents adjacent to the property who concerned about the cutting of some trees and what the plans were for the property. A coordinated meetings with the residents immediately adjacent to the property with integral communities to discuss the site. Integral Search subsequently initiated separate meetings with residents near the property. In the spring of 2014, Integral Communities submitted an application and site plan to the city for Riverwalk. In September 2014, the notice of preparation was issued to the city for an environmental impact report, and there were two public scoping meetings held, one at Shire Park and the other at duly elementary school. The Planning Commission held three sessions and a hearing on this issue before voting on their recommendation to the City Council. And I met with many neighbors on several occasions. Like I said, I walk the neighborhood and I talk with many people who live in the neighborhood about the proposed park project. And before I get into some additional comments, I'd just like to ask a couple of questions which I've heard from residents this evening just to get some clarification. And for city staff, I heard a lot of express concerns about losing privacy, particularly those who live on 48th Street. And I just want to clarify. I think I heard it. I want to make sure that I'm clear. Will there be any three storey homes in this development immediately adjacent to these existing homes?
Speaker 6: Councilmember asked. And the answer to that is no. We actually have a requirement in the project that the homes abutting the 14/48 Street northern boundaries be two story. We also have a requirement that there be at least a minimum of a six foot six inch block wall, which can be increased to eight feet in height if that is desired.
Speaker 4: He. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Hey, guys. No one can be asking questions from the audience, from the audience, or.
Speaker 4: Can.
Speaker 0: Also, as.
Speaker 4: A fan staff discuss some of the potential projects or issues that can be addressed with the $100,000 traffic medication fund that is being proposed for the development. Let me just be a little more specific as well. I know there was a there was a lot of conversation about the Meryl Streep Daisy. I was out there walking the other day. One of the speakers, Mr.. Mr. Causey pointed out. And we were talking in front of his house and, you know, he made a great suggestion that this be studied as a as a one way street. Would that be something that we could look at using that plan to do?
Speaker 6: Certainly the concept of a traffic mitigation fund was used very successfully in the Douglas Park Development Agreement, whereby the city was able to utilize the funds to address very specific traffic issues that were raised by the development of Douglas Park that were unanticipated. It allows the city's traffic engineer to be very site specific and very responsive to the needs of that immediate community. It is absolutely within the purview of the city traffic engineer to utilize those funds for those purposes. So certainly if a study needed to be conducted and it was determined that a one way street couplet or a one way street pattern was most efficient and desired. Yes, absolutely. That's something that could be done with these funds.
Speaker 4: Okay. And another concern that was was pretty consistent was the fact that that that particularly residents who live immediately adjacent to the property or around the property were concerned that people or residents in the property would be parking outside in their areas. And I'm sensitive to that that concern. I'm just curious whether or not we could look at preferential parking. And I think we can. Obviously, I think that's something that we can do. But I'd just like to get staff response on preferential parking, the possibility of doing so at a later date.
Speaker 6: That is also something that is is readily applicable to this mitigation fund. So if there is that a preferential parking district does require a survey and a certain petition process, certainly these funds could be used to go through that process and determine if that is warranted and if it's desired by the immediate community.
Speaker 4: I met with several residents on 48th Street who said their homes were built on a former dumpsite. Can staff address the research found regarding that?
Speaker 6: Certainly, as Joe Pera of Rincon indicated earlier, through the secret process, we scoured the state databases and have not been able to find any evidence of a landfill. Further, when this issue was raised at the Planning Commission, we went to a separate landfill consultant that the city has worked with in the past, who also did a database search and can find no evidence of any documented landfills in that area. That's not to say that the that this area might not have been subjected to illegal dumping or to improper compaction when the residential tract was developed in the forties and fifties, that there is no evidence of an actual landfill having ever existed on that site
Speaker 4: . Thank you very much. So I understand that there are many different opinions on the project. Many residents I spoke to in the neighborhood believe the project will be good for the neighborhood and they like the project. Some residents overall like the project, but have specific concerns, are issues they'd like to see addressed. And I think some of those have been addressed through the mitigations proposed for the project. Ultimately, I must weigh all of this input and these opinions to decide what I believe is in the best interest of the community. For one, this is not city property, but private property. The city had the opportunity a few times to acquire their property, but that was never realized, whether because of fiscal limitation or other factors. It's a land remained in private hands while it was undeveloped. When it was owned by the Boy Scouts, it was never a public park, nor was it publicly accessible open space. We have a lot of open space, by the way, in a district. The biggest open spaces is not publicly accessible. It's actually a country club. We have open space in the Carlitos housing. We have seven acre urban farm there. There is a lot of open space. We voted this evening on 39 acres of open space for for native habitat restoration. There's a lot of open space. And yes, this is private development, ten acres. And we're going to get three and a half acres of public park space. I'm weighing this out and I'm having a hard time seeing where this is bad for the community. As the Planning Commission chair, Marc Christoval, said last month during his hearing. To believe that this property would be remain open space forever. Is is really a pipe dream. It's not not feasible. I want to remind you comments from earlier from Councilmember former Councilmember Val Lerche, how long it took to find the forest wetlands. So three decades. Are we really, really, really willing to wait that long to do improvements in this neighborhood?
Speaker 0: Hey, guys. First of all, we can't go. We can't do like this. I don't think.
Speaker 4: Thank you. This is private property is going to be developed as residential. So. Watch this. This takes us to this particular proposal. The quality is, I believe, a quality proposal. As a development services director is indicated, the homes are of quality design. And this is a quality development that will be a complement to the neighborhood. In addition, the development includes a development agreement that provides many community benefits to the Dominguez Gap neighborhood. Most notably, the new park at Organ and Animal. When I was first walking this neighborhood running for office a few years ago. And ever since then I've been asked by numerous residents in the direct neighborhood and around the neighborhood when we when are we going to build this park that we were promised seven, eight years ago? The land was acquired by the redevelopment agency and was supposed to be built with read about development bond proceeds. But that money ran out and we no longer have redevelopment. So the city does not have the funds to develop the park at any time in the foreseeable future. This is an opportunity, folks, that I don't believe will come again to build a new city owned park that will be well-used by kids throughout the neighborhood and throughout the community. I think there are great benefits to having a park there with active recreation. I've said on many occasions, if you go north of the four or five freeway, you have very limited active recreation for our youth in that community. This park will serve a need when I say active recreation, soccer. Rugby football. Things that keep our kids running. That bring families and communities together. The development agreement also assures that several streets in the Dominguez Gap neighborhood will be repaved. 48th Street, from Oregon Avenue to Long Beach Boulevard. 49th Street from Morgan Avenue to Long Beach Boulevard. Daisy Avenue, Oregon Avenue to Pacific Avenue will also get repairs. And I know some of those streets need more than just flowery silk. I'm not I wasn't born yesterday. I've been I mean, I've seen the conditions of the streets. I've driven the streets. I've walked the streets they need for grind and overlay. And this is why I've asked for an amendment or further conversation on this and to give our public works director the ability to approve whatever improvements are going to be made there. I'll be making my motion. The request. I'm sorry. The development agreement. Also, there's a $100,000 traffic mitigation plan that we've discussed. I've also heard from residents that they want to explore having some sort of streets become one way because of the narrowness of the streets. And I think we've addressed that and will address that. Others have asked about having speed bumps. This mitigation plan can be used to study these measures and implement the necessary traffic improvements to address some of these concerns. It's not a perfect neighborhood. It's not a perfect development. It's not a perfect situation. But I think this is with almost $4 million in public improvements that are going to be directly into this neighborhood as a result of this project. There's something very difficult to walk away from. Plus there are additional public safety and school impact fees that will be going toward these services. Some residents who live adjacent to the property have expressed concerns about losing their privacy. With the new homes right next door. And we as we've established, there will be no three story homes up against homes along 48th Street. We also ask that the perimeter wall be eight feet high rather than the proposed six and a half feet, and that mature trees be planted along the perimeter of the property adjacent to the homes. And if we can preserve existing trees, I would ask the developers to look at that option as well. No one can be for sure what the future holds or what the market conditions will be a year or two from now. We certainly did not see ten years ago being in this situation. We didn't see five years ago being in this situation. But we have a unique opportunity when all said is done. I believe this is a project that the city can be proud of. The community can be proud of in the neighborhood with new homes, a new park and new streets, as well as 39 acres of wetlands just across the Llano will be much better off. So council members weighing in strong support of this project and would ask that you join me in approving it. And there are a number of motions that I would like to to read. Two. But should we take it from the council first?
Speaker 0: Yeah, I think what we'll do is if you I know you've you've made a motion or there's a second by Councilman Richardson. I think on the first the first part of the motion, I'll go through the members that are there, whether cued up, and then we can go to that vote and then go through the votes. Okay. Okay. So just to keep this organized. Next is Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 1: Thank you, councilmember austin. I think your outreach to the community and I've heard from neighbors who you knocked on their door personally. I actually ran into one last night and they think that that's wonderful that you've continued to keep that connectivity with the community. And I appreciate that. Even after a presentation from Miss Bodak, I heard from the community in public comment and perhaps they prepared their questions in advance of the presentation. But I just wanted to ask two or three questions really quickly, just to once again confirm what I had heard earlier in the presentation and what you and I had discussed earlier, which is come to the attention of our office, that there is misinformation out in the community, and we just want to correct the record once again. Ms.. Modak, does approval of this project exempt any other development in the city from going through the necessary approval process, including Title 21 zoning within the Long Beach Municipal Code?
Speaker 6: No, ma'am, it does not.
Speaker 1: And will the development project in the eighth District at DC Avenue impact any other current or proposed or future projects?
Speaker 6: No, ma'am. Each project is determined and verified on the basis of its own qualities and characteristics.
Speaker 1: I appreciate that, and I know we've discussed it several times. And the final question, which was very specifically called to my office on numerous occasions today because of misinformation in the community. If there is, for instance, an existing parcel in the fifth District that's zoned institutional. Does approving tonight's list of items from Mr. Austin grant an automatic zoning change for any of those properties?
Speaker 6: Categorically no.
Speaker 1: Thank you. I really appreciate the amount of time you've spent on the phone with constituents across the city. I want to thank my staff for fielding the numerous calls and properly informing the community. There's a process for a reason and there are no secret projects. The words are there. To inform the community and engage the community. And I hope that we can all stand together and talk through the fair process that we have in in knocking on doors and talking to the community and getting involved. And I want to thank every single person that came here tonight, because it's really important that you came to voice your opinion. And thank you to all of those who called to get clarification, because you didn't think that Councilmember Austin or any other member of this council would try to be deceptive. And we're really here to move the community forward. And I want to thank Councilmember Austin for his leadership.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilmember Richardson.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I took a lot of notes and sort of have been following this here recently and just the start. I think this is just a tough position for the city council one way or the other. You know, I would love to say that we should acquire Jay Reed, invest that money, expand open space. But the reality is it's we're just in a position where you have to find an opportunity to expand open space and other places. I think, you know, there's you know, this is this is seems like you're taking a difficult situation and making it creating a win or dilemma. Park Oregon Park looks great from the renderings. So, so I'll just start by I'll just applaud all the residents and the Boy Scouts for coming out. I got a history lesson tonight on the history of all the efforts the Boy Scouts made to try to preserve that space. Seems like they went through the right steps, but it wasn't it wasn't possible. So I just have a few questions based on things I've heard tonight. So. When my residents in North Long Beach were very close to this area and including myself, I don't live very far, just the Long Beach Boulevard. When we think of parks and open space parks and recreations, historically folks haven't thought about Will J. Read. Was this ever open? Was the site ever open to the public for recreation use?
Speaker 6: Not to our knowledge. It was never considered a public park. The city has not used it as a public park. The city has not maintained it as a public park. Certainly it was available for special events and the Boy Scouts had a number of events, including overnight campgrounds, camping at that location. So I'm sure that there are a significant number of people in the community who have had access to wheelchair read in the past. But it is not and has not been publicly accessible to the residents of Long Beach.
Speaker 3: Okay. Is there now? I know that we're in the process of identifying, opening space and building new parks and trying to figure it out. And, you know, a big part of this is funding. And that's why it took so long with the de force wetlands opportunity. So is there funding available that I'm not aware of that the city has at this point to acquire the site and develop it into a park?
Speaker 6: I would leave that to the city manager or the assistant city manager, to my knowledge. No.
Speaker 9: No, sir.
Speaker 3: The Oregon Park site. What is the current development plan and timeline for that? If this isn't approved, including funding and timeline.
Speaker 6: If this is or if this if this.
Speaker 3: Is not.
Speaker 6: If this is not approved, we do not have any funding lined up for any portion of this project. It would still be owned by the former successor agency and now the city of Long Beach. But we do not have any identified funds for the construction.
Speaker 3: In the event that we cast a vote in support of this project. What is the timeline for park construction?
Speaker 6: The timeline for the park construction is concurrent with the overall development of the residential homes. Grading of the project site would be concurrent with grading of the park site. The developer would be required to deliver the park site prior to the 33rd issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the 33rd home. And the city would then enjoy the warranty maintenance period on the landscaping. And then the city would need to accept the park for use maintenance and essentially the rights to use the park and to maintain the landscaping by the 67th certificate of occupancy for the residential. We were very cognizant of the the need to ensure development of the park since that is a significant benefit to the neighborhood and we wanted to ensure that that would be done prior to completion of the residential project.
Speaker 3: So it sounds like when the project's halfway done, 67th occupancy permit is when we take the park back over.
Speaker 6: Correct.
Speaker 3: Okay. And how long is that going to take?
Speaker 6: I would say that the developer is best able to answer that somewhere around probably 18 months or so.
Speaker 3: So an 18 months or more park can be open.
Speaker 6: 18 months from, I would say, grading? Yes. Okay.
Speaker 3: And there were concerns I heard about the traffic on the Alamo. And I know that like I take the Alamo pretty often and the traffic is pretty bad, but and it's the same way on Artesia and Artesia, we're doing a master plan to look at active transportation and things like that, to try to make sure that people who want to connect to the blue line station that's right at the Alamo. And what is that Santa Fe think? It's the Alamo. Santa Fe. They have access. Are there any current, current designs or plans with the blue line station? I would ask or to connect to that. I would ask the council member or anybody else, is there something in the works already to add, you know, bike facilities or something on Alamo?
Speaker 6: Not that we're aware of. Certainly there is on Artesia, as the councilmember is aware, there's an effort by the Gateway Cities to do a significant multi-jurisdictional project on Artesia.
Speaker 3: Is is since you're building a park on Artesia, is that something the developer can can work on?
Speaker 6: Developing the park at Oregon Dilemma.
Speaker 3: Yeah. I mean, since we're building a park and we build bike lanes or.
Speaker 6: I would defer to our bike coordinator to see what sort of master planning efforts are currently in the works in that area. I'm just not versed enough to be able to speak to that.
Speaker 3: I want to know. Do. Okay. I guess I'll get that answer and some other point and then preferential parking. So I know that. What was it? Maybe three years ago, we created a new ordinance for construction related preferential parking that didn't have the the whole elongated timeline. It was supposed to be immediate subject to public works on if there was any sort of construction related impact we could utilize this this tool and I think we've only utilized it once is our would that be a tool that can perhaps help mitigate some some of the potential parking impacts or perceived parking impacts.
Speaker 6: Certainly during construction? Absolutely. In addition, there is a requirement that there's a construction management plan for the project that will also mitigate the impacts of the construction vehicles in the neighborhood as well.
Speaker 3: Okay. And then as you know, I represent Long Beach on SAG as well. And every city in the region, including Long Beach, has been issued RINA numbers addressing housing needs. What is what is Long Beach is most immediate housing housing need as indicated by by okay.
Speaker 6: So sag hands down and allocates numbers to all jurisdictions within the region and are required arena numbers which stands for regional housing needs assessment is a little over 7000 units that we need to be able to have appropriate zoning for. They break out the arena numbers into different categories are very low, low, moderate and above moderate income units. And of that 7000 and change arena number, our biggest need is for above market rate residential housing.
Speaker 3: Is that what this is?
Speaker 5: It's.
Speaker 6: Of our total arena numbers of 7048, we are required to have adequate zoning to accommodate 3039 above market units.
Speaker 3: Are these above market units?
Speaker 5: Yes, they are.
Speaker 3: So this helps meet that requirement that every city has, excuse.
Speaker 6: Me, above moderate income units.
Speaker 4: Okay.
Speaker 3: And so the shrinking the sinking street stuff. Is there anything written in to make sure if anyone's house sinks? We don't think it.
Speaker 6: Certainly the developer has offered to deal with those issues if they are found to be the responsibility of the developer. Certainly on site there are absolute requirements from a geotechnical perspective and a soil compaction issues to ensure that the site is capable of withstanding this construction and that we don't have these issues.
Speaker 3: Okay. So from my from my standpoint, you know, to conclude it earlier, earlier today, we talked about the forest wetlands, huge open space opportunity. It took 30 years to get to get there. And what I see here is the Boy Scouts have tried to do the right thing. Now they've come to the city and was able to help us figure out how to add a park that we have no strategy to build at a park to North Long Beach, which the city hasn't even figured out how to add more parks in North Long Beach. And this the Boy Scouts and the developer has figured that out. I think that's something to be acknowledged. And and this is a good thing that in 18 months, we're going to have new open space in terms of Oregon Park and the forest wetlands. I think that's and I think that's something to be to be recognized. I know it's I know it's a tough situation for everyone to be in. But I think that the key word here is diligence. The Boy Scouts have done their diligence. The developer so far seems like they've put out like a open call saying, hey, what can we do to help to fix it? So from my standpoint, I think this is a project that I'm going to support and encourage the council to support for the sake of open space in North Long Beach. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Councilmember Ringa.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mayor. For the purposes of transparency, yes. Integral did give me $750 for my officeholder account back in earlier in the year, January or so, before I knew that they were involved with this project. And when I found that out, I gave it back. And I also gave back about another $3,000. A letter from other donations that potentially might put me in a. Conflict of interest situation. So I'm listening. I hear it. I'm trying to do the best thing I can as well. And it's not welcome when there are aspersions thrown at not only at me, but at my fellow council member when threatened with a vote. I mean, we all have an important job to do here, and it's not easy. The easiest vote for me to take today would be to say no. To say, let's leave things be as they are. Let the open land stay open and undeveloped and become a blight to the community. There was a comment made earlier today about maybe we could use eminent domain. Eminent domain went away with redevelopment. So that is not there. It's been mentioned before, and I will re-emphasize that again. The Boy Scouts did a stellar job in trying to do the right thing. They put it for sale. No takers. They put up for sale again. There was a taker. It's private property, folks. And when it's private property, the property owner has a right to do what they want with that property. There are other properties in Long Beach that are going through the same process. There's there's property. The mansion that was also mentioned by the same gentleman who put a price on me on that. That, you know, we had the oil properties out there. The oil properties has been a vacant land for. Oodles and oodles of years and nothing being done there. You want to keep that there. Keep smelling that oil coming out of there. Instead of when you can have a developer come in, clean it out and make something beneficial out of it that would benefit the city and benefit the residents. I spoke with Integral about the project at hand. They are a responsible developer. They are. They've offered to build a park, which is part of a community benefit. And when a company comes to me and says, I'm going to give you a community benefit, I'm listening. It's not totally about the development itself. It's about giving back to the community. And that's what they're doing. It's a responsible way of being able to develop a project that is going to be welcomed and that is going to benefit the community more than it's good that will be there if not developed. So that's that's the option. If we don't vote for this tonight, what are we going to have an empty lot? If I don't if we don't do anything with the oil property, what are we going to have? Another empty lot? If I don't if we don't develop the land, the other part of my district which is out there and Santa Fe and PCH, close to the Long Beach State Tech Park. What's that gonna stay vacant land. These are properties that are owned by private companies who have the. Ability to develop something there that can be positive, and we need to support that. Now, should there be more community involvement? Absolutely. Should there be community benefits coming out of these projects? Absolutely. And we're going to work towards that. And I know this city council is responsible towards doing that. And that's what we're going to do and that's what we're trying to do here. The fact that there is going to be a park, Oregon park is a is a huge benefit to the community. Now, is it everything for everybody? No, it's not going to be. Is it too close to the to the. With that the path. Well, the wetlands. But the the gap. Yeah. The the the forest gap. I mean, we can't please everybody. But, you know, in the long run, the benefits outweigh the negatives. And I would also be supporting this project.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you, Councilman Price.
Speaker 5: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And thank you to the staff. I found tonight's presentation to be very informative. I did have the opportunity to read all the correspondence that came to our office, as well as the emails. I believe we received over 20 emails over the last week, so I've had a chance to review all that, and I did receive a packet of letters that were sent to us today. I actually had to read them during the meeting because we received them so late. But I want to thank everyone who did submit letters and express concerns. I also want to take a moment to just again, the staff's presentation was very informative, very educational for those of us who don't know the history. And I just had a couple of questions and then and then I'll make my final comments regarding what were the conversation that's gone on tonight in regards to this the the negotiations that have taken place with the developer? Ms. BODAK How common is it to ask a developer to make improvements to adjacent streets?
Speaker 6: Typically when we are working on a development project, we are obligated to work within the existing state guidelines that only require us to ask for improvements that have a direct nexus to the impact from the project. In this case, because we are entering into a statutory development agreement, it provides the city a much greater level of flexibility in focusing on that nexus, and it allows the city to ask for additional things that may not be directly related to impacts caused by the project. So in this case, because the developer is asking for a statutory development agreement, we had the ability to ask for much greater level of improvements. If this had been a a zone change and a general plan amendment. Without the development agreement, we would not have been able to ask for the extensive park improvements or a number of the street improvements and.
Speaker 5: Based on your experience.
Speaker 1: Would you would you.
Speaker 5: Conclude that we've done a good job in terms of the city's position of of getting the most public benefit with this project that we can under the circumstances?
Speaker 6: Yes, ma'am. I do feel very comfortable with that. I have been involved in the other two development agreements in the city, and we have received quite a bit of benefits from the Douglas Park Development Agreement. And it's to be seen what we will get out of the Golden Shore Development Agreement. But this one also has a number of public benefits that far exceed our abilities normally to get these type of benefits.
Speaker 5: I may have missed this during the presentation, but what is the anticipated square footage of the plan one and plan to homes?
Speaker 6: So the houses range in size, but the average square feet of a house is about 2500 square feet with a two car garage. Okay, so the units range in size from 2100 square feet to 2900 square feet.
Speaker 5: And I know there were some comments about personal speculation about sales price. Has any of that been determined in terms of what the price per square foot might be in this area, what the fees might be, anything like that.
Speaker 6: That's not within our purview. So we don't get involved in that. That's purely a market issue. I don't know if the developer has those pricing available or not.
Speaker 5: I want to you know, I know this is not an easy decision specifically for Councilman Austin. I want to thank him for his leadership because he's really taken the time. I appreciated his presentation tonight and his talking points. I'm very much a visual learner. I need to read things and I appreciate that he enumerated for us all the what he's been through and kind of the history of the project. That was very beneficial for me. He has done his due diligence. I think it's really important that he reached out to the community to the best of his ability to try to get their feedback and that his intent here is very good. It really is. I know that Councilman Austin cares very deeply about his community, and I know that he's done the work on this project. And it is he has no desire other than to better his community. And I know that his leadership on this issue and his request to his council colleagues tonight to request support is based on a premise that he believes he's doing what's best for his community, a community that he is intimately familiar with. So I will be supporting his request this evening. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Councilman Austin.
Speaker 4: Okay, thank you. And I know this has been a long night and I want to thank everybody who has indulged this council on this particular item. Again, I want to thank our city staff for their great professionalism and their due diligence and hard work for the last two years, developing and working with the developer, negotiating the community benefits. I want to thank the developer for being a good community partner thus far. Their outreach to the community, their transparent process. I want to again thank the residents who participated for every step of the way, those who were in the scoping meetings, who who who submitted comments in the draft ADR, who participated in public comment at Planning Commission here. I want to thank the Planning Commission for their work on this. And I want to just just applaud the process for being open and transparent. Whether you agree with the decision being made here tonight or not, I understand that the process was transparent, that the process was open and the process was fair to everybody involved. And yes, the city is getting nearly $4 million in community benefits from the project, which will, in my opinion, make this neighborhood a better neighborhood for for all of its residents and for North Long Beach as a whole. And so, members, I'd like to make the motion to adopt the resolution certifying the EIA are adopting findings and approving a mitigation, monitoring and reporting program. As the first motion.
Speaker 0: Case was just just let's go where we are right now. So there's a motion in a second for the first motion, and then we'll go through through, down, through all of them. Mr. MAYS. Okay, thank you. So there's a motion on the floor for motion number one for Councilmember Austin's motion. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Motion number two, please. If we can get a motion in a second for motion number two. Thank you. And just just to be clear, Mr. Mayes, you had mentioned that public comment is for all the motions and that was that was adequate just to you can. | Resolution | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record; conclude the public hearing, and
Adopt resolution certifying EIR 01-15 and approving a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Riverwalk Residential Development project (State Clearinghouse No. 2014091011), for a new 131 single-family home subdivision (Riverwalk) at 4747 Daisy Avenue; | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11102015_15-1136 | Speaker 4: Next motion is to to declare ordinance, approving an application and requesting the city attorney to prepare the city manager and city manager to execute a development agreement with the Long Beach project owner.
Speaker 13: Excuse me, counsel.
Speaker 4: And I repeat that.
Speaker 7: No, no, that's fine.
Speaker 9: But does your motion on that item include.
Speaker 13: The amendment that Ms.. Bodak mentioned to.
Speaker 9: Exhibit C, the development.
Speaker 7: Agreement that would allow the flexibility of the public works to director to.
Speaker 13: Determine appropriate surfacing of some of the street.
Speaker 1: Areas to.
Speaker 9: Include either slurry.
Speaker 13: Seal or something more extensive.
Speaker 4: Let me strike that and reread that motion. Okay. Okay. Declare ordinance, approving an application and requesting city attorney to prepare and city manager to execute a development agreement with the Long Beach Project Owner, LLC and D Investment Company LLC. Read the first time and lead over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for Final Reading for Motion six at. At the end with the amendment that the specified street repairs be made in the manner approved by the Public Works Director.
Speaker 0: Mr. Bass. Okay. All right. Okay. There's a motion and a second on that. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Next item. | Ordinance | Recommendation to declare ordinance approving an application for a Development Agreement pursuant to Chapter 21.29 of the Long Beach Municipal Code; directing the City Attorney to prepare a Development Agreement embodying the application and key terms of the Development Agreement as approved by the City Council; and authorizing and directing the City Manager to execute, on behalf of the City of Long Beach, a Development Agreement with The Long Beach Project Owner, LLC and DEM Investment Company, LLC, for the Riverwalk Residential Development Project and Oregon Park construction, read and adopted as read.
(District 8) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11102015_15-1137 | Speaker 4: Next motion is to approve a visiting tentative track map and site plan review.
Speaker 13: Excuse me, Councilman Austin, is that motion you had mentioned earlier, the addition of.
Speaker 7: A larger perimeter wall, I think you said to eight feet in mature trees on the perimeter wall or.
Speaker 9: The exterior walls. If you.
Speaker 7: Want those two items, it would be appropriate to add.
Speaker 13: Them as conditions of approval.
Speaker 7: To the site plan.
Speaker 13: Review.
Speaker 4: And that was on motion number six.
Speaker 13: Motion seven, the one you just read.
Speaker 7: Okay, so you want to add the wall, the higher wall.
Speaker 13: And the mature.
Speaker 9: Trees.
Speaker 1: It would be appropriate to add.
Speaker 13: Them as conditions of approval.
Speaker 1: To.
Speaker 13: The site plan review.
Speaker 4: So moves.
Speaker 0: Okay. Cast your votes on that, please.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 4: Motion eight is to declare ordinance banning that a transportation improvement credit fee is due and authorizing city manager to execute an in agreement providing for the transportation improvement fee credit. Read the first time and lead over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for final reading.
Speaker 13: And Councilman Austin, I think this is the last time I'll interrupt. Does that also include the correction that Miss Bodak mentioned.
Speaker 7: To adjust the traffic improvement fee credit to reflect the.
Speaker 13: True amount, which is slightly higher than what's in the ordinance, and only bring it back for second reading next week, the correct figure will be in there.
Speaker 4: So move. I mean, second.
Speaker 0: Grade, the second place people plug in.
Speaker 4: Okay.
Speaker 0: And last one.
Speaker 4: No, this is number nine. Declare ordnance. Finding that a park and recreation facility fee credit is due and authorize city manager to execute an agreement providing for the park fee credit read for the first time and laid over to the next regular city council for final reading. | Ordinance | Recommendation to declare ordinance finding and determining that a credit is due against the Transportation Improvement Fee applicable to the Riverwalk Residential Development Project; and authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement regarding credit for transportation improvements made in connection with the Riverwalk Residential Development Project, read and adopted as read. (District 8) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11102015_15-1139 | Speaker 4: Washington second.
Speaker 5: Are they really?
Speaker 4: He in the last motion is to declare ordinance amending Chapter 21.30 and 21.31 read for the first time and laid over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for a final reading session.
Speaker 0: Okay, so there's a motion. Is there a second member who's going to cast your votes?
Speaker 1: Motion carried.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. That's a series of motions. I just want to make one quick comment, and I know I think some of the folks have all left before the votes, but I know there's a lot of neighbors here still that live in this neighborhood and want to hear from me directly. I've walked that neighborhood before. I've been in that neighborhood. And I think you have a great neighborhood. And I just want you to know that the city will continue to try to work and invest in that neighborhood. We have limited resources. But to the developers of this new community, you also have a very big responsibility now in working with this neighborhood, as you all know, and providing the services of support and creating a community that really integrates with everyone. And I think that I know is the expectation of Councilmember Austin. I know he's been pushing you guys to do more and we're pushing you guys to try to to really make that a even stronger neighborhood and community. And that's all of our expectation on the council as well. And so I just wanted to make sure that that was said as well. But thank you. Thank you to it to to the neighbors. I'm going to go and take a one minute recess and then we will I'm sorry to take the last hour on the last one. So that's my apologies. But on the last one, we thought we had already had done that. We did.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 0: I thought they did, didn't they? You recorded the last vote? Yeah, we did the last vote already. What do you want to clear the screen?
Speaker 5: If you can just hit.
Speaker 0: It's been recorded.
Speaker 4: Already. He only has.
Speaker 0: The last votes. Is the last vote? Yes. Yeah, it's recorded right there. You got it? Yeah. We're taking a minute. Recess. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Bye. Wow.
Speaker 1: They don't want to keep on the next.
Speaker 5: What it's going to be. That's why. Still on the last night of.
Speaker 0: Um. Call this meeting back to order. Madam Clerk, if I can do a roll call.
Speaker 1: Councilwoman Gonzalez. Vice Mayor Lowenthal. Councilwoman Price. Councilmember Cooper. Not here. Councilwoman Mongo. Councilman Andrews. Councilmember Odinga. Councilman Austin. Councilmember Richardson. Mayor Garcia.
Speaker 0: I'm here as well. Can I get a motion for a consent calendar, please? Motioned in a second for consent calendar. Any public comment on consent calendar? Can I please come forward? If you public coming from concert calendar you need to speak please if you have a comment. | Ordinance | Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by amending Table 30-1 of Chapter 21.30, Table 31-1 in Chapter 21.31, and by adding Subsection T to Section 21.31.020, and adding Division III to Chapter 21.31 by adding Sections 21.31.300, 21.31.310, 21.31.320, 21.31.325, 21.31.330, 21.31.340, 21.31.350, Table 31-8, and 21.31.360, relating to planned unit developments, read and adopted as read. (District 8) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11102015_15-1148 | Speaker 1: A report from Economic and Property Development. Financial Management Recommendation to award a contract to Environmental Construction Group for the City of Long Beach. Old Courthouse Abatement and demolition for a total contract amount not to exceed 4.4 million District two.
Speaker 0: Thank you. There there is a motion in a second before I get there. I know staff. Do you have a short presentation?
Speaker 11: Yes, you do.
Speaker 9: Presentation by Mike Conway, our director of Economic and Property Development.
Speaker 16: Mayor Garcia, Members of the City Council. This item requests authority to enter a contract with Environmental Construction Group Inc, the perceived low bidder for environmental abatement of the old courthouse. This is a rebid of an earlier bid in October, which was rebid in a manner that allows the city to contract only for abatement rather than for abatement and demolition. This approach allows abatement to start immediately, which needs to be done in the interest of public safety. Regardless of the ultimate fate of the courthouse building. Demolition of the courthouse building will require a separate action by city council at a future date. In response to this invitation to bid, seven bids are received, ranging from 5.9 million to 8.5 million, with six of the bids within $700,000 of each other. The initial low bidder, U.S. demolition was rejected as a result of an error on their bid bond. The city has long held posture regarding the reliability of bid bonds, which require that the bond is clearly valid. On its face, U.S. demolitions bid bond referred to the prior invitation to bid, not the current one. While this may seem like a ministerial error, it does call into question the validity of the bid bond. And the city's long standing position is that this error cannot be waived. Waiving this error in this case would call into question all prior rejections based on similar criteria and may expose the city to additional protests and adverse unintended consequences. Two more protests were received which were reviewed determined to have no merit and were rejected. This is an important to understand that bids of this monetary magnitude, with pricing so closely compressed, are almost almost guaranteed to generate protests. But time is of the essence for this abatement work to begin and staff request that council approved staff's recommendation. And I'm available for your questions.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Vice Mayor Lowenthal.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just wanted to thank the staff for their diligence. I know this was a long process, so I do thank you for being careful and diligent about this.
Speaker 0: Q Councilman Richardson, so we're going to have any public comment on this item. Please come forward. If there is public comment. Okay. Go ahead.
Speaker 9: Eric, could you characterize the address? I'm suggesting this council hold this off. Unless I'm mistaken, I don't see in the files any. A report from our city auditor relative to the very issue of. This or raising or replacing the city hall or the entire concept of. What the city has been doing with in terms of planning, I think instead of hiring, instead of relying on willy nilly. You should rely on a friend. Request a report from the city auditor. So we understand fully the dynamics and whether or not this makes sense. And from the number of people I've talked to who are very familiar with city business, they say this is a catastrophe in the making period. So there can be there should be no harm in looking for and asking the city attorney's city auditor to present a report on such a seminal project. This project should last 100 years. So another six weeks or eight weeks is not going to rock the boat. Period. And this reminds me the way you approach this is there are three things that always stick in my mind where this is before many half of the council was here, where we disposed of property in a really inane way. Somebody came before the council and said, There's an orphaned piece of property nobody wants whatsoever. So they sold it for 17 to $0.19 an acre before the ink was dry. The guy made $1,000,000 on it. And it turns out that orphaned piece of property apparently had a sibling. Must have been but ugly. Because they'd only got 8 to $0.10 an acre. And of course, the one that sticks in my mind the most is when the city got rid of such a distressed property in such a distressed area as a 45/2 walk from Ocean to Broadway and gave away their Broadway hotel for $1. And I'll always remember that one because that was at the same time that the ladies of Cartagena. Holding policies. Secret Service. To their contract and tried that they were trying to get out of and so it. Your fiduciary responsibility is to request the city auditor to present a report on the feasibility of that. Absent that, it says, you know, and you're aware of there's something fishy that she does not want to. She should not get inside of. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Speaker, please.
Speaker 11: Good evening. Kevin De I'm an attorney from Alvarado Smith. I represent us demolition. Speaking on this item was interesting because the staff report was entirely lacking what we heard from the staff presentation tonight, which is what necessitated me to come down and speak to you, I think, on the dias for each of you, because the last minute nature of this, we have provided you a big protest letter with tons of law and tons of analysis of this situation. The initial comment was very interesting when it was described that the contract could be awarded to the perceived low bidder. That's because the the bitter that the city is looking to award the contract to tonight was not the actual low bidder. We heard the commentary about the rejection of a bid based upon the misidentification of a bidders bond. The bid bond that we're talking about here is a preprinted city form that was completed correctly. It included a reference to a prior project. That's true, but it was dated after the submission date for the prior project. It could only have been valid related to this project. And so included in the letter is the initial bid protest that that we present. And the timing is kind of interesting on this because the bid from us demolition was timely. It was the low bid. Six days passed and they heard nothing. All of a sudden, out of nowhere, they got a letter from the city, Tulane letter, saying your bids been deemed non-responsive and has been rejected because of the bid bond issue. That same day, U.S. demolition had a letter from their bid bond contractor. It's included in the packet to say that the surety was standing by the bid bond. That issue was off the table. It's ministerial. There is case law on this issue, county of Menifee. It's in the letter that that kind of irregularity can be waived and is waived routinely across the state. You're protecting the public fisc. You're using money from the general fund to abate hazardous materials in your courthouse. You have a responsibility to choose the lowest responsible bidder. The bid from US demolition should never have been rejected. That wasn't there. The. The problem that was created was the. Rejection of the bid came one day before a bid protest was due. So US demolition has put together a complete package. Asked for responses from the city have gotten nothing necessitated this hearing tonight. So the bid protest is twofold. It's very simple. We'd ask that you pull this from the calendar tonight. Don't vote on it. Have the city attorney have a have staff, look at it and analyze the bid protest. In light of the authority we've presented to you, our bid was responsive, shouldn't have been rejected. The second issue is that the potential awardee has material misstatements of fact in the bid on the public contract you're about to award. We presented evidence to you in the bid protest letter. So the the action item for you is either pull this or direct staff, our staff to analyze this further and take another look at us . Demolitions Bid Board.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Time's up. Okay. Is there any other public comment on this item? See no other public comment on this item. There is a motion and a second on the floor. Members, please go ahead and cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. Item number nine. | Contract | Recommendation to adopt Plans and Specifications No. R-7043 for the City of Long Beach Old Court House Abatement and Demolition; award a contract to Environmental Construction Group, Inc., of Signal Hill, CA, in an amount of $3,690,000 for abatement only, and authorize a 20 percent contingency, for a total contract amount not to exceed $4,428,000; and authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to enter into the contract, including any necessary amendments thereto;
Increase appropriations in the General Fund (GF) in the Citywide Activities Department (XC) by $1,373,000 for a transfer to the Capital Projects Fund (CP) in the Public Works Department (PW); and increase appropriations in the Capital Projects Fund (CP) in the Public Works Department (PW) by $1,373,000, for a total project cost of $4,428,000, offset by $3,055,000 in currently appropriated Fiscal Year 2016 non-recurring General Fund resources and the remainder from bond proceeds. (District 2) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11102015_15-1149 | Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. Next item, please, which is number. Is it ten?
Speaker 1: Yes.
Speaker 0: Techweez.
Speaker 1: Report from Economic and Property Development. Recommendation to execute contracts with various One-Stop Career Centers service providers for a total amount not to exceed 2.1 million citywide.
Speaker 8: Thank you. There's been a motion and a second council member, Richard Wood. Would you like to comment? Councilmember Austin. Thank you. So any member of the public that was to address the Council on item ten. CNN members cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Vice Mayor Lowenthal. Yes. Motion carries. Yeah. Adam 11. Report from Economic and property development. Recommendation to execute contracts with various One-Stop Career Center service providers for a total amount not to exceed 2.5 million citywide. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager to execute contracts with various One-Stop Career Center Service Providers, in support of strategies that provide training and employment services to residents, for a total amount not to exceed $2,115,000; and to execute any needed subsequent amendments. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11102015_15-1150 | Speaker 1: Vice Mayor Lowenthal. Yes. Motion carries. Yeah. Adam 11. Report from Economic and property development. Recommendation to execute contracts with various One-Stop Career Center service providers for a total amount not to exceed 2.5 million citywide.
Speaker 8: Councilmember Richardson or Councilmember your younger. No, thank you. SUNY staff report on this item.
Speaker 7: Excuse me, we can have a quick report from the executive director, Nick Schulz. And it's important to note that the three items are going through tonight, through Nick and his.
Speaker 10: Team's work is realizing $7 million to the city. So, Madam Vice Mayor, Mayors, the city council. Very quickly, as opposed to the previous item, this item is actually a discretionary award through H1-B money to the Pacific Gateway Workforce Investment Network from the Department of Labor. This is money directly for training to eligible individuals for open positions. Based on my forecast in the health care sector, you will see in the training institutions on on page two, who will be the actual providers for those residents to assist in those training and the primary areas of instructions or occupations that the folks will be able to fill. Those have all been determined to be in demand in the local labor market area.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Mr. Schultz. Councilwoman Mongeau.
Speaker 1: I just wanted to comment on how remarkable a job you've done on this. I think that it's. A new day in Long Beach for Rio. And I'm really thankful that you're at the helm. So thank you for the work you've done. This money means a lot to the community in terms of what good it can do. And so I know there's even more on the horizon, and I look forward to the things ahead. So thank you. It's. It's. This money is life changing money for many people who don't have work right now. So thank you.
Speaker 10: Thank you.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Councilwoman, is there any member of the public that wish to address Council on item 11? None. Members cast your vote. Motion carries. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Item 12 Report from Economic and Property Development. Recommendation to execute documents with the State of California to accept Workforce Investment Act funds to operate the Long Beach Youth Demonstration Project and execute a contract with leadership Long Beach in the amount of $220,000 to provide leadership development citywide. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager to execute contracts with various One-Stop Career Center Service Providers, in support of strategies that provide training and employment services to residents, for a total amount not to exceed $2,533,850; and to execute any needed subsequent amendments. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11102015_15-1151 | Speaker 1: Item 12 Report from Economic and Property Development. Recommendation to execute documents with the State of California to accept Workforce Investment Act funds to operate the Long Beach Youth Demonstration Project and execute a contract with leadership Long Beach in the amount of $220,000 to provide leadership development citywide.
Speaker 8: Mr. Schultz, is there anything I'm sorry. Councilman in Austin. Okay. Mr. Schulz, would you address this item?
Speaker 10: Sure. Again, Madam Vice Mayor, mayors and members of council. This money is discretionary money awarded by the U.S. Department of Labor specifically for services to disconnected youth. It allows the City of Long Beach to expand the purview of what would be considered eligible youth, as well as expand the age range of disconnected youth that we serve. We were one of four communities in the United States to be awarded this $2 million worth of discretionary money. The only community west of the Mississippi, I would add, and that we're actually very excited. It's not just about employment and training with this pilot project. It's actually about mentoring and taking an opportunity to integrate those disconnected youth into what's going on in our community, allow them to be exposed to issues, develop some leadership capacity. I know we're very excited about the partnership with with leadership Long Beach. They've modified their entire curriculum to address this this population specifically. And we're looking forward to serving 350 youth then and coming back and talking about the outcomes.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Is there any member of the. I'm sorry, Councilwoman Pryce.
Speaker 5: Thank you. I want to echo the comments of my council colleagues on the great work that you and your team have done. And I think this is an excellent and innovative partnership with an organization that has a proven track record of building leaders in the city of Long Beach. This partnership seems to me to be something that not only benefits the youth, but also benefits the city in a great way by creating our future leaders. So I thank you again for the innovation and for the identification of these funds and for carrying forward all of these programs. Thank you.
Speaker 8: Councilmember Turanga.
Speaker 2: Now, there's a new term I've heard tonight. Disconnected youth. Could you give me a definition of a disconnected youth?
Speaker 10: Sure. What we look at when we when we say disconnected youth is somebody who's hasn't completed been separated from traditional educational systems without a credential or a degree certificate, that type of thing. Those who are underemployed at this at this current point in time, not not self sufficient.
Speaker 2: So they're just, for my own purposes, talking about maybe dropouts and unemployed youth.
Speaker 10: Yep, both educationally and economically disadvantaged.
Speaker 2: Are and age ranges are or within what you offer there.
Speaker 10: So typically under the core federal dollars, we would offer services to to youth 16 to 21. This specific pilot is going to focus on 18 to 26 year old disconnected boys and men of color.
Speaker 2: Is there I see in the report here that you're making an effort also to connect with local colleges and universities. Are those connections already in place in terms of what you're working with, perhaps City College or Cal State, Long Beach?
Speaker 10: So, so, so both if appropriate. And again, that would depend on on the individual. But what we're looking to do is, is step into the gap and bridge the participants participation in those normal pathways that kids who stay on track and and go through our systems get to take advantage of.
Speaker 2: The mentoring that's going to be taking place with leadership. Long Beach are these individuals will be offering like a job shadowing or they're going to be going into a classroom setting, providing some real experience for themselves and or how is that going to work?
Speaker 10: So that's that's part of the traditional program that would happen. What's happening is we're actually making an attempt to invite those disconnected youth back to being functional and contributing members of the community. So the curriculum that's used in the formal leadership, Long Beach training through a human centered design process is actually being modified to to reengage the students who will participate or the excluded disconnected youth will participate in this pilot to to actually realize the the opportunities and the ability to participate in civic engagement and such in Long Beach.
Speaker 2: Because there's a civic engagement.
Speaker 10: There is as well.
Speaker 2: Yes. Good. Final question. What what's the what's going to be your measurement of success? What would be the the benchmark that tells you that the program has met its its goals and its mission?
Speaker 10: So it's typical and stays in line with other federal metrics. So it's additional completion of educational program or their earning of a degree or credential. And then the other measures would be attainment, retention and wage advancement associated with employment.
Speaker 2: And a job.
Speaker 10: Yep.
Speaker 9: Correct.
Speaker 8: I want to call in Councilmember Richardson as the second year of the motion.
Speaker 3: Thank you. I just want to just take a moment and say what a fantastic job this is. I participated in the Leadership Long Beach program, and I think this is really timely. My question for you is, how does this align with our My Brother's Keeper initiative and the work that we're doing to develop our local action plan to have it ready for January? And how does this also align with our PATH program for disconnected youth, as well as our federal program on this connected youth through the our White House grant? So how do you how will all those work together?
Speaker 10: I think it aligns perfectly with the initiatives that you've mentioned. It provides another area of focus for those individuals who are called out in My Brother's Keeper, the folks you're hoping to serve through the PATH program. It provides a dedicated funding stream to attach to those folks as they move through a new educational opportunity, through a training opportunity, or for some form of subsidized employment. And again, it's another tool in the toolbox to address the type of interventions that the series of programs you mentioned have as priorities.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 5: I had questions, but they've all been answered. So I just wanted to say thank you, Nick and Pacific Gateway for all of your work. I know as we talk a lot about jobs and especially for adults, but this is really focused on youth and the younger population, which I think is so important. And I see here it's 350 participants, is that correct? That's correct. That's wonderful. Thank you.
Speaker 8: Councilman Austin.
Speaker 4: Thank you. And I'm going to be enthusiastically in support of this. But I did have one question, because I know we have voted on a number of items regarding youth employment. Is this on top of existing grants that we do have now?
Speaker 10: This is over and above everything that's come in front of you to date. Yes.
Speaker 4: This is excellent. Thank you.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Is there any member of the public that wishes to address the Council on Item 12? Seeing None members cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Councilwoman Mongo. Motion carries.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Item 13. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager to execute all documents, and any needed subsequent amendments, with the State of California to accept Workforce Investment Act funds totaling $1,999,146 to operate the Long Beach Youth Demonstration Project for the term of July 1, 2015 through
March 31, 2017; execute a contract with Leadership Long Beach in the amount of $220,000 to provide leadership development; and
Increase appropriations in the Community Development Grants Fund (SR 150) in the Department of Economic and Property Development (HR) by $1,999,146. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11102015_15-1154 | Speaker 8: Item 15.
Speaker 1: Report from police recommendation to determine that the application serves the public convenience and necessity in receiving fire. The application of Malibu Wines for an original application of an ABC license at 1126 Queens Highway District to.
Speaker 8: Thank you and council members. I am in support of this item. Is there any member of the public that was on item 15? Please come.
Speaker 1: Forward.
Speaker 7: Good evening, counsel.
Speaker 10: My name is Shane Semler.
Speaker 7: I am the applicant for this ABC license. I just wanted to introduce myself. I will be brief. We're renting a small space on the Queen Mary. We're going to do a wine bar that offers Malibu wines. And, uh, that's about it. We've worked with John Jenkins. I'm sorry. John Thomas.
Speaker 13: Who is the ship historian.
Speaker 7: We haven't altered the space at all.
Speaker 10: We've actually kind of made it a little bit better, and, uh, that's about it.
Speaker 3: So if anybody has any questions.
Speaker 8: Great. Thank you. And thank you for introducing yourself and for waiting this long. Members, please cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Councilman. Awesome motion carries.
Speaker 8: Thank you. | ABC License | Recommendation to determine that the application serves the public convenience and necessity, and receive and file the application of Malibu Management Services Number 2, Incorporated, dba Malibu Wines, for an original application of an Alcoholic Beverage Control License, at 1126 Queens Highway, Portside Retail Shop Main Hall Aft. (District 2) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11102015_15-1125 | Speaker 1: Item 20 Communication from City Attorney Recommendation to Declare Ordinance Amending the Long Beach Municipal Code relating to testing in Operation Read and adopted as read citywide.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Mr. City. Attorney.
Speaker 10: Vice Mayor, members of the Council. This is the second reading of the amendment to Title 18 or Chapter 18 of Long Beach Municipal Code. And it it's requiring contractors, engineers and test companies to submit electronically their compliant and non client non-compliant reports.
Speaker 2: So it will hopefully increase efficiencies.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Councilman. Councilwoman Gonzales. So any member of the public that wishes to address Council on item 23. None. Members cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Councilwoman Mongo. Motion carries.
Speaker 8: Thank you. | Ordinance | Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by adding Section 18.48.195, relating to testing and operation, read and adopted as read. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11102015_15-1186 | Speaker 8: Thank you.
Speaker 1: Item 21 Communication from Mayor Garcia. Recommendation to approve the expenditure of $25,000 as a reward for information helping to solve the murder of Long Beach Police Officer Frankie Lewis.
Speaker 8: There's been a motion in a second, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Madam Vice Mayor. This communication came from the mayor, Robert Garcia, to approve this expenditure. I wanted to just. Just lend my. My unequivocal support for it. This is, I guess, a cold case that is has not been solved since 1975. I think we owe it to our police officers and this this the officers this officers family in particular, to do all we can to find his. His attacker, his murderer, and bring them to justice. So I'll be in support.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Councilman Austin. Councilmember Richardson.
Speaker 3: I concur. I think the Long Beach City Council joins the county of Los Angeles and others in in this action tonight. So thank you.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 5: Thank you. I echoed those sentiments. And coming from a district attorney's office that has been a statewide leader in cold cases and cold case investigations, I think the new technologies that are available in the forensic field today and available to law enforcement are really going to hopefully help move this case forward. It's really been far too long, and I am here to do whatever we can to support the efforts of our police department, department and allied agencies. Thank you.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Councilmember Your Honor.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mayor. Just for a matter of history, has the city council in previous years ever made this kind of motion?
Speaker 7: This is the second time in about ten years.
Speaker 2: Well, I'm very proud to be a part of this. I think we do need to support our police officers. And whenever there's a there's a situation like this, I hope that we keep that in mind when we have other situations like this. I fully support this. Thank you.
Speaker 8: There's been a motion and a second. Is there any member of the public that wish to address council on item 21? Seeing none. Members. Cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 8: Thank you. And that concludes our official business. We are on to new business. Council members, if you will indulge me briefly. I would like to thank all U.S. veterans for their service and sacrifice to our wonderful country and its principles of freedom and democracy. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to approve the expenditure of $25,000 as a reward for information helping to solve the murder of Long Beach Police Officer Franke Lewis. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11032015_15-1117 | Speaker 1: Item 14 Report from Economic and Property Development Recommendation to Declare City Owned Property located at 240 Long Beach Boulevard. 322 356 East Third Street and 269 Avenue as surplus and execute all documents necessary for the sale of the subject properties in the amount of 2.3 million.
Speaker 0: District two Vice Mayor Lowenthal.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So Councilwoman Gonzales and I were trying to figure out how long it's been. And I know this council's accustomed to hearing me say that I've worked on something for five years or six years. I think this one takes the cake. So this moment has been 15 years in the making, more than 15 years in the making. Long before I joined the council, I was a resident in downtown at around 2000, and I recall initial conversations between artists and residents who envisioned an innovative visual arts center in downtown Long Beach. There are a lot of members of the downtown community that have at one time or another participated in the art exchange effort, whether it was for the entire 15 years, some of us, certainly for the entire 15 years and others have come in at critical times and helped move us forward. They wanted space, these individuals, these artists for creative programing, artists, studios, galleries and special events 15 years and several, several iterations later. And you finally found a place to call home in the East Village Arts District. And I want to thank all of those individuals who've hung in there with us in the city and really with each other to make this happen. I'm especially thankful for Steve Elicker, who is one of the pioneers and been part of this for more than 15 years. But definitely the entire time we've worked together as a city. I know how important owning your building is for fundraising for all of the other aspects that provide legitimacy to the work that you do. And that point has never been lost on me. As for the acres of the books building, acres of books building, I'm very pleased to have a premier local development team in J.R. vendors working on its restoration and adaptive use. I know they're here today. Most of you are familiar with John's incredible work around town with the Ebell Club on Third Street, the art theater on Fourth Street, and most recently, the American Hotel or the Psychic Hotel, as some of us know it on Broadway, the new home of Inter Trent. So I have high hopes for adaptive reuse of acres of books. I understand that some community members are still disappointed with the city for taking a beloved independent bookstore away. And I understand that. And I think those are decisions that were made at a time and those that certainly we're not here to challenge today. But I do acknowledge that there is some disappointment. But with that always comes something sweet as well. It certainly. It didn't help that we had to go through a historic recession to reach this point. I think we are all aware of the impact that that has had on many projects and certainly had an impact here. But I will say this, Phil and Jacqui Smith, who were owners of the property, were able to walk away and start their own life, their own new life, and have a new lease on life, a retirement package that might never have come had they stayed. And certainly those were the times that we had the redevelopment agencies to assist. And so we move on and we make the best of our current circumstances. And I think the art exchange team certainly has helped us make the best of what we have available and are going to show us and and this city what they're able to do with this beautiful location. The residents in Long Beach will soon have a vibrant city block filled with the arts, culture, commercial and residential uses. And I'm really optimistic, very optimistic about the future connection of our downtown core with the East Village, especially when I look at what's happening to yellow yellow 108, the blender and rainbow juices, the redesign of City Place and soon to be finished Edison Lofts with Reykjavik Properties. And I know Mr. Activity is here today as well. Something to be said about connecting the East Village and the downtown core. When the old mall before City Place was here, I think it was called the Long Beach Mall. Yes, yes. Long Beach Mall. It divided the downtown. It separated the East Village from the downtown. And something that we all who live there, work there, love the heart of the downtown wanted to see more than anything was to open that up. And so the fact that City Place did that in some way by opening up Fourth Street and Fifth Street, it helped. But I think this project will help even more to reconnect, to stitch the East Village to its proper downtown location. And we also have Cliff I mentioned earlier, Cliff and John are here and they're behind this project as well. So we couldn't ask for a better group of folks working on this block. I'm very pleased, Mr. Mayor, to move this item for approval.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 5: Everything that the vice mayor said, plus more. I'm very thrilled to have this tonight on the agenda. I know she has worked tirelessly for many years to be able to bring the communities together. And I see John and I see Richard there. And it's been a wonderful now we're here and it's been a wonderful manifestation of what is possible in downtown an East Village. And I see Nico here as well from the art exchange. And this is going to be very exciting. I know as many of us are going through looking at the different changes in downtown, this is one more thing that we can feel very, very accomplished for. So I commend Vice Mayor Lowenthal for all of her work in this.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Andrus.
Speaker 3: Yes, thank you, Mayor. You know, I am really happy to see that we will continue to, you know, the progress that we are doing in the downtown area. But before I really vote in this area, I want to make sure that we are hiring Long Beach residents for any demo or construction as promised by the developers. You know, I like to, you know, have a status report on how many jobs we are creating and how many that were filled by the Long Beach residents. If that would be okay.
Speaker 0: We could certainly come back with a report on that.
Speaker 3: I can accept that. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Vice Mayor Lowenthal.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I would be remiss if I did not think our city team and actually, I think Amy's been there from the beginning as well. I don't know if she's here tonight, but Amy and Angela Reynolds, they're all here and know this project from the beginning. And I want to thank our city team for hanging in there as well with the artist and the proponents for the project. And something that I wanted to mention, oftentimes developments talked about as being conducted by entities from outside the city. Folks that don't know our city really, not our residents. But if you look at this team, the team that art exchange is made up of, as well as the development team, they are local people. They live here. Almost all of them are local. And that's something that I think we don't talk about very much because maybe it's more commonplace here than in other cities. But I want to celebrate that and I want to be sure that we do celebrate that, that this is a local project by local community members so that they can continue to live and work in the city they love. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Before we go to any public comment, I just want to add first, congratulations, obviously, to the team that's putting this forward. I just want to say that we've been talking about the site for such a long time. It's such an important connection for for downtown. I'm really I'm heartened by the fact that there's that there's artists involved. And it's going to be really centered around this idea of creating art. And I think that the fact that the team is working with or with the art exchange, the team is working to develop that kind of a feel on the site and also adaptively reuse the acres of book site, which I think is really important. I think it's something that's really, I think, a proud moment for the city. It's been tough getting here. But I want to congratulate the vice mayor for seeing this project through. And here we are and of course, everyone that's been involved in the project. So with that, if there's any public comment on the project, please come forward.
Speaker 1: And I have to say, Mr. Mayor, we all have less hair. All of us.
Speaker 4: All right.
Speaker 1: I do.
Speaker 3: Thanks. Nice man.
Speaker 4: Oh, sorry, Mr. Goodhue.
Speaker 7: Very good. Clark, as the address, the use of the property, in my view, is certainly not at issue. In my mind, what's at issue is the way the sale is going about. And I had this same trip, the same problems with the disposal of earlier properties that were rattled off rather quickly. I would rather see. And I think it makes sense. To have the properties put up for sale. To the highest bidder that shows up at the courthouse step with a cashier's check period. I think that's the way to go. I think that's always the way to go. And I'm sure that you would not be comfortable passing this unless you had the and I don't know, maybe she's done it. The approval of or reflections from the city auditor as to whether or not this is financially sound. Disposing of the property in the way we're disposing of it and so forth. Is there? Am I wrong? But I don't see. Any report from the city auditor indicating whether or not this is financially sound or not. Is that something that the clerk failed to attach to that, or is it just simply because that was not done ? What's the public record show? So the public record shows the council is moving, prepared to move forward without a recommendation one way or the other from the city auditor. That speaks volumes. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Any other public comment on the item? Seeing none. There's a motion any second. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Item 14.
Speaker 1: 15.
Speaker 0: Was it 15? Yes. | Contract | Recommendation to declare the City-owned property located at 240 Long Beach Boulevard, 320 East 3rd Street - 356 East 3rd Street, and 269 Elm Avenue (Assessor Parcel Numbers 7281-017-904, -905, -906, -911, -912, -913, -914 and -915, collectively, the Subject Properties) as surplus, authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute any and all documents necessary, including a Purchase and Sale Agreement (PSA) with Ratkovich Properties, LLC, a California limited liability company (Buyer), for the sale of the Subject Properties in the amount of $2,340,000, and accept Categorical Exemption CE 15-149. (District 2) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11032015_15-1127 | Speaker 1: Communication for Mayor Garcia recommendation to request the Sustainable Sustainable City Commission to prepare a report on the current status and opportunities for expansion of the electric vehicle infrastructure.
Speaker 0: Thank you. What we're basically asking for today is. I'd like to request that the cities the Cities Sustainability Commission, look at our electric vehicle infrastructure policy, as well as provide recommendations in the next few months on how we strengthen that. Right now, the city over the last few years has actually done some work on every policy. There are about 50 between 50 and 55, actually public electric vehicle stations throughout the city. And the city currently follows a state mandate as far as what our EV policy is. And there's been a couple of us, including, I think Vice Mayor Lowenthal, myself and a few others who have been involved in doing this work over the last few years. However, in talking to our development services plan planning staff, there are a lot of opportunities still where the city can strengthen our current electric vehicle policy. I mean, that ranges from strengthening our policy when it comes to private commercial, lots looking at retail, lots that are being developed, the new buildings, we can exceed the state, the state mandate. We also have a lot of work to do when it comes to our beach, lots and lots at our at our parks. And also looking at looking at ways that we can actually look at our current building code and increase the current three, the current 3% percentage. There's been a lot of also question about the fees. I hope the commission can also look at that and what we're actually both charging and being charged by our partners. And so this is just really an opportunity for the commission to come back to us and to strengthen our current policy as it's laid out. And I think it's time considering that our our actual vehicle drivers are growing. In fact, there are a few on this council. The infrastructure needs to be, quite frankly, dramatically improved across the city and across the county. And it's time for us to take take the lead on that. And so if I can have your your support and we'll hear some great, I think, recommendations over the course of the next few months. With that, there's a motion by Vice Mayor Lowenthal and Councilmember Austin. I'm gonna turn this over to Vice Mayor Lowenthal.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I wanted to just thank you for bringing this item forward and believe that it's something that the Sustainability Commission has considered before, and I think they'll be very excited to take this on. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 2: I support and encourage our colleagues to do the same.
Speaker 0: Councilmember Supernova.
Speaker 6: I was a charter member of the Sustainable City Commission and served two separate terms as chair. So I was asked the question about the procedure of this item. And so I would like to ask the city attorney because I think I know how it goes, but I'll let him give the full story. This is an idea that is starting with council and it is going to the Sustainable City Commission to be vetted and then come back to council. And is that as simple as it is? Mr. Green.
Speaker 2: That's correct.
Speaker 0: I think it comes from a supernova. Councilwoman Pryce.
Speaker 5: Thank you. I want to thank you, Mr. Mayor, for bringing this forward. I do drive an electric vehicle, and I think there's definitely some opportunity for growth in this area for a city of our size. So thank you for bringing this forward. And I look forward to seeing the data when it's returned to us. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And Councilman Andrew.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Mayor. I think it's an excellent, you know, a forward thinking for my mayor. And I also support our aviation. And I would like to learn, you know, how this can bring an additional revenue to the city of Long Beach. And, you know, can we make sure that this is in the report as well?
Speaker 0: Absolutely. Thank you very much. Any public comment on the item, please?
Speaker 4: Good evening, Mayor Garcia, Vice.
Speaker 2: Mayor Lowenthal and council member my name is Nicholas Zarate. I live in the second district and I'm I'm a.
Speaker 4: TV journalist, basically. So sort of here to report.
Speaker 2: The industry is really booming right now. There are lots of people I'm talking to. They would love to come in here and do all sorts of things. Lou, you're right. We have about four times as much as charges as we had a few years ago. We need a heck of a lot more, but we also need electric car sharing programs and bicycle programs and everything. I'm in talks with a lot of people and a lot of companies want to come out and try it out. So far I've seen them going other in other cities and I would love to see them over here a little bit more. Plus.
Speaker 7: I'd love to be able to cover stories.
Speaker 2: Right here instead of having to fly traffic from L.A. and Orange County. So I really hope it goes forward.
Speaker 4: And also, I'd like to.
Speaker 2: Share all of my resources, my help, if that helps, because I really believe in it. So hopefully that's good enough.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you. And I would encourage you to when the commission starts actually hearing the issue, I would encourage you to attend their meetings and to give your input. That would be very helpful to them actually. Any other public comment on the item? Casey nine members, please. Gordon, cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next item, please. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request Sustainable City Commission to prepare a report and recommendations on the current status, and opportunities for expansion, of the Electric Vehicle infrastructure in the City of Long Beach, and report back to Council within 120 days. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11032015_15-1114 | Speaker 1: Report from City Manager, Financial Management and Public Works recommendation to amend contract with Ford SC for the Naples Island Permanent Seawall Repairs Phase one project to increase the contract amount by $300,000. District three.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I'm gonna have a motion on a second about Councilman Price. I think we're gonna hear from Mr. Lopez. Or did you want to start off, Councilwoman?
Speaker 5: No, I was going to ask staff if they could give us an update on this item.
Speaker 0: Okay, great. So turn this over to Mr. Lopez.
Speaker 2: Thank you, honorable mayor, members of the City Council, we are happy to announce that we have substantially completed the construction of the Naples Island Permanent Seawalls Repairs Phase one project and have reopened the northeast quadrant that will allow the canal and the adjacent sidewalks to for public access. The additional contract authority that's being requested today will allow us to fully complete the project and be able to tie some loose ends and fully complete all construction activities at the site. That concludes Steve's.
Speaker 4: Report.
Speaker 5: Thank you. Thank you to Eric Lopez and Rachel Tanner for the update and for the amazing work that you guys have done on this project. It's been outstanding. And I want to thank resident who is here today, Maureen Po, for her 20 plus years of work on this project. And of course, my predecessor, Gary DeLong, for his work on this project as well. As you know, this project had been approved prior to me coming into office, but I've had the pleasure of working alongside city staff when the when the project commenced and then when phase one was completed just last week. On Saturday, the mayor and I had the pleasure of celebrating the grand reopening of the Naples canals. The rebuilding of phase one of the seawall started last December with demolition of the old concrete cap and sidewalk, installing 47 feet long steel sheet piles, redoing the drainage system, pouring new sidewalks and adding new lighting and benches. The canals provide a unique recreational opportunity that is special and a defining part of the Naples community and the city of Long Beach as a whole. People come from all over the region to kayak, stand up, paddle board or take a gondola ride through our charming canals. The Naples Improvement Association is gearing up for the 69th Annual Boat Parade on Saturday, December 12th. I hope residents from all over the city visit the canals during this holiday season to see the new infrastructure as well as the wonderful holiday decorations that the Naples community is known for and takes great, great pride in. I'd like to just ask for your indulgence for a few minutes to show a short video that staff has put together showing the work on phase one of the seawall. Okay. But.
Speaker 0: That is quick turnaround.
Speaker 5: That was great video. I like that song. Very catchy. And I have to say, it was a very I told the group it was an unexpectedly romantic morning with the mayor on a gondola at the height the tide was high. So the boat that we were originally going to be on couldn't make it under the bridge. So it was a fantastic event. Again, staff's done an amazing job. My team, the third district office team, of course, Julie's been on this project for many years. Christina Duggan from my office has been attending the monthly meetings, and we've worked very closely with the Naples Improvement Association. So it's been a wonderful partnership. And, you know, I just want to make sure that everybody is clear that this is a project that really, you know, but for the special care that went into some of the selections, like the lighting and the the palm trees and some of the special touches really was, you know, proceeded very well and efficiently and within the budget. And so all the extra time and money that's being spent on it is really being being done to make sure that it the project ended on a positive note and that the residents were happy with the final outcome. So thank you staff for making that happen and for the amazing outreach that you did throughout this project. You guys did a great job. I hope every project is just like that. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Any public comment on the item? Please come forward.
Speaker 7: Very good you. I don't live down around that area, but I fully support the use of public monies for that. And some people may not understand why if. You don't live around the water. Imagine if there were an earthquake and your big gap appeared and you're down the center of your street and the city decided not to do anything about that. Eventually, the foundation of your house may take a couple of years, but would collapse. So too would it be here if the seawall gives way. Those homes would get flooded out, the foundations would be eviscerated, and eventually it would destroy that tax base. And the tax base within that area is almost equivalent to I don't know what the exact figures are, but it would dwarf almost, I think, one or two tax bases of this district in other parts of the city and so forth. Beyond that, once that goes, the commercial area on Second Street would go within Naples. I do have concerns. I want to make sure there's some clarifications. It's my understanding this is phase one and phase two. Is that allowed to begin now or is that the one where the Corps of Engineers comes down and says, no further work on the sea walls unless and until the Sorento pathway is completed? There was an article in the paper in that and I think I saw something like that in the permit. But that needs to be clarified because the Corps of Engineers, I've asked for the inspector general, the Corps of Engineers, to get inside and make an order do that, because I can, as my factory senses, tell me there's going to be a problem with the Sorento. Pathway easily addressed, but you'd have to have the right type of management to do that, and I'm not sure we have that in place right now. So I think that needs to be clarified when if this first phase is all work, stop. And I think the Naples people need to know that there's a stop right now at the end of this phase and wait until Sorrento or are they allowed to go through a phase two period? And the last thing I question, quite frankly, in the order to get inside of it, why, when we're talking about the billions, the millions we're talking about, an additional $300,000 is needed. Something's wrong there. You know, the olfactory sense of it is going into high gear. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 7: He was dancing down there. That's.
Speaker 1: Maureen Po one four, four, seven. A walk. Thank you for providing an opportunity for me to come and talk to you all today, because you have all been part of the rebuild of the the Naples Sea walls for over 20 years. I've been the chairman of the committee, but it's a committee of volunteers, people who wanted to get together and help and work with the city. And we've had a remarkable time. And the result is what you saw in that beautiful video. And I was presented this afternoon with a booklet from one of the homeowners that were so grateful. And they took pictures during the whole trip, and they have more pictures to bring to me. But they just wanted to let me know how much it meant to them to have a safe wall. And I know that as you have looked at the rains and the decomposing of the sea walls down in South Carolina, I went to bed sleeping better, thinking, well, our walls are getting fixed and they're not just getting a new rod put in that could hold a little bit and then have the wall crumble. They're actually getting new stainless steel walls that will be there for 70 years. And so I won't be here to worry about it the second time around. I think that it's going to last longer than that. But we really had a public and city project because I know that Eric Lopez and Rachel Tanner have been with us all the way through. And I we had a whole lot of other people that had worked in their positions that came back to see the grand opening of the seawalls. Susie Price has made herself available at any hour. I can send her a message and I know she'll get back to me within a half hour. She stays up late just to make sure that she keeps us in touch. And I know that the mayor, he worked hard before he became mayor and when he was on the Coastal Commission to provide a way for us to see a mitigation that could occur with the Sorento trail is one of those things that he helped with. He had the insight to to be able to work with that, because I know it took me three years of meeting over and over and again with the Coastal Commission to make sure that they were aware of the project and how much we were in need of it. And so I just thank you very much for everything that you've done, and it's been a pleasure to work with the city on this project.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I'll repeat in a maureen what we we said over the weekend, it would not be possible without you and obviously the whole committee. So thank you for your for your work. There's very work in the committee's work and it's been fantastic. So with that, there's a motion and a second on any of the public comment. Seeing nonmembers, please go and cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Let's do I understand there's a few folks here for item 24, so why don't we go into item 24?
Speaker 1: Next report from Public Works and Financial Management Recommendation to award a contract to Sally Milliken Contracting Company for improvements of the bicycle system gap closure and improved Los Angeles River Bike Path Access Project for a total contract amount not to exceed 1.1 million districts one, six, seven, eight and nine. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager to amend Contract
No. 33457 with Ford E.C., Inc., of Los Angeles, CA, for the Naples Island Permanent Seawall Repairs Phase 1 Project, to increase the contract amount by $300,000, for a total contract amount not to exceed $11,717,637; and execute all documents necessary to complete the Project. (District 3) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11032015_15-1122 | Speaker 1: Next report from Public Works and Financial Management Recommendation to award a contract to Sally Milliken Contracting Company for improvements of the bicycle system gap closure and improved Los Angeles River Bike Path Access Project for a total contract amount not to exceed 1.1 million districts one, six, seven, eight and nine.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Mr. Awesome. Before I turn it over to him to go to start first. Or did you want. Okay, Mr. West, why don't you provide a staff report? Mr. Mayor, council members.
Speaker 6: This is a project that started back in 2011 with a huge $1 million metro grant, and we're happy to bring it to fruition tonight. So I'm going to transition it to our Malloy and our public works director to walk us through the project.
Speaker 2: Honorable man, honorable council members. This project project is one of our most important bike closure projects in the city, and I'm kind of proud that after six years of hard staff work, we're here tonight to be able to get this approved. This is this project connects the south basically from Ocean Boulevard all the way to City nine. It's it's about 8.4 miles of bike connection. It has class two and class three bike lanes. And we have worked very closely with the council offices, with the communities community meetings. I have to say that we had over 18 community meetings in the last six years or four years, which my staff has been actively working on. This project starts from ocean and continues north to four or five, connects at San Antonio Boulevard and then makes a left on the Alamo and also a portion of Harding Avenue and City nine gets gets to have this this treatment. Um, that that is basically the, the gist of this project. This was competitively bid. We had several bidders and the lowest bidder is, is Sally Miller. So most lowest responsible bidder is Solly Miller. And we're here to get your approval for this contract.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And turn this over to Councilman Austin.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And thank you, Mr. Malloy, for the staff report. I must concur that there is this is this project has been a long time coming and has been a lot of work put into it. There's been a lot of community outreach. We've heard from many residents of the community regarding specific aspects of this. I think this this project obviously encompasses several campus council districts and will go a long way toward proving our our bike infrastructure, which has been a goal of this council for many years. This project has had, as Mr. Malone has mentioned, over 19 community meetings that I know of regarding this route. I've had a number of residents continually ask me when this project will actually get going, because there's been much anticipation over the last couple of years. I'm pleased to now see that we're now able to truly say it's starting shortly. I know that some residents had some concerns and come before the council to voice their concerns on some of the elements of the project. And I appreciate staff's work to try to address those concerns as much as access, this project is really about safety. I can tell you specifically in the eighth District, this project will provide safer routes to schools at least two or three schools, Longfellow Hughes, as well as Little Cerritos. And while not everyone agrees, I know that the new traffic signal with Pacific and Wardlow will address an intersection that has a significant number of accidents over the years. And the traffic circles will help with traffic calming and esthetics in the Los Cerritos neighborhood to address concerns that were raised that some of the initial community meetings and look forward to this project getting underway and utilizing this bike route by myself. I would ask that the council support this. I know two of my colleagues are here tonight. Councilmember Rex Richardson and Councilmember Urunga did tell me that they support the project and wish they could be here to vote.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman. We have a second with a motion and a second by Councilwoman Gonzales. Do you have any comments?
Speaker 5: Yes, I just wanted to thank Ora and his staff. I know this has been a long time in the making, and this is it's a great project because it does cover so many different parts of the city. So I just want to commend you in that and thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Let me do any public comment on this item. Please come forward.
Speaker 1: Good evening, Mayor Garcia, Vice Mayor Lowenthal, council and elected officials. My name is Rene Lawler. I live in the seventh District. It'll sound as though I am opposing this project. I don't oppose the project. I don't oppose the enhancement of biking. But I do continue to have a consistent concern with respect to multi-use trails in the city and the safety issues that continue to prevail without safety signage for multi-use trails. So with this project, and as you've heard me speak several weeks prior, the consistent problem with these types of projects is that there's not safety signage alerting the public about the the crossings at the multi-use trails. So, for instance, with the volume of users that are being brought into the L.A. River and the enhancement of the bike paths, what happens is that all those user groups are being brought into the existing historic equestrian trail areas. They're crossing the equestrian path, but they're not being alerted as to the fact that they're even coming into an equestrian zone, that there is a trail there and what the protocols are for the crossings and yield. So I would respectfully request that if you're going to approve a project like this or any other project along the L.A. River on a regional basis, as per A.B. 530, which is new state law, that these projects be reevaluated so that you do include education to the public and safety signage. There's a federally approved sign by the NPS and at every gateway, every destination, every crossing, as well as the entry signage where you're giving wayfinding signs, those signs for this project really need to be multi-use in in their demeanor so that instead of just focusing on the fact that you're entering a bike path, that you do really alert the public that there are the crossings. This has been a consistent message that we're seeing with the equestrian community. The numbers are diminishing because the equestrian community's voice is not being heard. The preservation of the trail and the safe connections for the equestrian trail. As additional user groups are being brought into these areas, the original user group's needs are not adequately being addressed. It's unfortunate that this project was given a a waiver with respect to Sequoia, because in actuality, the L.A. River Master.
Speaker 8: Plan.
Speaker 1: Never adequately addressed the cumulative negative impact that the equestrian community is continuing to experience with projects along the L.A. River. So I would request that you have a friendly amendment with this type of project and any other project like the Forest Wetlands that you're going to be reviewing in the future to have an amendment that really addresses the multi-use signage.
Speaker 4: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Next speaker.
Speaker 1: Hi. My name is Sue Baden and I live at Country Club Drive in the seventh District and I appreciate the opportunity to address the council on this. And I love the idea of more bike lanes in the city, and that's absolutely, perfectly wonderful. I'm a cyclist, so I like to make use of these lanes. But one portion of this project that Councilman Austin brought up was the roundabout, in particular the roundabout at the corner of 36th and Pacific. When our community first heard about this and I opposed as opposed.
Speaker 8: To this, I remain opposed to this. When our community first heard about this even a.
Speaker 1: Couple of years ago, we did have some community meetings and they were very emotional meetings and many people were very opposed to this. And the reason brought up at that time.
Speaker 8: Was because of the.
Speaker 1: Speed and the volume of traffic on Pacific. I wondered aloud at that time, and I wonder aloud now if there were any other any other ideas that were brought up as for how as far as how to deal with this with this traffic problem, even the idea of perhaps minor undulations or speed.
Speaker 8: Bumps or something on Pacific fiscally.
Speaker 1: That would be less of an impact. And I think that it would be less of an impact on our community members that live on and near the corner where this roundabout is going to be. I know that there are according to the last plans I saw, a couple of our community members will lose the parking in front of their homes. I don't think that's fair. I think it will affect their property values. I don't think it's right for them to bear the brunt, ah, the.
Speaker 8: Brunt of this, of this.
Speaker 1: Issue. And so I'm really concerned about that. I feel very badly for them and I just don't think it's fair. Second thing is that, again, I'm a cyclist and I would like to I don't know if there's any solution to this, but so many of the cyclists that are in our city now totally ignore the rules of the road. I live at the corner of Bixby and Country Club. Nobody stops at those stop signs. They just go right through the stop signs. Some of them I have seen barely missed some cars that are at their stop the stop signs. I always stop. I always stop at signals, but rarely do I see our cyclists doing that. And we're being very fair to the cyclists and offering them many of these bike trails. But I would love to see if there's something that can be done to let them be made aware that they're responsible for.
Speaker 8: The rules of the road. It just kind.
Speaker 1: Of irks me because I do and I and I just don't like it when when they just ignore the rules, the rules. And I don't know if there's anything that can be done for that, but I just did want to express my opinion on that. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Thanks, Speaker.
Speaker 7: Mr. Mayor, city members of the council, my name is William Kessler and my wife and I are married, live at the corner of Pacific and 36th Street, are directly affected by this project. And our opposition is not about the bike lanes. It's about the same thing that Sue talked about is the roundabout right at our intersection, the design that we were we're familiar with replace a stop signs with the yield signs. We think that's a safety issue for the reasons that Sue enunciated here. The bicyclist come barreling through that intersection really fast and it's a yield sign is just going to exacerbate that. The other the other thing that I would like to enunciate is the same thing that Sue mentioned, and that is the the parking is going to be confiscated as a result of this of this project. There's going to be several parking places along Pacific.
Speaker 2: Avenue that are going to be taken.
Speaker 7: And no parking put put there. And that's going to have a big impact on on our neighborhood. You may or may not be aware of it, but the blue line overflow traffic.
Speaker 2: Is getting to be more.
Speaker 7: And more.
Speaker 2: Significant.
Speaker 7: The cars park.
Speaker 2: Two or three blocks.
Speaker 7: Away from the blue line just to catch the blue line. They come to our they come to our house in front of our house and in front of our neighbors houses to park the. And there are also other community activities in the area, church activities and the like that create create a parking situation that's.
Speaker 2: That's really getting to be pretty bad.
Speaker 7: There. The when you when you add to the confiscation of extra parking spaces along Pacific Avenue, that's going to make it make it a lot worse. So we're not against bike lanes and we're not against most of this project. But we ask that you oppose this project until the safety issues and the street parking concerns are are addressed.
Speaker 4: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Mr. Mayor, city council members. My name is Mary Kessler. I live at the corner of 36th and Pacific where this roundabout will be. I strongly oppose the the roundabout for many for many angles. The Los Cerritos Neighborhood Association took a vote on this project about a year ago, and 75% of the members of the neighborhood association oppose this. And our issues have not been addressed. They've been ignored. It's the safety issue, the way we are, the way you're proposing to narrow Pacific Avenue, cuts down the visibility. And if and as Sue pointed out, the bikers and never stop at the stop sign and they're not going to go around that traffic circle, they will cut the other way. And since the visibility of the drivers has been obscured, I'm afraid it's it's an accident waiting to happen. I'm afraid there's going to be a lot of accidents. There are a lot of bicyclists hurt. As my husband said, we're not opposed to bike lanes. We would like to see lots of bike lanes. We like to see continuous bike lanes the way they are now. You have a nice bike lane for about a block and then it disappears. They come and go and they come and go. And and in this proposal, there's also the proposed bike lanes come and go. They're on one side of the street, not the other. Also. Of course, the parking is terrible, though. We are half a mile from the blue line. We get people from the blue line parking there because there is inadequate parking. But one thing you could do is have hidden parking on Pacific Avenue on the one side of the street, and you would double the amount of parking there. And that would only take a little bit of paint. That is basically a long off ramp. That's not two way traffic at all. It's a divided street. So like I say, or our concerns have not been addressed. They've been ignored and. I really think there will be. A lot of guilt for a lot of people who planned this, for the people that are hurt in this intersection. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Turn this back over to the council, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 2: Yes. In response to one of the public comments regarding the, um, the multi-use trails, I'm aware of at least one location in the Dominguez gap where there is equestrian and bike traffic that, that, uh, that may happen at the same time. Have we taken any consideration to that, taking that into consideration, and are we amendable to, to doing signage in the areas where we can do that? Councilmember Austin. Absolutely. We're we will work with the community and install any signage that it's necessary to create safer and eliminate any confusion possible. So the signage is not an issue as far as installing new signage. So, yes. Okay. And specifically, I know if I if I'm telling you right away, I think you're talking about the Del Mar that that area. Yes.
Speaker 8: Actually, I'm talking about.
Speaker 2: Everyone.
Speaker 1: There needs to.
Speaker 2: So. So I think that's a fair and reasonable request. And it's not something you necessarily need the emotion or to be built into the the item. I'm just going to ask them to take that into consideration because I think that that's very reasonable. And I'd just like to just just also just elaborate on the the process and the the many surveys. I know my office did a survey. I know we hosted a number of meetings along with our traffic engineers. And the community is truly there's a split. There's there are people who are bike advocates and and who are concerned about the safety of their children getting to or from schools. And then there are folks who are concerned about losing a parking spot or or the traffic. I think, to reiterate, the roundabouts are being planned by our traffic engineers are being planned to mitigate traffic in the slow, slow down traffic on Pacific Pacific is one of the widest streets, I believe, in the city. And I have heard nothing that would make me feel like this. This was less than beneficial for the city. This is, I think, a well thought out process and well thought out project that is going to benefit our infrastructure for for many years to come. And so, members, I would ask for your support.
Speaker 0: Can you think of any other public or council comment? I'm sorry. Any council comment? I see no other council comment on this. Members, please go and capture voters emotion any second by Councilman Austin and Councilman Gonzales.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. Moving on the agenda, please, madam.
Speaker 1: Quick report from Development Services Recommendation to receive and expand grant funding from the Department of Justice for the Fiscal Year 2015 Youth Violence Prevention Enhancement Project and State and Community Development Awards Citywide. | Contract | Recommendation to adopt Plans and Specifications No. R-6984 for Improvements of the Bicycle System Gap Closure and Improved Los Angeles River Bike Path Access project; award the contract to Sully-Miller Contracting Company, of Brea, CA, in the amount of $1,051,223, and authorize a 10 percent contingency in the amount of $105,122, for a total contract amount not to exceed $1,156,345; and authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to enter into the contract, including any necessary amendments thereto, and consider Categorical Exemption No. 54-10 (15301 Class1). (Districts 1,6,7,8,9) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11032015_15-1115 | Speaker 1: Quick report from Development Services Recommendation to receive and expand grant funding from the Department of Justice for the Fiscal Year 2015 Youth Violence Prevention Enhancement Project and State and Community Development Awards Citywide.
Speaker 0: Okay. I'm sorry. This is. I missed that. This was. I'm 13, right? Okay. There's a motion in a second. Is there any public comment on that? CNN. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 2: Mr. Mayor, I'd just like to say well done to the staff for going out and getting this grant. This is going to help improve public safety and improve our violence prevention plan and allow it to be rolled out. I think that effectively so well done. Staff Development Services, Tracy, Arturo, and everybody who had anything to do with this.
Speaker 3: Oh, God. Excuse me. They are so high. I just. I just look back to ask you. You guys did a fantastic job. God, I was in, you know. Well, I maybe been napping, but I thank you, Mr. Mayor. Great job, you guys. Great job. Yes.
Speaker 5: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I also wanted to say thank you as well. I know they worked very hard on just finding new opportunities and new avenues. And so I want to thank you for your work. Appreciate it.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Motion carries. Okay. Next item 14.
Speaker 1: Item 16.
Speaker 0: Item. I'm sorry. Item 16. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager to execute all necessary documents to receive and expend grant funding from the Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), for the OJJDP FY 2015 Youth Violence Prevention Enhancement Project and the FY 2015 State and Community Development Award; and
Increase appropriations in the Community Development Grants Fund (SR 150) in the Development Services Department (DV) by $529,000. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11032015_15-1045 | Speaker 1: Report from Public Works. Economic and Property Development and Financial Management Recommendation to execute an agreement with PPF. Amalie 245 West Broadway to perform storm drain relocation work in West Third Street, Pacific Avenue and West Broadway in an amount not to exceed 1.7 million. Districts one and two.
Speaker 0: There's a motion in a second by Councilman Gonzales and Vice Mayor Lowenthal as any public comment on this item. Seeing an account from the Germany comments.
Speaker 5: Thank you, Ira, and our city staff for this. This is going to be a wonderful project, so thank you for your work.
Speaker 0: Is there any public comment on the item? Please come forward.
Speaker 6: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Gary Shelton, again, a couple of items from when this was originally going to be at council about a month ago, and then it was withdrawn. There's been a 26% increase in the city's share of the cost of this has gone up by $350,000, which is primarily administration and testing. And so one of the questions that I have is to what percent is it meant as the administration cost being worked into this deal? Another is that the city has decided to assume 45% of the cost of this when it actually possesses only about 30% of the storm drain. Now, I understand that that that the city says it's only paying its proportional share, but I don't know how 30% equals 45%. So I think there's a question there that's worthy of your of your consideration you're asking staff about. Also, we just we just learned that the bond issue is is now in place to repay the general fund allocation for this. However, I learned earlier today from from staff that that this is not being funded with any bond money. So I'm maybe it's because the bond doesn't exist yet and it's in effect, some type of bond. Maybe that's what's happening. I'm not really sure about that, but I think that's worthy of your consideration. One thing I wanted to mention that might not be obvious to the members of the public is that this the city property that lives that lives over this 45% of the storm drain or 30% of the storm drain is actually part of the Civic Center project. And that's why it's tied in with the bond issue, which is designed to fund the demolition of the city. I mean, excuse me, the old courthouse. I wanted to also ask just because I don't know who is PPF, namely, the initial company doing this was Broadway Properties Company, LLC, and there's been nothing that I'm aware of that that has changed. So evidently it has. And that might be good or it might be bad. I don't really know. The city's additional cost of the removal of it's a segment of the buried part of the storm drain, which according to what the the Planning Commission approved two years ago on this, the the idea is for that storm drain to remain underground and only be demolished under the private party portion of this property. So that's a future cost. When the when that building is constructed as part of the new civic center, that's not incorporated in this item today. So there's even going to be a further cost overrun, as it would seem. That's really clear in the conditions number condition number four point C, which actually was not available to the public until just a couple of weeks ago after it was considered by the Planning Commission two years ago. And so just one last thing, if I can.
Speaker 0: Four time. Time's up. But real quickly, go ahead.
Speaker 6: Okay. Is the impact on First Congregational Church is unknown at this time, and the church is asking the city to please consider that there needs to be a claims process in place in case the demolition of the storm drain could would cause any further damage to the facade of the church facing Cedar Avenue. Thank you so much for your consideration, Mr. Mayor.
Speaker 0: Thank you. There's Sandy. The public comment seeing none. There's a motion and a second on this. Please cast your vote.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: So now we're back to 17.
Speaker 1: Madam Quick Report from Financial Management Recommendation to increase blanket purchase orders with complete office for providing a citywide office supply program by $450,000 citywide. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager to execute an Agreement with PPF AMLI 245 West Broadway, LLC, and all related documents necessary to perform storm drain relocation work in West 3rd Street, Pacific Avenue and West Broadway in an amount not to exceed $1,703,653;
Increase appropriations in the General Fund (GF) in the Citywide Activities Department (XC) by $1,703,653 for a transfer to the Capital Projects Fund (CP) in the Public Works Department (PW); and increase appropriations in the Capital Projects Fund (CP) in the Public Works Department (PW) by $1,703,653 offset by revenue from bond proceeds. (Districts 1,2) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11032015_15-1121 | Speaker 1: Report from police recommendation to receive and file the application of Dog House for an original application of an ABC license at 210 East Third Street Suite. The District to.
Speaker 0: Face Marie Lowenthal.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And for the record, I don't know that we're trying to be like any other city but our own. So I take that as a compliment. I just wanted to point to my colleagues that we have a couple of items that were handed out to you. One is for the dog house, and that's the requested conditions. That's okay. And that should be at the dais for everyone to see. So I'm just making the motion to move this with the requested conditions.
Speaker 0: Thank you. There is a motion in a second and we have requested conditions. Is there any public comment on this item? Nope. All right. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 1: And I would like to welcome them, Mr. Mayor, to the downtown and. Wish them great success. Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next item, please. | ABC License | Recommendation to receive and file the application of DH Promenade, LLC, dba Dog Haus for an original application of an Alcoholic Beverage Control License, at 210 East 3rd Street, Suite D. (District 2) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_11032015_15-1120 | Speaker 1: Report from police recommendation to receive and file the application of pizza Mr. for an original application of an ABC license at 1837 East Seventh Street. District to.
Speaker 0: Vice Mayor.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And you also have the set of recommendations or requested conditions for this item as well. And I'd like to welcome the pizza Mr. to the historic East Seventh Street and make this motion to receive and file.
Speaker 0: Thank you as any public comment on this item. Seeing none. Let me just add also a welcome. I think from what I understand, we have some very good operators coming to this location with successor and another location. And it's really it's really also a great location on Seventh Street. And I think it's going to be a great a great change. And so congrats to the second district really is getting a great new business in this one. So please cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Vice Mayor Lowenthal. Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next item, please.
Speaker 1: Report from Public Works recommendation to execute a Fourth Amendment to contract with concrete construction for concrete repairs and related improvements, increasing the contract amount by an additional $5 million citywide. | ABC License | Recommendation to receive and file the application of Pizzanista, LLC, dba Pizzanista!, for an original application of an Alcoholic Beverage Control License, at 1837 East 7th Street. (District 2) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_10202015_15-1090 | Speaker 2: And that's right now. And we want to get those kids home and parents and faculty home early. And next after item 12, we will take up item 11, which is commission appointments by Mayor Garcia, item 24, which is a request to draft an ordinance regulating unmanned aircraft systems or drones, has been withdrawn by the city manager and staff at this time. So I'd just like to share that. And then finally, I think we can do this somewhat quickly. We'd like to take three items up together. That would be item 18, 19 and 25, and we will take that after item 11. Madam Clerk, is that do I need to repeat that? Because 18, 19 and 25 was different. We're good. Thank you. All right. Item 12. Madam Clerk.
Speaker 0: Communication from Councilman Andrews recommendation to receive and file the report on the Thank America's Teachers Dream Big Teacher Challenge for Lafayette Elementary School.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Councilmember Andrews, was there a motion? Yes. Would you like to make it motion? Thank you. Great. Councilman Andrews.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Vice Mayor. I think this is very exciting because the fact that these individuals who have been out on the I would call it the fine line in order to do things, which is very, very hard. And I think they've gotten it done. They did what they had to do. And I'm just the others are going to be left up to us as individuals who really know how important. Once I finish reading this so important, it is really be it. It'll be up to the community and to the individuals that do know that voting is of essence in order for us to get this grant. So one of the local teachers, Mrs. Katherine to Sarah, representing Lafayette Elementary School, which is located in the sixth District, is named as a finalist in the race for a $100,000 grant to farmers market to support the Lafayette School. What I am asking from the community is to help us with getting enough votes to win the grant. You can vote daily online before midnight, October the 31st and that is w w dad. Thank America teachers. Dad can. I want to personally acknowledge Kathryn Peseta for applying for this grant and putting our kids needs first. Catherine has been a Long Beach Unified School District teacher for 18 years, and as a teacher myself, I know the dedication it requires. So thank you so, so very much. And if you'd like to come down, would it be okay? Possibly with. All of the individuals who was involved and likely to come down.
Speaker 8: Thank you so much, Honorable Vice Mayor and Councilmember Enders. So, as you mentioned, we're here from Farmer's Insurance for our Dream Big Teacher Challenge whereby we are going to be giving out $600,000 grant to teachers across the country. As a company, Farmers Insurance is committed to making our customers smarter about insurance. And we also want to help teachers, our community, make our children smarter. So that covers our program. And as you mentioned, one of the finalists I'm excited to announce is in our community, and it is Catherine to say at Lafayette Elementary School. So without further ado, I'll bring her up and she can discuss the grant she's applying for.
Speaker 0: Good evening and thank you for having me here. I wanted to tell you a little bit about the proposal for the $100,000 and what it would mean to our Lafayette community, not only our teachers and our students, but also our families. As you may not know, there are over a thousand students that attend Lafayette Elementary School, and those thousand students do not have the access to digital resources that our student that our children may have. So without the access and creates this huge digital divide and equity and access is what my grand proposal is all about. At Lafayette, we are wireless. We have everything that we need foundationally to support the technology. We just don't have it in the kids hands every day, and that's where we need it. We have two labs, but in order for our students to become great digital citizens, to be college and career ready, we know how technology plays such an important role. And so the grant would bring iPads and Chromebooks into the classroom so the students could use it on a daily basis. Not only would the grant provide hardware, but it would also provide for generations to come that go through the doors of Lafayette. And it's not just hardware that's needed. We're so fortunate that we have teachers, technology, integration, teachers that are here and ready already crossing hurdles to get into the hands of students digital resources. Our Long Beach Unified School District gives us a lot of support through our technology leader, Vineeth Chandrasekhar and the technology department. And we are ready. And I brought two technology integration teachers with me here today, Dr. Velasco and and Mr. David Noyce, to speak a little bit from the teachers perspective and what this grant would mean for them. I'm I.
Speaker 5: Represent. My name is Dr. Velasco and I represent the the area that is not talked about.
Speaker 0: A lot at schools.
Speaker 5: Which is the parent involvement area and what our. Opportunity the farmer's insurance has provided for us and we're excited about is that we're not only going to provide access to kids, but actually entire families. And that's my role to get that technology into their hands. And so we can have their.
Speaker 0: Support.
Speaker 5: At home and make it a true village, which we currently don't have because of lack or lack of equity. So I'm really excited and we are expecting everybody to vote before they leave tonight. And so thank you for the opportunity to come and address you tonight.
Speaker 9: Thank you for having us. And a special thank you to Kat to say for putting herself out there and reaching for something that has everything to do with our students and our passion. Our philosophy in Long Beach Unified is every child, every day. And by raising the bar and with digital technology, we have the opportunity to meet the needs in equity and access for each and every child that walks through our door. In addition to that, and it gives us an opportunity to become more enhanced in our instructional practice and our passion. So thank you.
Speaker 1: Good evening and thank you for having us. Tonight, council members, vice mayor and the city of Long Beach is a really special opportunity. I'm Dave Gamble. I'm one of the local field leaders for Farmers Insurance in the South Bay communities. And I have to tell you, this proposal that Katherine Tisei has put together is really something quite special. And it's my job tonight to kind of frame this for you in terms of what we need to do at home, make sure that your community gets this money and that that money goes right to the school. So in nationally, we're going to give away six of these prizes for $100,000. And what's so special here tonight is Katherine Tessier is the only finalist in all of Southern California. The only finalist? So as a community, my thoughts are we really need to rally together. And it doesn't matter if you're in Long Beach or in Carson or any of the surrounding communities in the Los Angeles community. I would like to see this money go right here to Long Beach. I don't have a choice this year to redirect the money to one of the neighboring cities. And that's why I think we have a real opportunity to all band together. So I want to make sure that everybody really understands that. And the way that this money is going to be granted is going to be granted through an outpouring of support demonstrated by the community. And that outpouring of support is demonstrated by voting on the website each and every day. We do have a very simple method for people that want to participate on a daily basis and vote. You can simply, simply send a text message to the number 81010 with the message out sign like in your email 100 K And this is a special site that we have set up for Katherine where she can send a daily reminder with a simple link to get right into that website to vote. I want to give a couple of other calls to action real quickly as well. This is not a one time thing for farmers insurance. This is our second year in giving away the big the Dream Big Teacher Award to several teachers around the country. But quarterly teachers have the opportunity to participate and compete for 20 $500 grants each and every quarter. And there's a lot of those grants that go around. There's about $400,000 available every year on a quarterly basis. And and Councilman Andrews gave our website and that's thank America's teachers dot com and people that are interested in learning more about how to obtain grants can find that information there as well as vote for Katherine every day . So with that, I thank you so much for your support. And we've brought some fliers to hand out for those that would like the reminders and we've left them at the table. Thank you so much for your time.
Speaker 2: Can you repeat the text number again?
Speaker 1: Yes, by all means. It is 81010. That's 81010. And the message is out. Sign like in your email. 100 k100k and that will get you a text message each morning. Compliments of Catherine and there's an easy to click link. I will give you just a very high level quick tip on this. You you do have to have a Facebook account to vote. And that's so we can make sure that members of the community don't try to stuff the ballot box with a thousand votes today. So that ensures that one person can vote one time each day. And again, this competition ends on October 31st. And I will tell you, we're very happy. We've been working on this very hard with our members of the former Southern California team. And as of this morning, Katherine is in first place in the western zone.
Speaker 3: Well, there you go.
Speaker 1: But for the community, realize what that remember is. There's five other teachers that now have a target on Katherine's back. So we really appreciate all of your support in voting daily to make sure that Long Beach gets this money.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Thank you. And thank you, Catherine, for all of your efforts and your team and for working as hard as you do for your kids and families. Kids and families. And thank you for mentioning parent involvement. That's wonderful. And, you know, it's such a collaborative environment. I don't think five other teachers are here gunning for Catherine. This is going to be a very supportive effort and I know each of us will put that out. We you know, we truly believe in our Long Beach schools and our Long Beach kids. And the fact that you brought them to number one so far is phenomenal. So we will push that out into our own social media efforts. Councilmember Andrews, did you want to say anything else?
Speaker 3: Just. Just vote. Just vote.
Speaker 4: Like the Nike commercial.
Speaker 2: Just vote off and absolutely. Council member, your anger.
Speaker 11: Thank you. I want to thank Councilmember Andrews for bringing this forward. And of course, I want to thank Kathryn for having the vision to apply for this proposal. And I wish you well. I'm sure that the community is rooting for you and will vote for you. With that old Chicago saying, you know, we'll vote often. Yeah. And now, of course, you know, this can't happen without the generosity of a farmer's insurance. And I want you know, I thank you for making this possible available because there's nothing that we are more proud of in Long Beach is our schools. And we really certainly want to support anything that helps our schools and helps our children, especially bringing them up into the 21st century. And although Lafayette's in the sixth District, it is in the Wrigley area of of my council district. So you know that I'm going to be getting that out through my social media and my newsletter to make sure that they vote for this project as well. Thank you again.
Speaker 3: Thank you.
Speaker 2: Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 5: Very glad that you came to council and that council member Andrews brought this forward because I think it's so very important. What you've done, both on the technology side and just an educational realm, is is so very important. Working for a large tech company, I can't even say firm corporation like Microsoft. It's I work a lot with the educational institutions and not many teachers do things like this. It's really very far, few far in between because, you know, I don't know if they don't see the value, but it's you don't see this often. So it's really great that you're taking it upon yourself to do this along with your technology team. And I hope you get it. We will certainly help you and support you in the first district. So you have our vote as well.
Speaker 3: Thank you.
Speaker 2: Councilmember Richardson.
Speaker 10: Thank you, Vice Mayor. Councilmember Andrews, what a fantastic idea. Katherine Farmer's Team. I know these are really important to teachers and what I heard earlier was the small micro classroom grants. Those are hugely important to teachers. And for example, in North Long Beach, the last year, we raised over $40,000 to target much of that to smaller, smaller classroom grants. $500,000 will go a long way in the classroom. And, you know, and I think it's fantastic that it's so easy to just pull up and vote. So have you? Probably can see I have it queued up right here. I'm pushing my red button that says, am I over 18 years old? I am. I am. And it says opt to receive communication from farmers insurance. I guess I'll do that too. And then. And then submit. So it was really easy to do. So I participate. I did my vote today. Councilmember.
Speaker 2: I thank you. There's been a motion and a second. Is there any member of any other member of the public that wishes to address council on this item? Item 12, Seeing None members cast your vote.
Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 2: Wonderful. Thank you. Congratulations. Thank you. Good luck, actually. Item 11. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to receive and file the report on the Thank America's Teachers Dream Big Teacher Challenge for Lafayette Elementary School. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_10202015_15-1066 | Speaker 2: And you're not the infant. But I know what you meant. And so let's let's let's to hearing item one. I'm sorry.
Speaker 0: To.
Speaker 2: You can stay there. You don't have to move. We're coming right.
Speaker 0: Back. Report from Economic and Property Development Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the hearing and adopt resolution confirming the Bixby Knolls Parking and Business Improvement Area Annual Report. Continuing the levy of assessment for the period of October 1st, 2015 through September 30th, 2016, and authorize the City Manager to extend the agreement with the Bixby Knolls Business Improvement Association for one year. District seven and eight.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Councilmember Austin.
Speaker 7: Yes. Thank you very much. The BBC's Minos Business Improvement Association has is is doing a spectacular job on the eighth District as well as seventh District in its boundaries. It has engaged business owners. It is really engaged the residents and created an environment that is vibrant and thriving today. It wouldn't be possible without a great staff led by our executive director, Blair Cohn, his motivated staff to succeed, as well as our Kate Yoshioka. And they are constantly being innovative and creative in approaches to to keep the businesses engaged, excited and keeping Atlantic Avenue vibrant as well as Long Beach Boulevard. And so. Members I ask for your enthusiastic support for to. Approve the recommendation before us.
Speaker 2: Okay. And let me turn it over to Mr. Modica to see if there's a staff report.
Speaker 8: Good evening, Vice Mayor and members of the City Council. The report tonight will be provided by Mike Conway, the director of Economic and Property Development, Vice Mayor and members of the City Council. I make this relatively quick. This item is the annual approval of the Bixby Knolls Parking and Business Improvement Area Annual Report and ongoing levy of assessment. And the report proposes no change in the method of levying the assessment and no significant changes to the proposed activities. On September 22nd, 2015, City Council approve the annual report and set the hearing date for today to hear public testimony and with with that staff's request that Council received the supporting documentation into the record, approve the resolution, continue the levy and the assessment, and authorize the city manager to extend the agreement for another year.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mr. Conway. And there's been a motion and a second. Is there any public comment?
Speaker 8: Good evening. Thank you, Vice Mayor, for beginning, Mr. Koch. And wait, I appreciate that.
Speaker 2: That was planned.
Speaker 8: I just want to give you a brief rundown of what's been going on here in Vic's Phenols for the last year. We're kind of at a crossroads this year. And, you know, the song Changes by boy, that's that's been our motto for the last year. So we kind of have the old school starting to retire and we're seeing new school coming in. And we're excited to announce that our Lola's on Fourth Street is coming up to become an all star to open a second location, as is the Twig and Willows Store, also on Fourth Street. And knock on wood, we've got a number of phone calls right now for other businesses looking to do the same thing. Expand within Long Beach, but into the Bixby Knolls area in the near future will see the steel craft project go in at Bixby and which boulevard, which are the cargo containers that will go in that corner with 5 to 7 eateries and activate that part of the district, especially the boulevard of serve the neighborhood as well as all the businesses there. We have said goodbye to our seven year project manager, Krystal Leader, to welcome Kate Yoshioka, who is very active in the city and she's a total dynamo and has really taken the reins and helped us move to the next level here. We've just launched our board in Bixby campaign where we challenge everyone in the neighborhood as well as the business owners themselves to not just not change their whole life, but to make a commitment to change at least one usage from somewhere outside the area, but into Bixby. And also if they get their hair done at the pump or gas somewhere else, make sure they do it here and then brag about it and post it through social media. We had an art component this year, creation of the gallery, which is we took the alley space between two businesses, put festoon lighting, put murals up on the wall. We closed it for special events, specially first Fridays and other events. So creating a public space right in the heart of the district, our utility boxes are being painted. Of course, we were part of the powwow event and the expo building got one of the murals. So we can have Expo in now housing the BIA office as well as the eighth district field office. And the programing is steady with the kids, theater company and activities. Now for seniors that are happening weekly, we have community meetings. We have the major Black History Month celebration every year. And of course, it's the arts hub for first Fridays, our facade of streetscape improvements. We've now painted over 40 buildings in the district and installed lighting all over to make sure that we are plenty vibrant, clean and safe programs are always the priority. We just hired a kid from Lonely City College to be our clean team, so he's out three days a week, picking up trash, reporting graffiti and anything else that he sees out there. And our security team hired the private security CSI that's out five nights a week and also three days a week, making sure that the district is safe. We're doing more outreach to our members, including our Bixby Business Breakfast, which is great time to get everybody together before they go to work and fill in what what we feel we've got doing. I'm not going to hit the 60 seconds here. I got just a few more food and wine. Coach coaching can wait. Still maintaining our monthly events and programs. Yes, we're seven and a half years of our walking club, 92 books into our literary society. We continue to push the city city's black agenda with our monthly critical mass rights. Of course, First Fridays has grown from a handful of businesses now to being the most important night for retailers and for the neighborhood. We partner with many community groups and recently hosted the I-Team and we're about to launch our Big Smiles Good Spirits Club. We'll let Mr. Austin speak on that. We have plenty great progress, what we call the Promised Land, but we must think, of course, the seventh and eighth District for their their support. The mayor and the city managers are partners in public works, development services, language PD and of course, the fire department and couldn't do it without the help of all the other bids and associations and all of our community groups and neighborhood leaders that we partners with. So we're having a good time up there. It's a very fertile land. Babies are being made. And we thank you for your time.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Councilmember Richardson.
Speaker 10: But I'll defer to Councilmember Ranga since this is his district as well.
Speaker 11: They could go through Richardson. I want to congratulate the Beatles, B.B. King, for everything you're doing. And I just saw that you are going to be starting your good spirits club in the first establishment. The inaugural is going to be taking place in my district, the mighty seventh at the Pure Trenches on tour 22nd from 630 to 830. I hope to see people there and thank you for all you do. And congratulations on being a new dad.
Speaker 2: Councilman Richardson.
Speaker 10: Thanks. So, Councilmember Austin, Councilmember Arango, how jealous. How jealous we are. This is just fantastic. We're so excited about I mean, the whole city is excited about what's going on in Bixby Knolls. I think it's fantastic. I'm honored to cast a vote tonight and I'm going to do what Councilmember Dawson requests and cast an enthusiastic vote in support of this. I want to learn about what Bixby spirit is as well. So count, count on me. I'll be there to to help kick off the Bixby spirit. So thanks a lot.
Speaker 2: Councilwoman Price, thank you.
Speaker 6: I want to congratulate you on all the excellent work that you've been doing and on the baby, of course, just a minor thing. We've brought the baby to its first council meeting. You. You do excellent work and your council representatives are major champions of the efforts that you guys do in your bid. Unfortunately, you're not my favorite bid, but you're a pretty close, close second. You guys do really amazing work and there's some amazing businesses coming there. So thanks for all you do for the city and for all you do for your bid. Thank you.
Speaker 2: Thank you. And is there any other public comment on this item? CNN members cast your vote.
Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 2: Thank you. And if we can go back to Mr. Million's item. 25. | Resolution | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the hearing, and adopt resolution confirming the Bixby Knolls Parking and Business Improvement Area Annual Report, continuing the levy of assessment for the period of October 1, 2015 through September 30, 2016; and authorize City Manager to extend the agreement with the Bixby Knolls Business Improvement Association for one year. (Districts 7,8) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_10202015_15-1089 | Speaker 2: Thank you. And if we can go back to Mr. Million's item. 25.
Speaker 12: Okay. We're on page three. Third slide. Today's presentation is based on the memorandum to you on October 2nd, which provided an update to the progress to the many improvements. This memorandum followed a request on August 18 by the City Council to return to October with an update. This presentation follows the first presentation on August 18th. One of the first most urgent steps we took was to assess the security situation and take action. Since August 18, we have increased the security at City Place structures. These structures include Lot A, which is located between fifth and sixth streets by Madina offices, Lot B, which is located between fourth and fifth streets and Lot C located between third and fourth streets, and will be the parking structure for Studio 111. Security now in place is 24 seven, which includes weekends and nights. Previously, security made rounds only during business hours on Monday through Friday. These patrols will also follow the instituted procedures in March, requiring the security guard to use their mobile devices to check into designated areas and provide a report. Additionally, employees of nearby businesses can request a security escort in the late evenings to get to their vehicle. Standard Parking. Plus, the city's contractor, who manages the city place garages, have also hired a customer ambassador. This ambassador adds another set of eyes and ears on the garage and attends to customers throughout the day. The ambassador assists customers with any problems they might encounter with the garage, earning frequent contact with Klotz Security, which patrols the garages . Additionally, the ambassador strategically returns to lot A during key times, including in the middle of the day as American career college students transition from day to evening classes. And at the end of the day. When Molina employees depart from their offices. Standard parking has been fully cooperative in their partnership with the city to address these issues. In addition to increasing security at the garages, standard parking has also increased the cleaning of the garage. Garages will undergo a high pressure power wash treatment on a monthly basis and twice weekly street bangs compared to the previous quarterly washings and once weekly sweeping. This increased cleaning schedule is in line with cleaning practices at the aquarium parking structure also managed by standard parking. Additional maintenance staff have been added in the evening shift to address any issues of maintenance, including graffiti abatement and emptying overfilled trash bins. This is in addition to the morning shift that also empties trash. In addition to the security and maintenance improvements, we have centralized parking information on the city's website. Visitors can go to w w w thought Long Beach dot gov slash parking and find direct links to purchase a monthly parking permit for parking structures and lots managed by standard parking on behalf of the city. Annual beach lock permits and other parking related requests. Easy to locate numbers have been added for convenience. Previously, only the citation office number was included. Here is the front page of the parking services web page. You'll note in the red circle are links related to downtown parking and monthly parking permits, which were added after the August 18 meeting. The critical phone numbers can be found in the blue bar on the right hand side. This is in addition to other parking related items. If you click the monthly parking permit site, you will be directed to an easy to complete enrollment form. Standard parking reports that we receive about 2 to 3 inquiries per week. In addition to streamlining the website, we continue to make progress on the parking mobile application, which will display live data on mobile applications. The parking app will draw on live occupancy data collected by the new sensors. The is in the first to deploy this cutting edge technology of non street embedded sensors. This slide here summarizes the general improvements to the parking structures. We're well on our way to completing this list and taking additional projects. It has been updated since the October 2nd to reflect completions and progress made in addition to security, maintenance and marketing. Standard parking has worked with nearby stores to reconfigure, reconfigure cart corrals, removed damaged cart corrals, and implemented a system that remove carts from nearby stores. The removal of the cards have been completed and the removal of the cart crews have been completed and the cuts will be and removal of the costs will be an ongoing progress. Standard parking monitors, the garage for stray carts. We have received a quote on the fencing off of a certain area in the structure, and we're in the process of moving that forward. Likewise, the elevator window washing has been initiated. Finally, the city added lights to the walkway in Lot A in May of this year. Recently the wall was repainted and the walkways cleaned up to remove stains. We're also adding even more lighting to the walkway. These additional projects are included in this list, which shows the work that public works and standard parking has done and will continue to do so. As mentioned, city staff is adding more lights to the walkway and lot A after adding lights in May to further improve the customer service experience. Standard Parking is looking to relocate to a storefront so that customers can easily meet with standard parking representatives and an easy to find location. The city will remain diligent in evaluating current security operations and maintenance. At this time, I would like to share with you some before and after photos. Standard Parking Plus has undertaken these improvements on city's behalf. Here you can see the old signs are replaced with bright new signs. The new updated ticket dispenser has indications about video recording and is covered with information about where to ask for help. The parking islands have been repainted. Here's another view of the parking islands with the refreshed ticket dispensers. Extended parking also added new landscaping to the front with drought tolerant shrubs. The walkway and Lot A has been considerable attention. Standard parking has painted the wall one solid color as a blank canvas for future mural opportunities. The walkway also have been refreshed and you can see the stairs have been eliminated in the after photo. As I mentioned, corrals have been removed or replaced with new smaller corrals, and standard parking has identified daily collections. If the nearby stores do not take the responsibility to remove carts in a timely manner. Finally, the firehose box mission on August 18 has been repainted and plexiglass replaced. While we made major improvements, Public Works has identified additional opportunities to further enhance the parking experience. These enhancements include interior repair of the structures, which include repairing surface cracks. Additional computer service to support the added security cameras and painting. The estimated cost of these improvements are approximately $430,000 per garage in labor and material costs based on quotes we received. The structures have undergone an energy audit, which the city will have results on this audit at the end of this year. This audit will provide a more firm cost estimate of energy savings, potential rebates and incentives and other financing options for LED conversions. This future improvements also align with the renaissance that City Place will undergo with the addition of Studio 111 as an anchor tenant. I had the pleasure of meeting with Studio 111 recently to discuss their fantastic creative vision for Los C, which is located between third and fourth streets. This speaks to the department's continued belief that community partnership are key to the thriving and successful parking experience. And we invite our partners to work with us to ensure the safety and success of parking in downtown and citywide. The funding for these improvements have and will come from three important sources. Parking garage revenues from city plates will offset the maintenance and security enhancements previously discussed. This $125,000 costs will not have structural budget impacts to the general fund. Downtown parking meters will also support parking improvements in this area, including Cityplace in working with financial management. We estimate approximately $70,000 every two months in net meter access revenue. Finally, any additional funding identified by City Council could also fund these improvements. We've also focused these presentations on the city place garages thus far. I do want to briefly cover the following as these issues were raised at the previous council meeting. Specifically, we have a new city traffic engineer and we will begin the review of parking surrounding the courthouse, focusing on alleviating the parking impacts in the adjacent residential areas. Secondly, staff will reach out to private vendors to encourage them to adopt new technology. While the city has made significant upgrades on city owned parking structures and city lots. Not all of the individual private non city owned structures have taken those steps. Thank you for your time, and I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mr. Malloy and Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 5: Yes. Thank you, Ira. Thank you, Ciaran, for the wonderful presentation. I know it has been some time for us to get to this point, but I really do want to give you a lot of gratitude for this presentation and the way it looks and it's organization. I know it's been a lot of us working collaboratively to be able to to bring us to where we're at now. And as everyone knows, downtown parking is a big topic, especially in the first district, just in in the city in general. So I have a few questions, but I again want to just thank you for pointing out all of these important topics for us, because I think it makes. It a lot easier for us as a council office, but also just as a city to be able to point to where our parking is in the downtown. And then also some of our core areas like city place that has often not looked so good. Now it's looking a lot better and we can really point to it and say this is something that is evolving every single day. But it's it's it's getting there and it's looking a lot better. So a few questions I know you had in the report. It mentioned a customer ambassador. And this is this is someone employed with our contractor. Correct. And this is how many hours with this person work? Is it a normal 40 hour workweek or what does that look like?
Speaker 12: Honorable Gonzales. Yes, this is the ambassador is an employee of essential parking, and they're employed, I think, 9 to 6 Monday through Friday.
Speaker 5: Perfect. And as far as security practices, I'm glad to see that that was a emphasized. I know we've also talked and I'll just reiterate this as well as reiterate this again, as far as security is to make sure that there's more efficient security practices. And I know you've had discussions with our contractor in terms of, yes, it's great to have security there, but to ensure that they're actually doing their job when they're there, which I know we you know, we've we've addressed. So I just wanted to point that out. Also, with power washing, we've talked in the past about better notification. So how will tenants be notified? I know Molina health care has quite a few employees there. I know there's been issues with notification and power washing. So how will employees how will residents be notified?
Speaker 12: Great question. I know that we had one instance that there was some confusion with some of the employees coming from one entrance versus the other entrance. That situation has been rectified. Central parking does the notifications. They provide notifications 48 hours before the power washing. It's scheduled already, so all the tenants know which days the power washing is going to occur. And we will also use Twitter and Facebook to inform any constituent that this this is occurring.
Speaker 5: Okay. Thank you. So there will be a notification there. And then ice. I know we talked about a better parking office situation where it currently stands now. It's it's not very customer friendly. You have to kind of find your way to be able to even pay for monthly parking, which could be a hindrance for a lot of people. So what is the timeline on Central Parking's reorganization of of a better parking?
Speaker 12: We're working with the with with the property owner. Unfortunately, central parking doesn't have any control where they can go. So it's we're working with the property owner to make sure they can provide a space for central parking to relocate. So that's in progress. And we'll get back to you when that occurs. But it's an effort that we started. We recognized as the location that central parking was given. It's not too obvious. So we want to as as in the report indicates we want to find a storefront that they can relocate to and they'll have direct access to the street.
Speaker 5: Okay. Great. Um, and one sort of last question is how are we working with our businesses? So I know we have been in contact with Walmart who had in previous days had know sometimes left shopping carts. There's been trash, I mean, around the property. So how are you working with the city place property owners specifically about city place and some of the local areas I'm sorry, the local businesses about the maintenance.
Speaker 12: We we're having at least that I know of monthly meetings with our business ambassadors I would called central parking's involved my staff is involved we've had a lot of good luck with Walmart. They've been really stepping up to the removal of the carts. They are the ones that removed the broken carts and the corrals. So we basically we're going to enforce what we said we're going to do if if we have a cart that it's not removed within a certain time period, we're going to remove it for them. So that's that's our approach. And fortunately, they're doing a great job at this point. They're at the table discussing with us and we're in continuous communication with them. We have a lot of email discussions with them also, so that's moving forward with the local businesses that are around there. We also have to partner with with Mr. Shoshone to make sure that his clients are also being responsible for some of the stuff that goes on around there. So I have a meeting with Mr. Shoshone to discuss that issues also.
Speaker 5: Great. Thank you. And and then I will say that our website looks great. I think it's a it's a wonderful evolution from where it was before. It is one stop shop you are able to find. I mean, right there, it quantifies the amount of parking spaces we have, which is 9000. It also states that the lowest monthly rate is $35, which I think is very enticing for some people because I mean, as a council member of the first and just working in the district for six years, people will say there is no parking in downtown. And I keep telling people there is parking in downtown, you just have to pay for it in some cases. And then in other cases it's 2 hours for free. But we didn't in the past have that all in one place for us. For me as a representative to go to a website to pointed out to our residents and our business owners, and now we do. And thankfully and I know it will continue to evolve as we bring more property owners if they are interested, but it will continue to evolve. So I want to thank you for that. Um, I'll, I'll, I'll just ask that we continue looking at different marketing approaches as well. One last thing that I don't think I mentioned before, but um, maybe I mentioned it to Tom is electric car parking. And I believe we have Zipcar locations as well in downtown. I'm not sure if that's the case. Maybe not. Okay. Our saying no, but I know we do have electric plug in locations and so that would be great to advertise some way somehow through signage in the downtown. So what are we doing about that?
Speaker 12: Um, that's an excellent question. Part of our mobile app, it will have a function in it that shows recharging stations. So we have some, for example, on Broadway parking structure, we have electric, electric charging stations for the public that will show on the on the app. So if you go to I mean, we if Park MI finishes their their app, you will find that information. So it's it's part of that application. And also we can show it on our website if that needed to be. And it's currently available on their website. I also forgot to mention that our biggest partner is the LBA and we're working with them. We have we will have biweekly bi monthly meetings with them to discuss all the issues in downtown. But specifically parking is as part of one of our first initiatives. So I neglected to mention that this is going to occur and we're going to participate with the LBA in future marketing and partner with them in any way possible to enhance the parking experience in downtown.
Speaker 5: Well, great. Well, thank you. I was actually going to close with that saying that we should make sure that we're meeting more often, my office included. I know I just spoke with Craig not too long ago and Sean and I really want to thank them as well for their efforts in overall in the downtown parking, especially because they've been a large part of this as well. And it just really adds to the vitality of our economic development. We're changing a lot in downtown, I mean, from where it was before to where we are now in downtown, it's it's really it's a it's a big deal. So I just want to close and say thank you again for this. I look forward to the changes and look forward to. Meeting with you on this. So congratulations.
Speaker 12: Thank you. Thank you very much.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Councilwoman Gonzalez. Councilmember Richardson.
Speaker 10: Just want to chime in and just say congratulations to both the downtown council members. This is a big win. And when you work so hard and have a moment to be able to celebrate all the work that's been done and come to this point, I think it is important to take this time out. City Council. So again, congratulations. When I visit a different city, I always check to see what apps the city has. I was in Washington, D.C., and I checked out the bike share app and it got navigated me to the right place to check out a bike. And I did my whole tour there. So, I mean, the more we can think about getting online, having an app, figuring out how to tie it into the our bike stations or whatever, I don't remember what our bike infrastructure thing is going to be called. Bike share. That would be cool too. So thanks and congratulations.
Speaker 2: Thank you. And I wanted to thank Mr. Malloy and as well for your hard work and the staff in putting the presentation together, but really also improving the infrastructure that we have to make parking as not so much as easy as possible, definitely make it as easy as possible, but also the availability as easily known as possible . And I think that when people come into our downtown, if they can just know. With methods outside of just wayfinding signs. It really does liberate folks. And it makes the point clear that there is plenty of parking, as Councilwoman Gonzalez said. But it's just not knowing perhaps where it is or having the clarity as to which are the ones that you pay for and which of the ones you don't. And it's part of a strategy. And the overall strategy is demand management through pricing. And we want to be sure that we strike a balance between what's charged, what's available and where where the parking assets are and where the other businesses are and where people want to go. So thank you. Is there any member of the public that wish to address Council on item 25? Mr. Cogen.
Speaker 3: Good to see you. You got it.
Speaker 0: Good evening. I am Francis. Emily Dawson. Harrison and I reside in District one, and I think this is just absolutely awesome, the progress that you've made on this matter regarding the parking and I'm out and about quite a bit and my concern is because I didn't hear anything mentioned, although you may already have covered as there's quite a number of people that are out and about that are disabled. And I want to find out what the availability of the parking is for persons that are disabled. And the other thing, too, of concern is Walmart is going to be adding well, they're in the process of bringing in the grocery store. And I'm told in here we're talking about a city place. And I'm hearing more and more people are all excited about coming down to Walmart. And I don't know if you have the capacity of looking at the potential impact that that may have on the parking in that area, because it might be kind of a little less parking. So I just thought I would come forward on this matter. And also the concern to us when they're the parking some is occupied and the lots are you finding that there's problems where people are parking into areas where people reside because there's such a thing as having preferred parking, you know, in some more suburban type of areas where I students were going and parking in front of houses and the house owners didn't have enough parking for their family and their guests. So and I just to add a whole lot to you, but I just thought I'd share that with you. Thank you, Max.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Francis. Next speaker.
Speaker 10: Good evening, Madam Vice Mayor. Members of the City Council. My name is Craig Cogen with the downtown Long Beach Associates. I want to thank counsel more Gonzales for bringing this up almost a year ago. It was November that you brought this up. And certainly there's been May there's been a lot of progress made on this. And certainly there's a lot more work to do. But I'm pleased to hear the progress that has been made to date. And Vice Mayor, you would remember that we've kind of moved this conversation of downtown parking from a lack of inventory ten years ago to now. It's more about the customer experience and it's about marketing the asset that we have. And it's part of the first and last experience that customer may have coming in to our downtown center. And that is to us, it's very, very important. We can't lose sight of really what is attracting these customers, these visitors, what asset we provide them and what experience we give them when they first arrive and when they last leave. And that's really what this is all about. It's no longer inventory. It is about what is experienced on a regular and daily basis. So I'm pleased to hear that the maintenance and security has improved. But those are perceptions. And I think we have to change perception into reality. And I think there is economies of scale of what we could do based on the types of services that are provided on the public realm within the downtown, as well as the private spaces that the city owns relative to parking lots and parking garages and the assets that we're talking about as far as City Place is concerned . And we're very excited about what Mr. Shushan is doing with city plates and what the vendors and the tenants are doing with City of Place. 2 hours free parking in the center of our downtown that at that we have approximately 2500 spaces is an it is an extraordinary asset to our downtown. Not many downtowns will be able to offer to our free parking without validation in the center of our downtown. That one could walk 2 to 3 blocks to get to their destination. And I'd like to elevate the conversation. In a more strategic fashion. If I could recommend to city staff that we look at not only the structures, the maintenance, the security and the marketing of these structures, but also the on on street parking experience. City and DARPA invested almost $2 million this past year for smart meter parking in our downtown. And I think we now need to consolidate this conversation into one strategic plan, one definite idea of how we want to create this experience. So I applaud Councilmember Gonzalez's initiative to bring this to staff's attention. I commend staff for presenting some very positive results. We look forward to working together in the future and creating more positive results. Thank you.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Councilwoman Gonzales.
Speaker 5: Yes. Thank you both for the comments. Thank you, Francis. And I will ask because I know it has been brought up before and I failed to mention the disabled parking. I know the opportunities for that. I don't I don't know if we've reviewed that a little bit in length, but to see what the you know, if we're on track with the amount of disabled parking spots we have. But I do know that the access in to City Place is also a little bit difficult, even for someone who does not use a wheelchair. So I would think someone who does use a wheelchair would be even even worse. So if we can look into that as well. But thank you both for your comments.
Speaker 2: Thank you. And there is no further request to speak. Members, cast your vote.
Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 2: And we have one last hearing before we get to public comment. Hearing item two. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to receive and file the report, “Downtown Long Beach Parking Improvement Update.” (Districts 1,2) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_10202015_15-1067 | Speaker 2: And we have one last hearing before we get to public comment. Hearing item two.
Speaker 0: This hearing requires an oath. Thank 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: Thank you. Assistant City Manager Modica.
Speaker 8: Vice Mayor Lowenthal and members of the City Council. The staff report today will be given by Lia Eriksen, deputy director of the Financial Management.
Speaker 0: Good evening, Vice Mayor and members of City Council. We are requesting City Council approval of a 30 year location agreement with CRC Services LLC. CRC Services is a material and supply purchasing company which will purchase materials and supplies for resale to affiliates of California Resources Corporation. CRC CRC spun off from Occidental Petroleum Corp. on December 1st, 2014. CRC is the parent company of a consolidated group of corporations that primarily explore, develop and produce crude oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids in the State of California. CRC has a significant presence in Long Beach, with approximately 475 employees and 175 contractors. CRC is an economic engine for California. In order to achieve administrative and cost efficiencies, CRC services will centralize the procurement function for its larger material vendors in Long Beach. The centralization of procurement is expected to result in significant new sales tax revenue to the city. Under the proposed agreement, CRC services would receive 80% of the sales tax received by the city, and the city would retain 20% for the 30 year term. However, the split of sales tax would not occur in any year until the city receives a minimum base of sales tax revenue equivalent to 425,000. If an end of year CRC services receives less than 80% of the total sales tax revenue received by the city, that shortfall would be rebated in the next year in which enough revenue is generated to both meet the base and the shortfall. This is within a two year catch up period. The city currently receives minimal sales tax revenue from CRC services or its affiliated companies, since it is not currently located in Long Beach. While the volatile nature of the oil production industry makes it difficult to predict the exact amount of sales and use tax revenue that will be generated as a result of this agreement. Based on recent expenditures and the size and stature of the organization, the city anticipates receiving sales tax of at least 1.5 million and a low year , of which 425,000 would be retained by the city. As market conditions improve, estimated sales tax received by city may grow to 4 million or higher in a good year, of which of which at least 800,000 would be retained by the city in order to stimulate growth in this key industry in the city, enhance additional business to business sales tax revenue, retain and grow jobs, and support the city's efforts to fund critical services to our residents. City staff is pleased to recommend that Council conclude a public hearing, authorize the city manager to enter into a 30 year location agreement with CRC Services LLC.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Councilmember Richardson. Okay. And Councilwoman Price, did you have any comments on this matter? Thank you. Is there any member of the public that wishes to address the council on here? Am I hearing item two? Seeing none. Members Cast your.
Speaker 0: Vote. Motion carries.
Speaker 2: Thank you. And I want to thank our speakers for their patience. I'd like to call up. A few folks from who team speaker cards. We have Evan Prouty from the Historical Society. Subject Matter Historical Society Cemetery. Cemetery Tour. | Contract | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing regarding an economic subsidy in connection with a Location Agreement with CRC Services, LLC, pursuant to California Government Code Section 53083; and
Authorize City Manager to execute all documents necessary to enter into a 30-year Location Agreement with CRC Services, LLC, located at 111 West Ocean Boulevard, for the establishment of a material and supply procurement company for California Resources Corporation (CRC). (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_10202015_15-1081 | Speaker 2: Thank you. Let me go back to item 18 and 19, which I had meant to pair up with item 25.
Speaker 0: A report from Economic and Property Development. Recommendation to approve the proposed budget for fiscal year 2016 for the downtown Long Beach Parking and Business Improvement Area and extend the agreement with developer districts one and two. Item 19 Report from Economic and Property Development Recommendation to approve the downtown Long Beach Property and Business Improvement District Annual Report and authorize the payment of $530,000 in city property assets assessments from the Civic Center Fund Districts one and two.
Speaker 2: Okay. Thank you, Madam Clerk, for reading both items. I know that Councilmember Gonzalez. We'll have to recuse herself.
Speaker 5: Yes, I since my partner is employed with Dolby, I just will excuse myself at this time.
Speaker 2: So thank you. Thank you.
Speaker 8: Vice mayor that the two items can be considered together but will need separate motions and votes. But public comment can be on both items. Sure. Thank you.
Speaker 2: So there's been a motion and a second on item on item 18. And if there's a public comment on either item or both items, you can take that now.
Speaker 10: Good evening, Madam Vice Mayor. Craig Cogen with the downtown Long Beach Associates. I'm going to keep the accolades to a very minimum, but I really want to take the time to thank the council and city staff for serving as a strong partner with the Dolby and many of the accomplishments that we've been able to achieve in our downtown, downtown as everyone's neighborhood. And I think we've we feel that strongly throughout the throughout the entire city. And I thought about this today when I when I considered my comments that Vice Mayor, we have had a great relationship over the last ten years. And I realize that tonight might be the last time you vote on this contract. And I'm hopeful that anyone who does serve in that same seat that you do that we have half as much success as we've had over the last ten years. So I appreciate your support. I appreciate the dedication that you have provided us throughout the years of living in the downtown, serving the downtown, and certainly being a strong partner and understanding the importance of bids, especially for our downtown. So thank you very much for that and we look forward to your support. Thank you.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Craig. And I want to thank you for your leadership. From the downtown bid, I. I have said this many times before, but during our worst times in the city, our worst recession. Somehow the downtown managed to not limp along, but really thrive in so many ways. And and I know that the prosperity wasn't necessarily shared by all. The recession was indiscriminate in that regard. But it certainly was wonderful to be able to see progress in in such a vital part of our city. And I thank you for that. I think the many board members that have served on the bay and the many residents and small business owners and other business owners that have come together to really reintroduce the downtown. When you see the downtown today, it is not the place that I certainly moved into in 1997. So it's been a personal joy for me to see that growth. Thank you for that.
Speaker 3: Thank you.
Speaker 2: Members. There's been a motion in a second for item 18. Please cast your vote.
Speaker 0: Are you a yes, Councilman Ranga? Verbal vote.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's there. Thank you. Motion carries. Thank you. And if we can show item 19 or make the motion. Oops. And if there's a second. Thank you. And we've already had public comments. So members, cast your vote. | Contract | Recommendation to approve the proposed budget for Fiscal Year 2016 for the Downtown Long Beach Parking and Business Improvement Area; and authorize City Manager to extend the agreement with the Downtown Long Beach Associates for the period of October 1, 2015 through September 30, 2016.
(Districts 1,2) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_10202015_15-0978 | Speaker 2: Okay. Thank you. I'm sorry. Council Member. Your Honor, I could see that you've activated your votes, but I don't know that it's registering, so. Thank you. Okay. And next we have item 13. Is that correct? Yes.
Speaker 0: Communication from Councilman Andrew's chair, Housing and Neighborhoods Committee recommendation to consider renaming the Center Theater to the Beverly O'Neill Theater in honor of her contributions to the city of Long Beach.
Speaker 2: Councilmember Andrews.
Speaker 4: Yes. Thank you, Mayor. I think this is a wonderful, wonderful honor for this young lady here. And I feel like would be a great honor to rename that the Senate theater after Mayor Beverly O'Neil. She's got our city through one of the most hardest times after the Navy left and turned it into a thriving tourist destination and a hub for international trade. She's helped develop the Long Beach Town Center and part of the 605 Freeway. Has the reputation of being a supreme leader. She was an educated Long Beach City College for 31 years. She started as a music professor but retired as a superintendent president. Mayor Beverly O'Neal has received numerous award for outstanding governing ability as the mayor and her devotion to education to our youth as one of the wards I proudly bestow upon her. I probably high school was probably a walk of fame ceremony with the stars is mounted on Poly's back fence. Also, she is no longer holding a public office. She is still very active throughout the city and she is so dearly loved. And we truly love ourselves. Right to move.
Speaker 8: To.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Councilmember and Councilmember Austin, would you like to comment on the.
Speaker 7: Yes. Yes. Beverly O'Neal has made some great contributions to our city, as I mentioned before. And when this item first came before us, as well as in the Housing and Neighborhoods Committee, she is arguably the most respected public official that Long Beach has had, at least in my time. And it is a real honor for me to to vote on this item and can't wait to see her name in lights on the the theater. It's going to be awesome.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Councilmember. And I think the honors well deserved. I'm thankful for the support of the entire council when this item when the recommendation was made before this body. And as you know, I was here earlier and the board members were here and and I'm sure they are delighted that this item has come through as well. Is there any member of the public that wishes to address Council on Item 13? Seeing None members cast your vote. Most eateries. I think it has a delay. Affected works eventually. Thank you. Thank you. All right. That was item 13 and. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to consider naming the Center Theatre to be renamed the "Beverly O'Neill Theatre" in honor of her contributions to the City of Long Beach. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_10202015_15-1070 | Speaker 2: Item 14.
Speaker 0: Report from City Clerk Recommendation to execute a contract with run back election services for mailing and printing of official ballots, sample ballots and vote by mail materials in an amount not to exceed $620,000 in the administration of the 2016 primary nominating and general elections citywide.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Councilmember Richardson. Would you like to address the item? Thank you. And Councilman Andrews. Thank you for the motion. And second, is there any public comment on item 14? Seeing none. Members Cast your vote.
Speaker 0: Councilmember Richardson. Councilman Langa. Motion carries.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Item 15. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager to execute a contract with RUNBECK Election Services Inc., for mailing services and printing of official ballots, sample ballots, and vote-by-mail materials in an amount not to exceed $620,423, plus a seven percent contingency, in administration of the April 12, 2016 Primary Nominating Election, and the June 7, 2016 General Municipal Election. (Citywide) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_10202015_15-1080 | Speaker 0: Motion carries. Item 17 Report from Economic and Property Development Recommendation to Award a contract for conducting a parking study in Belmont. Shaw to Nelson.
Speaker 2: Nygaard.
Speaker 0: Consulting Associates at a cost of $170,000, or the Walker parking consultants in an amount not to exceed $100,000. District three.
Speaker 2: Thank you. There's been a motion and a second. Councilwoman Pryce, would you like to address the item?
Speaker 5: This item?
Speaker 9: Yes. Vice Mayor, members of the Council on Mike Conway can present a brief staff report.
Speaker 8: Excuse me, Vice Mayor, members of the council. Prior to the staff report, could we make a clarification on which item the motion is? So a or I'm saying two separate motions. Well, no, there's it's a decision, I think, for the council to make either the 170 or the 100,000. And we just have a motion of I'm not sure.
Speaker 2: Right. So Councilwoman Price is your motion for one or the other.
Speaker 6: Emotion is going to be to approve a contract, not to exceed $100,000.
Speaker 8: Thank you. Vice Mayor Lohan told members of the City Council in 2014, City Council directed staff to issue a request for proposals to conduct a parking study in Belmont Shore for the purpose of identifying solutions for mitigating the parking challenges in both the business and residential districts. Staff spent some time reaching out to various stakeholders in Belmont Shore to ensure that the scope of the study would reflect the issues and concerns of the residents, business owners and tenants. On March 27, 2015, a request for proposals was released for a comprehensive parking study. And on April 23rd, 2015, four responses were received. A staff panel reviewed the submittals and based on five criteria selected Nelson Nygaard Consulting Associates at a cost of $170,000. As the most qualified respondent, the panel also determined that Walker parking consultants at a cost of 98,000 met. The requirements of the RFP, though, were scored lower than Nelson Nygaard in August 2015. The Belmont Shore Parking and Business Improvement Area Advisory Commission acknowledged that Nelson Nygaard was the most qualified but voted to limit the budget to $100,000 and eliminate any overlapping scope related to public improvements that may occur along Ocean Boulevard. And as such, City Council may choose to accept staff's recommendation and select may Nelson Nygaard at a cost $170,000. Or to accept the Parking Commission's recommendation to limit the budget to $100,000 and select Walker parking consultants. And with that, I am available to answer questions.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Councilwoman.
Speaker 6: Thank you. Just a couple of questions here. Just by way of background to my colleagues, the Belmont Shore Parking Commission reviews.
Speaker 0: Issues.
Speaker 6: Related to parking in the shore and makes recommendations as this body we can choose to adopt their recommendations, modify them, or completely disregard them if we feel there's a better route in this particular case. I have reviewed the recommendations made by the Parking Commission and I agree with them that picking a project and scope that is the fiscally prudent one and still achieves the overall result of the overall intended result of the study, which is to find out what parking options are available to us in an area that is parking impacted and has increased in terms of business and residential occupancy since the last time a study was done in the nineties. So I think the study is definitely necessary and I agree with the Parking Commission's recommendation to cap the study to $100,000. The one question that I do have, however, is that this study is projected to take two years. Is there any way that that timeline could be enhanced a bit or sped up so that we can have the opportunity to act? Because I have made a personal commitment to this community that I will attempt to implement some of the recommendations of this parking study, and I want to make sure that I fulfill that commitment to them. So does it really have to be a two year parking study and can we accelerate the study at all?
Speaker 8: I don't believe the parking study needs to be two years. I think the limiting factors are whether or not you want to include the Christmas parade and the closure of Bayshore within the same study period, in which case it could extend beyond a year. If we went under contract very quickly, we could possibly get this year's Christmas parade, but we might miss that. But if we eliminated the Christmas parade and just dealt with the closures during the summer, we should certainly be able to conclude this in a year.
Speaker 6: So really, the only limiting factor for us, if we were to not include the Christmas parade, is that we would have all parking data that we need absent what happens that one night a year. That's correct. I think that would be reasonable. And I'd like to see some recommendations from the parking from the parking study be made as quickly as possible. Of course, we want a thorough study, especially at the $100,000 price point, but we want to make sure that we also provide some recommendations in the near future. The other thing that I want to make sure that I clarify through this item is it is very, very important. I would like to be involved with the study in terms of receiving updates, being able to communicate with the constituents about where we are on the study. And I know that we have at least one meeting initially, but I just want to make sure that the legislative intent of this motion is there, that this is one of those projects in my district that I want to be involved in, and I want to be able to communicate to the residents what's happening so that we're all kind of moving forward together as the study gets underway and those recommendations are made. And that would just be a request that I would make because I've never been through a study like this before. So I don't want something to happen and someone to say, Oh, sorry we didn't tell you, but that's how we always do it. So if there is a situation. You don't involve the counsel office. At least let me know. Or please allow me to be involved, because this is a commitment that I've made to my constituents that I'll be involved in.
Speaker 8: There will be two meetings prior to the start of the study and there are tended to be two meetings after the draft study is produced. But I'd be happy to keep the council office up to date as well.
Speaker 6: Thank you. I appreciate that. Only because I've never been through a process like this, and I know that a lot of my constituents haven't either. And I just want to make sure we're all collaborating. And I know you do that very well. So I don't have I just wanted to express it so that there's no ambiguity as we go forward. So thank you very much.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Council member. Is there any public comment on this item? There's been a motion and a second. Members, please cast your vote.
Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 2: Thank you. And thank you, Mr. Parkin. We've done 18 and 19. | Contract | Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFP CM15-083 and award a contract to Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc., of San Francisco, CA, at a cost of $170,000 to conduct a parking study in Belmont Shore for a period of two years; or
Adopt Specifications No. RFP CM15-083 and award a contract to Walker Parking Consultants, of Los Angeles, CA, in an amount not to exceed $100,000 to conduct a parking study in Belmont Shore for a period of two years. (District 3) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_10202015_15-1083 | Speaker 0: Item 20 Report from Health and Human Services, Economic and Property Development Recommendation to adopt resolution declaring a shelter crisis for the operation of a Winter Shelter from November 2nd, 2015 and March 15, 2016. Inclusive and authorize the city manager to execute a lease and subleases for 12,000 rentable square feet of industrial space at 6845 Atlantic Avenue District nine Staff Report.
Speaker 9: This is the annual contract for a winter shelter. This is actually great news that it's going to be actually opening a month earlier. And if there's additional detail required, Kelly Collopy is is here to give a staff report if needed.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Councilmember Richardson, would you like to address the motion?
Speaker 10: Thank you. Vice Mayor I'm glad to make this I'm glad to make this motion. Our health department and our Long Beach Rescue mission attended our neighborhood association meeting, took questions from residents. I think they might do one follow up meeting with a different neighborhood. But this is, I believe is this the third or fourth year that this has been in this location?
Speaker 3: It was. It's been in there longer. One year was in a different location, but it's been there, I think five, five years.
Speaker 10: I think it's I think it was for yeah.
Speaker 3: It was for five years. Okay.
Speaker 10: This location now is four years in this location because it moved one year to over in the first district. And then it came back. It was four years. Well, look, I know these things are controversial a lot of times, but we've had a great experience with these guys. They've been responsive to every question that we have. And I just look forward to just having a long, larger conversation about where the permanent location will be so that we can just have some understanding every year and where we can expect our winter shelter. I'm glad to see that this isn't an emergency. I don't see the word emergency listed. The last three years we've had this listed as an emergency action, so I'm glad that we're actually doing this earlier. So congratulations to our health department on their leadership. And welcome back to our Long Beach Rescue mission.
Speaker 2: Councilman Gonzales.
Speaker 5: Yes. I just wanted to also say this is a great thing that is happening. It is great that will be pushing it up a bit. And Kelli, the health department, you all have done such a great job. I know we did have it in the first district for a moment. And at first the residents were a little apprehensive. But then after seeing how well-run it what real well-run it was and how organized it was for the community, it actually brought more safety and security in the neighborhood. So I want to thank you for your work in that.
Speaker 2: Thank you. There's been a motion and a second. Is there any public comment on the item? Please come forward. And I just want to announce that you're a commissioner. You didn't stand earlier.
Speaker 8: Downhill facilities manager.
Speaker 10: For the Long Beach Rescue Mission and co director for the Winter.
Speaker 8: Shelter. Vice Mayor Council. Thank you for your kind words. And we work every year to.
Speaker 10: Make it better and be good members.
Speaker 8: Of the community in what we do. So we just wanted to say thank you for your support.
Speaker 10: In making this happen.
Speaker 2: Thank you. There's been a motion and a second. Members cast your vote.
Speaker 0: Councilman Andrews.
Speaker 10: Yeah. Yes.
Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 2: All right. Thank you. Thank you. I am 21. | 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 November 2, 2015 and March 15, 2016, inclusive;
Authorize City Manager to execute any and all documents necessary for a Lease between Eddie N. John #1, a limited liability company (Lessor), and the City (Lessee), and a Sublease between the City (Sublessor) and the Long Beach Rescue Mission (Sublessee) and/or affiliated entities, 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 $6,500 for use as a winter shelter; and
Increase appropriations in the General Fund (GP) in the Health and Human Services Department (HE) by $29,250. (District 9) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_10202015_15-1084 | Speaker 2: All right. Thank you. Thank you. I am 21.
Speaker 0: Report from Long Beach Airport Recommendation to Award a contract to A.B. Corporation for Planning and Engineering Consulting Services for the Airfield Geometry Study Phase two at the Long Beach Airport in an amount not to exceed $873,000 District five.
Speaker 2: Through Staff Report.
Speaker 9: Yes, Mr. Brian Francis can give a staff report.
Speaker 10: Good evening, Vice Mayor Lowenthal, members of City Council. Before you this evening is the request to approve the airport to enter into a contract with H. A.B. Corporation for Planning and Engineering Consulting Services for Phase two of the Airfield Geometry Study at Long Beach Airport. In December 2014, Council authorized the city manager to apply for FAA grant funds to continue with the Airfield Geometry Study Phase two, which will develop a new airport layout plan or alpi and association associated official maps and documents required to maintain the Long Beach Airport's critical operating functions. Grant funding was awarded by the FAA at the end of fiscal year 2015. The new ALPI, which is expected to be completed within 12 months, does not involve any physical expansion of the airport. The work will result in official airport planning documents to include the recommendations provided in the preferred alternative three A of the airport geometry study , an airport strategic plan which the City Council approved on December 2nd, 2014. This includes the decommissioning of two parallel runways, the shortening of a runway in length and width, and the creation of multiple new taxiways, all in an effort to enhance the efficiency of the airfield. The primary funding source for this contract expense will utilize an FAA airport improvement program grant. The balance will be covered through airport operating funds and passenger facility charges. And that completes my report.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Councilmember Austin. Actually, I'm sorry. Let me go to the maker of the motion comes Mungo.
Speaker 0: I think that the airport director did an excellent job of communicating phase two of the plan to ensure that the airport and the restructuring of these runways provides for additional economic development opportunities on the exterior edges of the airport. Once this is completed.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Councilman Andrews. You're okay. Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 7: Yes, thank you, Mr. Francis. I just wanted some clarification on the actual runways that are going to be studied for for the benefit for those for obviously the council, but those watching at home.
Speaker 10: Yes, sir. Councilman Austin, the two runways which will be decommissioned are our north south runways, which have not been in use for several years. And the remaining runways will be our seven left to five right parallel runways, as well as the primary runway one, two, three zero.
Speaker 7: Thank you very much.
Speaker 10: You're welcome.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Is there any public comment on item 21? Seeing nonmembers cast your vote.
Speaker 0: Motion carries. Item 22 report from Long Beach Airport Recommendation to award a contract to Sully Miller Contracting Company for the perimeter security improvements at the Long Beach Airport. For a total contract amount not to exceed $7.4 million. District five. | Contract | Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFQ AP15-093 and award a contract to the HNTB Corporation, of Los Angeles, CA, for planning and engineering consulting services for the Airfield Geometry Study Phase 2 at the Long Beach Airport, in an amount not to exceed $873,497, for an initial 12-month term; authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to enter into the contract, including any amendments to extend the term for up to one additional year, authorize additional services within the provisions of the contract; and
Increase appropriations in the Airport Fund (EF 320) in the Airport Department (AP) by $834,072. (District 5) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_10202015_15-1085 | Speaker 0: Motion carries. Item 22 report from Long Beach Airport Recommendation to award a contract to Sully Miller Contracting Company for the perimeter security improvements at the Long Beach Airport. For a total contract amount not to exceed $7.4 million. District five.
Speaker 2: Councilmember Mungo.
Speaker 0: I want to thank the staff for working hard on this. The safety and security of our community and our airport is of the utmost importance. I know that some of these things are expensive, and you've gone above and beyond to find grant money and to include the aviation community in the discussions to ensure that business can continue while we ensure that the safety and security of our airport is the utmost priority. So thank you to the staff who have worked with the community and the businesses and who have met with my office several times on this matter. I'm comfortable moving forward and supportive of this action.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Councilman Andrews, did you have any comments? Thank you. Is there any public comment on item 22? CNN members cast your vote.
Speaker 0: Councilwoman Mongo motion carries. Item 23 report from Long Beach Airport Financial Management and Public Works recommendation to authorize the city manager to enter into three contracts for as needed construction management and other related services in an aggregate amount not to exceed $4 million. | Contract | Recommendation to adopt Plans and Specifications No. R-7008 for the Perimeter Security Improvements at the Long Beach Airport; award the contract to Sully-Miller Contracting Company, of Brea, CA, in the amount of $6,496,839, and authorize a 15 percent contingency in the amount of $974,526, for a total contract amount not to exceed $7,471,365; authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to enter into the contract, including any necessary amendments thereto; and
Increase appropriations in the Airport Fund (EF 320) in the Airport Department (AP) by $7,066,535. (District 5) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_10202015_15-1086 | Speaker 0: Councilwoman Mongo motion carries. Item 23 report from Long Beach Airport Financial Management and Public Works recommendation to authorize the city manager to enter into three contracts for as needed construction management and other related services in an aggregate amount not to exceed $4 million. District five.
Speaker 2: Thank you, sir. A staff report.
Speaker 9: Mr. Francis.
Speaker 10: Good evening once again, Vice Mayor Lowenthal, members of Council. We are requesting approval to enter into contracts with Arcadis U.S. Inc, Parsons Brinckerhoff Inc and AECOM USA Inc for Associated Construction Management Consulting Services. These three firms were among five firms which submitted presentations, and we selected these top three as ranked by their interview scores. They were determined by the selection committee to be the best qualified. As individual projects are identified, work orders for each project will be issued. Each work order will be funded from the source identified for each particular project, which could include federal grants, airport capital, passive facility charges, existing bonds or a combination. These projects may include various landside improvements at the airport. All of these project with further enhance the customer experience. And again, the contract expenses not to exceed $4 million for a three year term and the option to renew for two additional one year period. Second could not report.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Councilman. Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 0: I think that many have expressed the appreciation for the airport management staff for taking the leadership on these improvements at parking garage, lot A and for the phase two of the terminal improvements. I know that so many of us are proud of the work that's been done with the terminal and that moving forward to phase two is an important part of continuing that and ensuring that people who come in and out of Long Beach have a wonderful passenger experience. So thank you for your work on this and I'll be supporting the motion.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Is there any public comment on item 22? Seeing None members cast your vote.
Speaker 0: Motion carries.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Item 24 has been withdrawn and we completed 25 run ordinances now. | Contract | Recommendation to authorize City Manager to execute any and all necessary documents to enter into contracts with Arcadis U.S., Inc., of Los Angeles, CA, Parsons Brinckerhoff, Inc., of Los Angeles, CA, and AECOM USA, Inc., of Los Angeles, CA, for as-needed construction management and other related services in an aggregate amount not to exceed $4,000,000 for a period of three years, with the option to renew for two additional one-year periods, including any necessary amendments thereto, provided that the authorized aggregate total is not exceeded. (District 5) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_10132015_15-1052 | Speaker 1: Communication from Vice Mayor Lowenthal. Mayor Garcia. Recommendation to request the presentation from representatives of the Aquarium of the Pacific on recent and upcoming events. Its financial performance and future plans to conserve and build natural capital by building social capital.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I'm going to turn this over to Vice Mayor Lowenthal.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I want to thank Dr. Schaeuble for being here as well. It's always informative and inspiring.
Speaker 1: To get an.
Speaker 3: Update from you about the aquarium and its programs. And I'm always impressed by the challenging exhibits and guest speakers covering a host of subjects that are so topical. And I also want to thank your board of directors. I don't know if any of them are here, but your staff and your board as well for maintaining and expanding a world class caliber learning institution. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Speaker 0: Thank you. So with that, I'm going to welcome we have not only Dr. Schaeuble here, but a longtime chair of the board, board member, leader of the aquarium, which is also which is Mr. Molina. John Molina The whole family's been involved. So I think. John, you're going to kick it off. I'm going to kick it off.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Speaker 0: Vice Mayor Lowenthal and all the council members. I think it's fitting that we get to present on the same day that you honor Hispanic heritage. Councilmember Andrews during this month. Everybody's Latino, don't.
Speaker 2: Worry about it. Our involvement and.
Speaker 0: The Molina family involvement with the aquarium goes back. Actually, before it was built, my father used to go out and watch the construction crew as they built the aquarium and was fascinated and enthralled by it. Unfortunately, he didn't live long enough to see it opened and we became charter members and our interest and love for the aquarium continue to grow. So I want to thank you all for letting us be here tonight to give you a presentation was about a year ago that Dr. Schaeuble and I were here last to talk about the aquarium. And I know we have new council members, all of whom have visited the aquarium. But I do want to go through a few.
Speaker 2: Things because it is.
Speaker 0: Your aquarium. The board is just the caretaker. But we want you to know what we have done with the city's assets. The aquarium has 1.5 million visitors a year. That makes us the fourth most attended aquarium.
Speaker 2: In the country.
Speaker 0: That is pretty special given all the other activities that folks in Southern California can do from Disneyland to the beaches to the L.A. Zoo, they come here quite a bit. We have 113,000 members and 3 million website viewers. So. The city of Long Beach gets a lot of attention through this world class organization. 1.6 million teachers visit us online.
Speaker 2: And we're part of the Coastal American.
Speaker 0: Network of 25 Aquarium. No margin, no mission without the ability to finance ourselves with your help. We wouldn't stay in existence and we are experiencing our second best financial year ever. And that's without a special event like the 10th anniversary of the 15th anniversary. We continue to build we continue to get the reputation and the continue to be on solid footing.
Speaker 2: We were just accredited.
Speaker 0: By the Association of Zoos and Aquariums. Not every zoo or aquarium in the country is a member. But in order to be a member, you have to go through accreditation. And this happened earlier this year. And as the executive director said, the use of multimedia and telling the conservation story in the aquarium is unique to this facility . We have tried we strive to be more than just a place where people can go see fish. We tell a story. We tell a story of people and the environment and the role that the ocean plays in that. Award winning. Everybody talks about their award winning this. They're award winning that. We want you to see that we actually are award winning. And here are the awards, TripAdvisor Award, PINNACLE Award for video conferencing programs. The ESRI Award. Five International Telly Awards for films. Most people don't know this, but there is a film crew at the aquarium. They do produce their own documentaries. They entered into international competitions. Most of the time they are competing against folks who have much greater budgets and they continually win awards. And the finalists at the Blue Ocean Festival and most recently, the Cool Planet Award.
Speaker 2: Which we are nominated.
Speaker 0: For, keeping our fingers crossed. I think the award will be announced here shortly. We also recognize that we have a big impact on the community. And with that comes a special obligation, economic impact as studied by, I believe it.
Speaker 2: Was Cal State, Long Beach.
Speaker 0: External firm, $60 million economic impact to Long Beach, 150 million to the county. We have a huge volunteer staff. 1400 volunteers contribute 115000 hours. People come to the aquarium to volunteer because they love it. My daughter our daughter was a volunteer in the summer of 2014. She came back in 2015. She loved it so much and now she's going to do volunteering during the school year. We also have quite an educational program. 165,000 educational visits. Of those, about a fifth are free. So we want to make sure that we give back and we have life programs that are piped into a military children's hospital and that children love visiting the aquarium virtually. And they especially love the Molina Animal Care Center so they can see how the sick animals are taken care of and see that they're taken care of with love just the way they are at Children's Hospital. Let's back up here. And we have a special fondness for our friends here in Long Beach. So there's 50% off coupons to residents. There are you get a pass to the at the library. We have free nights hosted by all of you folks. I don't think there's a single council member here that doesn't have a free night and it's always a wonderful time. And Free Shark Lagoon nights for for residents. So again, I want to thank you all for your continued support. We continue to grow the reputation of the aquarium and by association the reputation of Long Beach or vice versa. And with that, I would like to introduce my good friend, our CEO and President, Dr. Jerry Schaeuble.
Speaker 2: We're just going to see it's done. Let's see what just happened. Oh. All right. This is in response to the mayor's mandate to make Long Beach a model of a climate resilient city. Over the last nine months, we've been engaging experts from across the country on different aspects of climate change to determine which of those events are most important to Long Beach. And the list starts with drought and then hot spells, sea level rise and coastal flooding, deteriorating air quality. And we've been looking at options to reduce the vulnerability of Long Beach and particularly of populations at risk to those different threats. We have a citywide education and outreach program that's going to be done in collaboration with Cal State, Long Beach Professors Wade and Ingrid Martin. They have about 35 MBA students, all of whom are mid-career managers in Long Beach businesses. They're going to get to the business community and then we're going to get to the not for profit community and to the general public. And we're forming a partnership with four other cities that have signed the Compact of Mayors, all of whom have aquariums that are part of the Noah Coastal Ecosystem Learning Center Network. And we're also, as you. The city is part of this NRC study. Pathways to Urban Sustainability. The NRC is the National Research Council. It's the operating arm of the National Academies of Sciences. It was established by Abraham Lincoln to shorten the time between advances in science and the benefits to society. And we will be leading a panel loaded, Ezra, on Coastal Resilience next month. Great cities have great cultural institutions. In the Aquarium of the Pacific is our city's best opportunity to have a world class cultural organization. After only 17 years, it ranks number four in attendance. It has the most diverse attendance of any aquarium in the country. That wasn't true ten years ago, but we've worked hard to make that true. And not only do we bring the diversity there, we work hard to build social capital because that's when the society benefits. It's the most distinctive aquarium in the country because of its combination of live animals and media and technology. And our goal is to have it become the most distinguished and distinctive aquarium in the world. And as soon as Pacific visions is complete, we will have achieved that goal. And we thank you for your support, because we couldn't have done it without you. Once it's expanded, the steady state attendance, we expect, will be at least 1.8 million a year. That's a 20% increase over what it is now. That will be very important to all of the stores down in the pike and it will be important to Long Beach. In the first couple of years, we expect the attendance will be 2 million. There's where we are. And since this slide was made, the gifts that have been pledged, that's increased from 29 million to 30 million. And if you look over at the far right, the 7 million in foundation grants, that's about as close to being certain as anything is in life. So we think that we're in pretty good shape and we're still we're working hard to complete this. These are a few of the things that have happened. You recognize some of the people in there. Betty White government. Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom with Mario Molina. And down in the right hand corner, Carmen Diaz. And I think if we could play a very short video now that Carmen Diaz made for us.
Speaker 1: Why should we care about the ocean? Well, because the ocean takes care of us.
Speaker 3: We are all connected at.
Speaker 1: Sea, from the tiniest plankton to the largest marine mammal. We are all part of one living earth system. Take a look at these plankton. These microscopic algae are the most abundant form of phytoplankton and make up an essential part of the food web. Even more importantly, they create most of the oxygen we breathe. And after they bloom and die, well.
Speaker 6: The plankton rain down to supply nutrients. Even the largest animal on the planet, the magnificent blue. Well, depends on plankton.
Speaker 1: The food web that connects these creatures is only one example of the many complex systems that help sustain life on Earth, even on land. What you do in your neighborhoods by recycling, avoiding harmful pesticides and not littering. Help sustain a healthy marine ecosystem because gutters.
Speaker 6: And drains make their way.
Speaker 1: To the ocean. Eventually, from a hurricane gaining.
Speaker 6: Force in the Gulf of Mexico to the mysterious.
Speaker 1: Hydrothermal vents found.
Speaker 6: At the deepest parts of the ocean. It's the conveyor belt that drives ocean circulation.
Speaker 1: Across the entire globe. The Earth's systems.
Speaker 3: Are interconnected.
Speaker 1: Complex and dynamic. We depend on these complicated systems for the oxygen we breathe, the food we eat, the water we.
Speaker 6: Drink, and the energy we use. We need to.
Speaker 1: Understand how our actions affect the planet, which is why.
Speaker 6: We need.
Speaker 1: Organizations like the Aquarium of the Pacific to educate the public and to inspire action. If you surf.
Speaker 3: Dove, snorkel.
Speaker 1: Swim, or just enjoy going to the beach like I do, you know how beautiful our oceans. But our ocean is changing. And it's up to us to create a better future for all people and the environment.
Speaker 6: That we all depend on.
Speaker 1: That's why I'm asking you to join me in supporting the aquarium's expansion. The Aquarium's Pacific Vision's expansion will engage audiences in new and creative ways. The Aquarium's Pacific Visions wing will use innovative technology, immersive theater experiences and live animals to share the most important ocean and environmental stories of our time. This project will help educate everyone about the challenges we face and the inspiring solutions that are possible. The aquarium is more than just a place to see beautiful sea creatures. It's a resource for all of us to learn about our ocean planet. The aquarium has gained distinction by bringing together stakeholders scientists, policymakers, entrepreneurs, environmentalists and artists.
Speaker 3: To explore complex.
Speaker 6: Contemporary issues.
Speaker 1: And to develop alternative pathways to the future. We've only got one planet.
Speaker 6: It's more than 70% ocean. And it belongs to all of us. I hope you'll join me by supporting.
Speaker 1: The Aquarium of the Pacific. Every gift truly has a difference.
Speaker 3: We're all connected and we're depending on you. Thank you so much.
Speaker 2: We have had a great partnership with this. We look forward to continuing that partnership to make Pacific visions come true. We will file a building plan with the city in the first quarter of next year and we expect to break ground about 12 months later. And it's an 18 month project, so we hope you'll all be there when we have the grand opening. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you, Dr. Schubert. I have a couple of folks who want to say a few words. Let me let me just also just thank Dr. Schaeuble and John and the whole aquarium team that's here. I think as the council is aware, the aquarium has embarked on a pretty ambitious climate change and climate resilience study on behalf of the city of Long Beach. And they've really gathered some of the top thinkers and scientists and minds from across the country, including from our federal government, to put together a report on ensuring that Long Beach is is a climate resilient city. And that report will come to the council, we expect could be December, could be January. But as they finish their work, we expect to have Dr. Schaeuble and his whole team before this body to present that report to this council, which I think will be very instructive, very important. And really, we are very thankful to you and to the board and the team for taking on this this challenge, by the way, on much of on their own dime. Might I also add on behalf of of the city of Long Beach. And so thank you for doing that as well, Councilwoman Mongo.
Speaker 1: Thank you. The annual visit for council officers to take people to the aquarium has been a very rewarding experience. Oftentimes, the fifth District seems so far from downtown, but this year we were proud to almost reach 900 attendees for one night, and that's record setting for the district. So thank you to what you provide. Thank you for for opening your doors to the Special Olympics. Councilwoman Gonzales and I really enjoyed an evening with our international competitors. And they're the way that you see the world through the eyes of children is just so amazing. So thank you for that opportunity and giving them that education at such a young age.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman Price.
Speaker 6: Thank you very much. I, too, want to thank you for the presentation this evening and especially want to thank you for allowing the aquarium to serve as a place where the residents of this city and outsiders can congregate. I know that the vice mayor and I hosted a community evening and you allowed us to invite residents from both of our districts as well as residents citywide. And it was a huge success. We look forward to doing that every year. So I want to thank you for that. The aquarium offers so many educational programs for people of all ages and hands on activities and lectures by leading scientists. These programs and all of the different experiences that the aquarium provides gives us opportunities to develop a deeper understanding into ocean science and learn more about our planet. I know I myself have had the opportunity actually very recently to meet with Dr. Schaeuble regarding some of the issues that are really global issues, but will have an immediate impact on on my constituents in the area that I represent. And actually, as a result of that conversation, I do need to speak with the mayor and city management about really taking a closer look about the around those issues and using the expertize that we have in-house to make sure that we're being proactive in terms of some of our more vulnerable communities on the water here in Long Beach. So I want to thank you for being here for the impressive presentation. You guys do amazing work. The most important thing that I think that you do and that you do very well is outreach and sharing your efforts with the community. I think that there are a lot of people who think of the aquarium as a place to visit for the day. But you do so much more and you do so much to educate each of us. And through that, we educate our residents about what you do. So thank you. Thanks for being here and thanks to the vice mayor and the mayor for putting this on the agenda tonight.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzales.
Speaker 6: Let's say my congratulations to all of you and the Molina family. Every time I'm listening to the radio or I'm I'm watching TV, the aquarium pops up and I become so very proud of our city to hear of the aquarium and also the Molina animal care space. And it's just a really great reminder of how amazing our city is and what great work you all are doing. So thank you so much.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Tauranga.
Speaker 2: I too, want to add my voice to in gratitude to the aquarium. You're much more than just about paying rent seals. You're about learning. You're about research. I had the opportunity to participate in one of your workshops where council member Congressman Lowenthal presented a workshop on global warming, and she was a very integral, important part of that presentation. I was here as a member of the Coastal Commission, but at the same time it's something that brings to the community and your access to the community is absolutely amazing, wonderful. And it's a footnote. I'm going to have my seventh District narrative choir tomorrow night. So looking forward to seeing you there.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Richardson.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And Dr. Schaeuble, Mr. Molina, your whole team. Thank you all for this presentation and a great presentation. It was. I believe that this this is a tremendous asset for our city. And I think it's great that you ensure that every part of town understands that this is our aquarium, from the mobile aquarium to the district nights. I got to tell you that, you know, people from all over Southern California come come out when we have our free night at the aquarium. It's not just the people in your district. It's hard to control it. People want to come out and see that aquarium. It's one of the one of my favorite things to do as a family in Long Beach is to attend the Aquarium Pacific. Then go probably eat what? I shouldn't eat bubble gums, but that's that's me. And so I wanted to just just also thank the sponsors of this vice mayor and Mayor Garcia for bringing this forward. So you do have an ally and a friend here in the ninth District. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Andrew.
Speaker 4: Yes, thank you, Vice Mayor. I also would like to thank Dr. Schaeuble and Mr. Merlino and your staff, because the fact that I just want to take the time to tell you how much we enjoy working with the Pacific because it's such a positive impact and you've made our city a landscape. Of course, my favorite event is the sixth District United Aquarium. And each year is is it's getting better and better because we had more than 900. We had 1300. So I was just counting that it happened to come up. But but the biggest part about all of that, I was the wonderful part about it was my daughter got married in Yokohama. So it's kind of happy to get rid of her. So. But thank you again.
Speaker 2: Yes.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman.
Speaker 8: Super nice. Okay. Thank you, Mayor. And thank you very much for the presentation. Really enjoyed it. And I'm looking forward to hosting my very first aquarium night. And for fourth district residents out there within the sound of. My voice. It's no. November 5th at 6:30 p.m.. So contact our office. 570444, four. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And Councilman Austin.
Speaker 7: You have to learn to queue up a little sooner because they say all that I want to say. But I did appreciate the presentation. And the aquarium is certainly certainly an icon here in the city of Long Beach has become one. It is something that many of our tourists look forward to going to many people who don't know Long Beach, they know of the Long Beach Aquarium. And as far as the district nights are concerned, I look forward to doing those every year. We we have kind of cornered the market on Halloween. And as a result, over 5000 people show up to our aquarium night each year. And we are able to to have a great opportunity for families to come together. And so thank you again for all that you do. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And thanks again for for all you do. I've always said that the aquarium is not just a tourist attraction. The aquarium is an education institution. It is a cultural institution. It's a place that does research, that leads thinking, that promotes environmental stewardship. And it's great to have one of the best scientists leading that institution as well. And Dr. Schaeuble, so think. Thank you, Dr. Schaeuble. And I see a lot of the aquarium workers and folks here, too. So thank you, guys, for for all the hard work you guys do a great job all the time. Thank you. Is there any public comment on this item? Seeing nonmembers, please cast your votes on receive and file.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you and thank you all again. It was a great presentation. Appreciate it. We're going to be moving on now to the next item we're going to do item 23. This is Madam Clerk. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request a presentation from representatives of the Aquarium of the Pacific on recent and upcoming events, its financial performance and future plans to “conserve and build Natural Capital (Nature and Nature’s services) by building Social Capital (the interactions between and among peoples)”. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_10132015_15-1051 | Speaker 0: Thank you. And just because I think there's a few folks here for this item, I want to make sure we hear the item on the oversize vehicles, the RVs, which I believe is item seven. So if I can have Madam Clerk, please read item seven.
Speaker 1: Communication from Councilman Price, Councilmember Supernormal Councilwoman Mongo recommendation to request the city manager to report on long term oversize vehicle parking and submit recommendations that would ban or limit long term oversize vehicle parking citywide.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I'm going to now turn this over to the makers of this motion. I believe Councilwoman Suzy Price would be first.
Speaker 6: Thank you very much. I want to thank my colleagues, Councilwoman Mango and Councilmember Super now for signing on to this item as well as my other colleagues for entertaining this discussion this evening. This conversation is not new, and perhaps it's long overdue. The number of oversize vehicles we have, in particular recreational vehicles on city streets is a public safety, quality of life environmental issue that has an impact citywide. City Council offices have been contacted by several community groups and citizens regarding the parking of oversize vehicles. Constituents report that vehicles are parked in front of their 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, although that is not always the case. Additionally, residents have observed several instances instances of individuals disposing waste from vehicles into stormwater drains, as well as reports of portable gas generators being used as a power source. Cities such as Lakewood, Paramount, San Diego, Bellflower and Torrance have imposed citywide bans on oversize vehicle parking. It's not just RVs that are an issue in this city. Boats, boat trailers, jet skis and motor homes advertising for various products are also an issue. I think it's very important moving forward in regards to this particular item for us to have an education on this issue as it's been presented to council before, if at all it has been presented to council before, and then some options in terms of how we could limit some of the issues that we've seen or mitigate some. So what are some of the options that would be available? Obviously, a city wide ban might be available, but are there other options that might be available that could eliminate some of the issues that we've discussed? I have a few questions for staff, and I'm not sure if staff is is prepared to answer these. And if not, maybe when the report comes back, the answers could be incorporated. Do we know how many streets in the city are currently signed for no oversize vehicle parking?
Speaker 2: I think we'd have to come back with those answers.
Speaker 6: And when you come back, is it possible to provide maps showing areas in the city where oversize vehicle parking is problematic?
Speaker 2: Yes, we certainly could.
Speaker 6: And also if there if staff could provide some recommendations on what constitutes a commercial vehicle in terms of height and length dimensions and weight, that would be helpful.
Speaker 2: We could certainly do that.
Speaker 6: Thank you. Again, this is merely asking for some information and data so that we can move forward from there and make the decisions that we think are going to address some of the issues that have caused problems for some of our residents. And, you know, a lot of people have reached out to our office in the last few days saying, you know, what about when we want to load or unload our RV? Certainly any recommendation that that comes back would hopefully include some reasonable provisions to allow people to actually use their RVs and be able to load and unload them. But we're we're really the heart of it here is long term parking over a period of time where it appears there's no other storage solution other than parking it on a residential or commercial corridor. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you so much, Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 1: Over the last 18 months because this discussion started before I was sworn in to council. We've come up with some short term solutions in terms of eliminating the oversize parking on certain streets, and a lot of neighborhoods get concerned. Many of our much of our district borders a city that has banned RVs. And so we do have that overflow. We actually had the police department win ticketing these vehicles and our scanning their license plates identify how many were from within the city and how many were from outside the city. We have had numerous complaints related to individuals living in these RVs, and as we've tried to find resolutions, the cadre of RVs continue to move through the city. Your neighbor who has an RV that they prepare to go on a trip. Permits associated with residents, I think are a great idea that we need to make sure is available and being able to exercise our right to own vehicles and go on vacation and enjoy the habitat that we have around us in ability to go take our snowmobiles or our water crafts or RV camping and experience nature. And within that, to still protect the next door neighbor, the next door neighbor who can't get out of their driveway because they can't see because that RV just doesn't fit exactly in that that usable space or the neighbor who we've in many parts of our district, we've had to paint the curbs on the corners red so that we can see the stop sign that an RV could have blocks before. So we've put in a lot of No six foot and over parking near a stop signs. But I think that it's time that we look for a city wide solution. And so I appreciate the residents that are here from the fifth District who have been working through this item with us over the last 18 months. And I look forward to some interesting and encompassing alternatives from our city staff. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 6: I want to thank Councilmember Price, Mango and Councilmember Super Na for bringing this forward. I think this is a great item to just look into the research of of what this could be and manifest in two. And I think it is. I know in the West Side specifically, we've had many issues. A lot of our business owners have complained because there are RVs, oversize vehicles blocking their their place of business. And then what results is trash? You know, sometimes urination, other things that are a major issue for those business owners in addition to some other residents in the Willmore who've also complained. And it's just become a real big problem. I know in the Magnolia Industrial Group we've had to put up signs in certain areas and that only does so much to say that you can only park here for a certain time. And I think we've had at one point we had no overnight parking in one area, but a lot of the businesses were impacted because they do have overnight employees. So it becomes an issue. And I think Lakewood does have a really good plan in place. I, I know some time ago we looked into that and how that would work out here in Long Beach. So I just want to reiterate that it'd be great to look really look into Lakewood and their permitting system. I think they have it down pretty well. But thanks so much for this item.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next up is council member Richards.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, Councilwoman Pryce. And co-sponsors for this. So I'm going to rise in favor. I think it's definitely something to look look into. I think across town, there might be different issues, but still issues that warrant study and review around oversize vehicles. I can name very different stories in my neighborhood, in other neighborhoods where, you know, you might have vagrancy or homeless homeless folks who might rent rent an oversize vehicle or camper for hours or for a night. And it creates major issues. One thing I would say is I think even though it might they may it may be a city wide issue. It's very different for different portions of town. So whatever recommendations come back, I like that we ask for like a hotspot map that allows us to have localized solutions. I can think of an example where we had a parking circumstance, we were against a different city and there was construction happening in that city impacted us and it was too big of an issue to address our preferential parking ordinance. We created something very different that allowed us to move around with flexibility locally. So whatever comes back, I hope it allows us to be to have a tailored approach for these neighborhoods that may have very different issues, but all related to the same the same impact. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Supernova.
Speaker 8: Thank you. I just wanted to request the staff that they engage. The Cal State University, Long Beach Police. University police. My staff and I met with the university on Friday and actually spoke to President Connelly on Saturday about this topic. And they have some very interesting intel on this subject, and I think we should get their input. Thank you. We'll do that.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Austin.
Speaker 7: Thank you. I'll be really brief. I'm going to also support this. I want to thank you for bringing it forward. This this issue does we hear from our constituents all the time. It serves as a nuisance issue in many of our neighborhoods citywide. I'm just I just want to get some clarity on the the. The definition of over oversize vehicles. Are we talking about just RVs or are we talking about boats?
Speaker 6: Well, in terms of the item, we're asking staff to come back with a definition of what a commercial vehicle size height would would be based on other ordinances. But the problem really has stemmed from not just RVs, but boat storage and things like that. So it's multiple commercial vehicles.
Speaker 7: And do we know and just just out of curiosity, how many RV parks we have in the city of Long Beach?
Speaker 2: We'll come back with that information.
Speaker 7: Great. I would love to have that. And I'd also look at like to look at designated areas in the city where we could possibly designate areas that would not be impeding on neighborhoods and this quality of life for our residents and also for us to be mindful that these are these are oftentimes one step above homelessness. And they are homes for many, many, many folks who use them. So thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Any public comment on this item? Please for. May we come forward and just make sure you say your name. And for the record, please, on the mic. Thank you.
Speaker 2: My name is Robert Cornwall. I live at 1920 Lees Avenue and the 15th Street, a street that runs north and south and and tees into a street called Fair Brook that runs east and west. The 17 homes on Lee's Avenue travel north to Fair Brook for access to Studebaker Road. The left hand turn coming from Lee's Avenue and approaching Fair Brook is immediately confronted. With a huge boat and trailer on the north west side of Hare Brook on the turn. This boat and trailer is 42 foot long, nine foot wide and 11 four inches high. Give or take to ensure they're on all my measurements. This vehicle at 6913. Fair Brook has been parked. That is stored. In front of this house for several years. It is seldom used for fishing. It's a large oceangoing vessel and has moved every week to Studebaker Road to avoid Friday sweepers. The boat is not hooked up to the three or 4 to 3 quarter ton tow truck most of the time. And on the opposite side of the street, on Fair Brook, right across from this boat, there is always a car parked directly on the other side. So that makes it very difficult to pass safely. We're asking the council to address the problem of parking storage, if you will, of such oversight vehicles in our area and possibly in other areas of Long Beach. And we're extremely happy to have read the press telegram. So you felt it was an important enough issue to discuss? The existing Long Beach code that we have seen on Stearns Avenue, which is a major contributing street that comes off of Studebaker Road and on other streets that like I think at Poitiers, they have a sign on this that has a municipal code ten, dash 22, dash oh 70, and it says that any vehicle 85 inches high, 80 inches wide and 20 feet long, that exists on other Long Beach residential 30 foot streets such as patios. Okay. So. The odd thing about it, when we as neighbors asked the owner of the boat why he stores this vehicle on the street, he has said he has a special permit. Well, I don't know what a special permit would be for a vehicle. You know, that is that wide, that high and that long.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Time is up on the clock. Thank you very much. No, thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: No shorter than he is. Good evening, honorable mayor and members of the council. And I would like to start off with thanking Suzy Pryce and Darrell, Sabrina and Stacy Mungo for bringing this issue forward to this council. This has been an ongoing issue, and Stacy has worked with our district for quite some time now. My name is Sherrie Perkins, and my husband and I have lived at 5255 East Wardlow Road. Well, probably for some of you were born, but we've been paying taxes for 47 years. When we first bought the home, it was a fixer upper. And we have worked very hard to make this a beautiful home. And I don't want to cry. I'm not trying not to. But it's very upsetting when you have these homeless people. And I agree with Senator, Counselor, Mr. Richardson that they have a problem, too. Okay. And this should be addressed as well. So when you bring your manager here and try to get some information, I would also recommend that you look at Huntington Beach as planned. They have an outstanding plan that they have put into place and it's working just fine. I would also recommend that you look at Los Angeles plan for the homeless that have been displaced because of their codes and try to work this thing, this whole issue as a whole package. But my special interest is Wardlow. Down the street where I live, there is a golf course, skylands golf course. And on both sides of the street there were at least 25 RVs, vans, trailers and different vehicles that have been making this their permanent home. They bring out their look. I want to paint a picture in your mind because it's hard to visualize this. You have. People living inside these homes with the curtains drawn and beware of the dog signs on the side. They have their barbecues set up, their lawn chairs set up in the evenings. They cook their meals, they watch TV inside in their comfort, and meanwhile, enjoying this beautiful golf course that we have. The rest of the neighbors are very fed up with this type of behavior. And recently I've made a study with some of the neighbors to see how they feel about it. And we seem to all be in agreement that something has got to be done about this. This has been going on since 2008. Before most of you people were involved with this at all. And as I said, we're pretty fed up about the whole thing. This is a safety issue. I'm very concerned about the golfers that try to cross the street there with all these trailers and RV park. People can't see them as they're trying to cross. There's two pedestrians in.
Speaker 0: Their type times. Yes.
Speaker 3: Okay. Thank you. Can I ask a question?
Speaker 0: Time is up. But what I will do is we will have some come over here to the side and we get your question answered.
Speaker 3: Okay. Okay. Thank you very.
Speaker 0: Much. Thank you very much. Mr. West, can we have someone go talk to this lady? Thanks, Miss Amy Borek will do that. Okay, sir, please come forward. Hi. How you doing?
Speaker 8: I'm Brett Lewis. I'm a fifth District resident, but I'm also glad to hear that this topic's being raised and kind of addressed. I'm kind of looking at it as like a two piece, maybe people with truly recreational vehicle that just aren't paying to have it stored. But there is a large amount I see of people on the verge of homelessness living in these RV's and just being able to look at it that way and addressing the situation. I can speak from having our business on the outer traffic circle. We deal with a lot of water thefts. If you kind of go when all the everyone's closed down or you come in when you're not really supposed to be working, there's a line, well, pots, pans, whatever, being filled with water. I mean, coming from Oregon, I feel for the people there. It's like something where we're contacting the police department about and stuff too. But I imagine if it's happening with us, probably where they're congregated, other places, there's probably a large amount of water theft to that business owner that they can see on their bills, too. So I think it'll be somewhat of a complicated issue in a way of the different circumstances, why the vehicles are there. But I just want to thank everyone for taking it under consideration, looking into it more.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Seeing no other public comment, take this back to the council. Councilman Mongo.
Speaker 1: I want to thank the residents who came out today and spoke. And I particularly want to thank Cheri because as a neighborhood leader who's involved in so many things in our community, I think that you've done an excellent job of prioritizing. Within your neighborhood association, I remember when we met. Your community had several issues that we needed to address. And one by one, through a community who is engaged together, we have come up with collaborative solutions. And I know that we can find that for this as well. And we want to make sure, as Councilmember Richardson and Councilmember Austin mentioned, that we're not just finding a solution that moves the issue. And I know that you and I have talked a lot about that because the issue started on Lakewood Boulevard and then it moved to Wardlow and then it moved to Studebaker. And as these vehicles move across the city, we're not finding a city wide solution. And so I think we've come to that time where where we're going to be able to get there. So thank you for your patience and your diligence in maintaining a community that's engaged on our issues. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. With that, we have a motion in a second. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. We're going to do the two hearings and then go on to the regular agenda. I know it's been a long meeting. So what have you hearing? Number 2/1, then hearing number one. Then we have public comment and the agenda. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to request City Manager to report on any past discussions, memorandums, codes, ordinances, and regulations on the matter, as well as submit recommendations that would ban or limit long-term oversized vehicle parking citywide. | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_10132015_15-1037 | Speaker 0: Thank you. Hearing item number one, please.
Speaker 1: Report from Economic and Property Development recommendation to receive supporting documentation and to the record. Conclude the hearing and adopt resolution. Continuing the East Anaheim Street Parking and Business Improvement Area Assessment for the period of October 1st, 2015 through September 30th, 2016, and authorize the City Manager to extend the agreement with the East Anaheim Street Business Alliance for one year term districts three and four.
Speaker 0: Thank you. We can have the staff report, please.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Members of the council, the staff report will be given by Mike Conway, Economic and Property Development Director and Jim Fusco, Development Project Manager. Mayor Garcia, Members of the City Council, the East Anaheim Street Parking and Business Improvement Area, uses business license assessment funds to promote and market the commercial areas along East Anaheim Street on behalf of the businesses located there. Council action on this item continues the assessment for another year and extends the agreement with the East Anaheim Street Business Alliance. There are no proposed changes in the district boundaries, the basis and method of leaving the assessment and no significant change in the proposed activities. On September 15th, 2015, City Council approved Resolution Number Arias 15 Dash 0115 granting approval of the annual report, declaring the intention of City Council over the assessment and set October 13th, 2015 as the date of public hearing. So at this time, staff requests City Council received the supporting documentation into the record, conclude the hearing and adopt the resolution of this concludes my report.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I'm going to turn this over to any public comment on the hearing first. So any public comment on the hearing? Seeing none. Council member non.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Mayor. I just wanted to thank to the board members in the audience tonight. It's been a long night. Appreciate you being here. And I think you guys had a board meeting today, too, so it's been a long day also, but that's Brett Lewis and Leigh Vera. They've done an outstanding job. They've basically taken over running the bid. And we really appreciate what you guys have done. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you very much. Councilwoman Pryce.
Speaker 6: Thank you. I want to echo that and thank is the president, Lee Vieira and Brett Lewis and and the entire board of directors for leading the business community and positively influencing the city's economic landscape. Is there I know is working hard to support more than 600 businesses within the district and the board is instrumental in empowering local businesses to achieve their business goals. I look forward to speaking at SBA on October 27th, and I know that Councilman Superhot and I share mostly it's Councilman Supervised district, but we have a few a sliver of businesses that fall within your jurisdiction. And I want to thank you for all you do for all the businesses and and those in the third as well. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Mongo. I'm going to go back to Councilmember Super now.
Speaker 1: I, too, want to thank your business association for all the great things that you've done. I've enjoyed meeting with your business owners on several occasions, and I think that you're a model of what an organization can be. While your SBA, we have SBA over on our side of town and they look to you guys for guidance and hopefully potentially a name change. So people won't confuse us so much anymore. But at the end of the day, as long as they shop local, we're all winners.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember Brown, I.
Speaker 8: Was just going to say, I apologize for not having the I-Team there to present, but we have so many great speakers. And Councilwoman Pryce, it's hard to work a man. So. Thank you, guys.
Speaker 0: Thank you. With that, we have a motion in a second. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 1: Motion carries.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Now back to the regular agenda. So we're going to go. We have one member of the public who wants to speak with Larry Goodhew, and then we'll move on to after Mr. Goodhew comes up. We're going to be moving on to item number 20. | Resolution | Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the hearing, and adopt resolution continuing the East Anaheim Street Parking and Business Improvement Area assessment for the period of October 1, 2015 through September 30, 2016; and authorize City Manager to extend the agreement with the East Anaheim Street Business Alliance for a one-year term. (Districts 3,4) | LongBeachCC |
LongBeachCC_10132015_15-1050 | Speaker 0: Thank you. That concludes public comment. We're going to be going to item number six.
Speaker 1: Communication from Councilman Andrews, Councilwoman Gonzalez, Vice Mayor Lowenthal, Councilmember Superman recommendation to direct the city manager to implement a dog walker watch program as part of the city's current community watch program and report back to city council within 90 days.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Councilman Andrews.
Speaker 4: Yes, thank you, Mayor. First of all, I could think of my colleagues who signed on with this item. I brought this to the neighborhood crime prevention item forward to assist the city of Long Beach Police Department, who's always in need of public assistance and keeping a watchful eye on the community. With over 63,000 dog owners households in the city. They are implementing a dog watch dog watch dog walk. Watch program, we can very many of those walkers, two extra eyes and ears for the police department. Dog walkers can be available resources in helping to make our community safer. If most of you individuals know with your dog walking and just running a jogging, whatever you do, it's still another eyes and ears for our community. The idea is that we walk where residents, you know, are taking their dogs out on a walk to their neighborhoods. They can do also be trained to watch for suspicious activities. Police have been asking people to report. And a lot of times when you talk about this, you guys realize that our police department is very, very limited and very resources in a lot of things. But this is something I thought that we could bring together, let you understand that your dog can be the eyes and ears and your dog is a man's best friend, so why not use him in this capacity? Foremost, I would like to make the motion to forward this item to the Housing and Neighborhood Committee, you know, for more time. Because the fact that the impact that it would bring on the police department, I think it right now we should take a little more time and look into this. But I'm very, very serious about this item. And I would hope that that my diocese would feel the same way and vote for me to do this also.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Let me first do public comment and public comment on the item. CNN. I have Vice Mayor Lowenthal.
Speaker 3: Thank you. And Councilmember Andrews, I can withdraw the the motion if you if you'll queue up for it. I just. Can I. So hold on.
Speaker 4: Right.
Speaker 3: Go ahead. Do you?
Speaker 4: And yes, I made up. I made the motion.
Speaker 3: Can you hit the button, though? Thank you, Mr. Mayor. May I ask a question? I know that Councilmember Andrews has been working on this for the better part of a year. And I'm wondering why you think it should go to a committee? I'm happy to support that. I'm just. I know you've just been working on it for so long and. Yeah.
Speaker 4: One reason is because the fact I think the input that the impact that it would bring on our police department right now has been, you know, with the social resources in which they have. I just think we should take a little more time in by taking into the house and neighborhood. We would have more time to do that.
Speaker 3: Okay. Thank you. That's all for me. Is there any other member that would like to make a comment? Councilmember Mongo.
Speaker 1: I think this is a fantastic idea, Councilmember And I think that you bringing this forward is really an opportunity for us to highlight the opportunities that so many of our neighbors have when they're walking their dogs at night and hopefully train them on knowing what to look for and how to be a good how to be a good witness should something suspicious arise that they see. So congratulations on all the work you've done on this. This is phenomenal and I look forward to being supportive as well.
Speaker 4: Thank you very much.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzalez.
Speaker 6: Councilmember Andrews, I want to thank you for this. It's you know, sometimes we got to get really creative on how we do things. And I think this is another opportunity to train individuals who need to be trained. What I would also suggest to our Housing Neighborhoods and Housing Committee is to maybe even look at some of our resources that are already existing. For instance, you know, we in the first District, we're trying to roll out a large community watch, which I know this will be mirroring. And we have great partnership with the DLB, our downtown Long Beach Associates or our business improvement districts. Many of those employees are already trained, so perhaps that could be another way for us. So we don't use so many police resources, as you mentioned. That could be another avenue for us to look at. Leveraging, you know, is another option.
Speaker 4: Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember Supranational.
Speaker 8: Thank you. And I'd like to thank Councilmember Andrews for bringing this item forward. I signed on originally. I just thought it was a, you know, a broad range of resources that will work. And then last Tuesday night during council meeting, I found out that a dog watcher in my district was able to inform me about some serious crimes. And to Councilwoman Gonzalez's point. We are now forming a community watch group as a result of that. So I didn't have to wait till the Senate approved to see the fruition. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilwoman Pryce.
Speaker 6: I, too, want to thank the councilmember and the co-sponsors that brought this forward. I think it's innovative and we try to encourage that. And I also think that it supports the police department's mission of increasing the number of community watch groups and allowing extra eyes to be put on the issues that impact quality of life and neighborhood safety. So anything we can do to help the police with adding additional eyes and ears I think is helpful for us to do at this time. Will they? Do you have have we thought about whether or not they will have shirts or patches or anything like that?
Speaker 4: Maybe. Sure, Cherry Dog in his district will have his district number on it to let people know. That's just one of my ideas. Yellow shirts for them in that district. One, two and three. You know.
Speaker 6: Polo shirt.
Speaker 4: Anything.
Speaker 6: Great. Thank you for bringing this item forward.
Speaker 0: Councilman Richardson. Thank you.
Speaker 7: Just want to chime in and say anything we can do to add more eyes to keep our neighborhoods safer that I can be in support of that. So congratulations, Councilman Andrew.
Speaker 2: Councilman.
Speaker 0: Councilman Austin.
Speaker 7: Yes. I want to thank you for bringing this forward. Councilmember Andrews. I'm a dog watcher and Walker and our guest watcher as well. And oftentimes walking through my neighborhood and through the community at night, I see a lot. We really do our report. I don't see a lot of crime, but I think this is a common sense approach to, you know, being good neighbors. So thank you for bringing forward our support. Look forward to coming through to coming to the Housing and Neighborhoods Committee, who will be have a chance to work on it.
Speaker 0: Vice Mayor Lowenthal.
Speaker 3: Okay. Just to take it full lifecycle, do we see deputizing these dogs and then can we have a special dispensation where they don't have to be on leash? How else are they going to fight crime? So, Councilmember Andrews, have you thought this through?
Speaker 4: Yes, I really have. And I think that would be the best thing to do, is to be able to deputize the dogs and.
Speaker 3: Have them off leash and.
Speaker 4: By all means, and maybe even have them carry weapons here.
Speaker 0: This is get it's getting late.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 0: What about? What about the cat? Yeah. We need to send the cat fighters to help Councilmember Richardson.
Speaker 7: Councilmember Austin had a suggestion that we could use the dog walking to help with the RV problem in the city.
Speaker 0: Okay. That's. I like that. Any public comment on this item? Now seeing none. Please cast your votes. Motion carries you item number nine. | Agenda Item | Recommendation to direct City Manager to implement a Dog Walker Watch program as part of the City's current Community Watch Program and report back to City Council within 90 days. | LongBeachCC |
Subsets and Splits