Sep 09, 2025 City Council

[00:00:01]

04:30 CLOSED SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL. COULD I GET A ROLL CALL, PLEASE?

[4:30 P.M. - CLOSED SESSION - ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING]

HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER KALUDEROVIC. HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI IS CURRENTLY ABSENT.

COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT. HERE. MAYOR LIGHT. HERE.

DO WE HAVE ANY BLUE FOLDER ITEMS FOR THE CLOSED SESSION? NONE FOR CLOSED SESSION. OBAGI IS HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI IS PRESENT.

THANK YOU. NOT FOR CLOSED SESSION MAYOR. OKAY.

WE HAVE NOBODY HERE FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS. IS ANYONE ONLINE? WE DO NOT HAVE ANYONE ON ZOOM AND THERE ARE NO ECOMMENTS FOR CLOSED SESSION.

OKAY, SO THEN BEFORE WE RECESS THE CLOSED SESSION, CAN YOU READ OFF WHAT WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT,

[F. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION]

THE FOLLOWING ITEMS WILL BE DISCUSSED IN CLOSED SESSION ITEMS F.1 THROUGH F.10 ARE UNDER THE TITLE CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL EXISTING LITIGATION.

REF 1 THE NAME OF THE CASE IS KENNETH ALEXANDER V.

CITY OF REDONDO BEACH SLATER WATERPROOFING, INC.

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, SIKA CORPORATION, ET AL.

CASE NUMBER 22STCV32700. REF 2 THE NAME OF THE CASE IS AES SOUTHLAND DEVELOPMENT LLC AND AES REDONDO BEACH LLC V. CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION CASE NUMBER BS157789.

REF 3 THE NAME OF THE CASE IS NEW COMMUNE DTLA LLC V.

CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, CITY OF REDONDO BEACH DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, ET AL. CASE NUMBER 23STCP00426. REF 4 THE NAME OF THE CASE IS NEW COMMUNE DTLA LLC AND LEONID PUSTILNIKOV V. CITY OF REDONDO BEACH AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH.

CASE NUMBER 22TRCP00203. REF 5 THE NAME OF THE CASE IS NEW COMMUNE DTLA LLC V.

CITY OF REDONDO BEACH. CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH AND DOES 1 THROUGH 100 INCLUSIVE.

CASE NUMBER 23STCV110146. REF 6. THE NAME OF THE CASE IS YES IN MY BACK YARD, A CALIFORNIA NONPROFIT CORPORATION SONJA TRAUSS AN INDIVIDUAL V. CITY OF REDONDO BEACH.

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, CITY OF REDONDO BEACH DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND DOES 1 THROUGH 25, INCLUSIVE. CASE NUMBER 23TRCP003255. REF 7 THE NAME OF THE CASE IS IN REGARDS TO 9300 WILSHIRE LLC (9300 WILSHIRE LLC, ET AL. V. AES-REDONDO BEACH LLC) BANKRUPTCY C.D.

CAL. CASE NUMBER 223-AP-01163-ER. REF 8 THE NAME OF THE CASE IS 9300 WILSHIRE LLC V. CITY OF REDONDO BEACH. CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH CITY, REDONDO BEACH DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND DOES 1 THROUGH 100 INCLUSIVE.

CASE NUMBER 23STCP02189. REF 9 NAME OF THE CASE IS IN REGARDS TO 9300 WILSHIRE LLC.

BANKRUPTCY C.D. CAL. CASE NUMBER 223-BK-10918-ER.

REF 10 THE NAME OF THE CASE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH ET AL.

V. CALIFORNIA STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD, CASE NUMBER 20SCCP03193.

AND FOR ITEM F.11 CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR.

THE PROPERTIES ARE 3007 VAIL AVENUE. A PORTION OF APN 415-001-7931.

PARKING LOT AT THE CORNER OF FELTON LANE AND 182ND STREET APN 415-803 3900.

715 JULIA AVENUE. PORTION OF PARCELS APN 750-702-0900 AND APN 750-702-1900. 1935 MANHATTAN BEACH BOULEVARD APN 404-900-8903. 807 INGLEWOOD AVENUE A PORTION OF APN 408-302-4900. 200 NORTH PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, A PORTION OF APN 750-500-9902 THANK YOU. THANK YOU AND CITY MANAGER WITZANSKY, WHO WILL BE SPEAKING? YES THANK YOU ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY CHERYL PARK. FOR ITEM F.1 WE WILL BE JOINED BY DIANE STRICKFADEN HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR AND DANA MCCUNE AND SABIRA SHERMAN, WHO ARE OUTSIDE LEGAL COUNSEL ON THE MATTER.

AND THEN FOR ITEMS F.2 THROUGH F.10, WE WILL BE JOINED BY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR MARC WIENER.

THANK YOU. CAN I GET A MOTION TO RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION, PLEASE? MOVE TO RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION. SECOND. OKAY WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ALL FOR? AYE. OKAY WE ARE RECESSING THE CLOSED SESSION.

WE WILL COME BACK ON OR ABOUT 6:00 TO REPORT OUT ON ANYTHING WE DO IN THE MEETING THAT'S REPORTABLE.

[00:05:04]

[A. CALL TO ORDER]

HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER KALUDEROVIC. HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI.

HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT. HERE. AND MAYOR LIGHT.

HERE. CITY MANAGER WITZANSKY. DO WE HAVE ANY REPORTABLE ITEMS FROM THE CLOSED SESSION? NONE THIS EVENING, MAYOR THANK YOU. OKAY WITH THAT, I WILL CALL TO ORDER.

OH, CAN I GET A MOTION TO ADJOURN TO OUR REGULAR MEETING? SO MOVED.

SECOND. ALL FOR? AYE. OKAY WE ARE ADJOURNED TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE OPEN SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

COULD I GET A ROLL CALL, PLEASE? COUNCIL MEMBER WALLER.

PRESENT. COUNCIL MEMBER CASTLE. HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER KALUDEROVIC.

HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI. HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT.

HERE. MAYOR LIGHT. HERE. DO WE HAVE ANY ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY OR VETERANS IN THE OFFICE IN THE AUDIENCE TODAY? STAND UP AND BE RECOGNIZED FOR YOUR SERVICE [APPLAUSE]. AND WITH THAT, WOULD YOU ALL STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG, AND THEN REMAIN STANDING FOR A MOMENT OF SILENT INVOCATION? WE DON'T HAVE A STUDENT HERE TONIGHT, SO I'LL. I'LL LEAD IT.

OKAY. READY? BEGIN. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

AND ALL PLEASE REMAIN STANDING FOR A MOMENT OF SILENT INVOCATION.

OKAY THANK YOU, YOU MAY BE SEATED. OKAY I HAVE NO PRESENTATIONS OR PROCLAMATIONS TONIGHT, SO WE'LL JUST DO THE

[D. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS/ANNOUNCEMENTS/ AB 1234 TRAVEL EXPENSE REPORTS]

I'LL START. FIRST OFF, GOT TO ATTEND A GREAT SWIM THE AVENUES EVENT EIGHTH ANNUAL BY RICK CRUMP AND HIS CREW.

AND I SAW COUNCIL MEMBER KALUDEROVIC'S HUSBAND AND DAUGHTER SWIMMING IN THE EVENT, SO IT WAS A GREAT EVENT.

COUNCIL MEMBER WALLER AND CASTLE WERE THERE AS WELL TO HELP START THE RACE.

FIFA WORLD CUP. HAD A MEETING LAST WEEK REGARDING THAT.

WE HAVE AN UPCOMING MEETING THIS WEEK AND NEXT WEEK WITH LA GALAXY.

WE HAVE A 9/11 CEREMONY ON THURSDAY AT 0900 OUT HERE IN THE CIVIC CENTER, OUT IN FRONT OF THE CIVIC CENTER.

LA KINGS, 5K IS THIS SATURDAY. WE HAVE A MEETING WITH THE COUNTY SUPERVISOR.

STAFF RELATING TO DOMINGUEZ PARK WILL REPORT OUT WHAT WE GET ON THAT.

OPEN WATER POLO COMING UP THE 20TH HOPEFULLY, HOPEFULLY WE CAN GET THOSE LAST CHECKLIST ITEMS OFF.

THERE'S A FAMILY COMEDY SHOW AT SAINT ANDREWS ON THE 20TH, ALSO FROM 5:30 TO 7:30.

I GOT ASKED TO A MEETING WITH THE KINGS TO TALK ABOUT THINGS WE COULD WORK TOGETHER THAT WILL BE HAPPENING AT THE END OF NEXT WEEK.

WE HAVE A COUPLE OLYMPIC COMMITTEE MEETINGS COMING UP, AND THEN I.

WE HAVE THE PERRY PARK TEEN CENTER RIBBON CUTTING.

I THINK THAT'S THURSDAY NIGHT, THE 18TH, CORRECT? AT 5:00 P.M. TO 6:30 P.M. AND THAT'S ALL I HAD.

SO THIS TIME, WE'LL START WITH YOU COUNCIL MEMBER KALUDEROVIC.

OH THANK YOU. YES I ATTENDED THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE FOR REGIONAL HOMELESS ALIGNMENT MEETING LAST FRIDAY.

WE DISCUSSED MEASURE A TAX DOLLAR SPENDING AND THE ORGANIZATIONAL PLAN FOR THE NEW COUNTY ENTITY THAT IS SERVICING FOR HOMELESSNESS.

AND I DID SUBMIT A $25 PARKING REIMBURSEMENT FOR THAT.

I ATTENDED SWIM THE AVENUES AND I GOT TO SEE MY YOUNGEST, CLARA, FINISH HER FIRST OPEN WATER SWIM IT WAS AWESOME.

GREAT ENERGY. WHAT A GREAT EVENT. I MEAN, WE'RE SO LUCKY TO HAVE SUCH A GREAT PLACE FOR ALL OF THESE WATER SPORTS.

LET'S SEE, THIS MORNING, I ATTENDED SOUTH BAY AEROSPACE ALLIANCE GENERAL MEETING.

I WAS SPEAKING WITH MEMBERS ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF OUR AIR FORCE BASE HERE IN LOS ANGELES AND THE ECONOMIC IMPACT IT HAS ON THIS REGION.

ALSO WAS INFORMED THAT $13 BILLION WAS ALLOCATED IN THE FEDERAL BUDGET FOR SPACE FORCE, AND SPECIFICALLY CONTRACTS THAT ARE GOING TO GOLDEN DOME.

SO THOSE KINDS OF CONTRACTS ARE ARE UP AND AVAILABLE FOR LARGE AND SMALL BUSINESSES IN OUR REGION.

AND THAT'S A HUGE IMPACT THAT WE COULD POTENTIALLY GAIN HERE.

TOMORROW I WILL ALSO BE TOURING NORTHROP GRUMMAN WITH SOME COUNCIL MEMBERS, CITY STAFF, SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS AND STAFF TO TOUR THEIR CAMPUS AND CONTINUE THIS CONVERSATION ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF AEROSPACE IN THE REGION AND HOW WE CAN FURTHER SECURE THAT AND THE WORK THAT THEY DO HERE IN THE REGION,

[00:10:06]

THAT'S IT THANK YOU. OKAY THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI.

ALL RIGHT THANK YOU MAYOR. REITERATE WHAT THE MAYOR SAID ABOUT THE PERRY PARK TEEN CENTER RIBBON CUTTING.

THAT'S THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 18TH AT 5:00 AT PERRY PARK TEEN CENTER.

I WENT TO THE COG TRANSPORTATION MEETING ON MONDAY.

WE HAD A PRESENTATION FROM GEORGIA SHERIDAN AND THE METRO PROJECT TEAM FOR THE C LINE EXTENSION.

NOW, I KNOW THAT IT'S CALLED THE K LINE, BUT THEY DECIDED TO PRESERVE THE C LINE EXTENSION NAME FOR THE EXTENSION.

SO WHAT THEY SAID IS THAT THEY WILL PLAN TO RELEASE THE FINAL EIR THIS WEEK.

THE FINAL EIR WILL ADDRESS THE AT-GRADE ALTERNATIVE, THE HYBRID ALTERNATIVE THE HAWTHORNE ALTERNATIVE, THE HIGH FREQUENCY BUS ROUTE AND THE NO BUILD.

AND THE HYBRID ALTERNATIVE, WHICH WAS THE QUOTE UNQUOTE, LOCALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE.

WELL WILL HAVE AN OVERAGE OF ABOUT $1 BILLION THAT IS NOT FUNDED.

AND WHEN ASKED WHETHER WHEN I ASKED HOW MUCH THE OVERAGE WOULD BE ON THE HAWTHORNE ALTERNATIVE MS. DIRECTOR SHERIDAN DIDN'T OR MANAGER SHERIDAN DIDN'T HAVE AN ANSWER, BUT SAID IT WAS MORE THAN ONE B, MAYBE 1.5 OR CLOSE TO 2. SO WE'LL GET MORE DETAILS ON THAT AS THE INFO COMES OUT.

ADDITIONALLY, THEY STATED THAT THE METRO WILL PROBABLY CONSIDER THIS IN ABOUT A MONTH OR TWO, BUT THEY'RE GOING TO GIVE US ALL TIME TO REVIEW THE EIR.

ALSO, IT WILL BE ENTIRELY AVAILABLE ONLINE, AND YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SEARCH FOR PARTICULAR SUBJECTS THAT ARE OF INTEREST TO YOU AND LOOK THAT UP.

SO I WILL ALSO HOST MY COMMUNITY MEETING COMING UP SOON.

I'LL ANNOUNCE THAT DATE AT OUR NEXT MEETING AND THROUGH EMAIL. AND WE'LL HAVE A LOT TO DISCUSS THANKS.

DO YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE SUNDAY? THERE'S AN EVENT AT IN LAWNDALE.

REGARDING THE METRO PROJECT IT'S AT WILLIAM GREENELEMENTARY.

LET ME SEE REAL QUICK. IT'S THE PARK IS NO ON ROW AT 1:00 P.M. ON SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 14TH, 2025 LAWNDALE.

THE LAWNDALE MAYOR SHOULD BE THERE, AND A BUNCH OF ACTIVISTS TO TALK ABOUT THE BEST WAY TO INTERACT WITH METRO THANKS.

THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER CASTLE EXACTLY. JUST TO REITERATE I ATTENDED THE SWIM THE AVENUES EVENT WHICH WAS ACTUALLY HIS MOST SUCCESSFUL EVENT.

NORMALLY, HE SAYS ALL OF THE SLOTS ARE SOLD OUT WHEN HE HAS 500 SWIMMERS.

AND HE ACTUALLY HAD A TOTAL OF 520 SWIMMERS THIS YEAR.

SO IT WAS A FANTASTIC EVENT FOR HIM AND KEEPS GROWING EVERY YEAR AND BUILDING ON THAT EXCITEMENT.

AGAIN, WE HAVE THE WATER POLO MATCH COMING UP ON THE 20TH, AND THERE ARE BASICALLY WE'RE GETTING LOTS OF TRACTION FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE INTERESTED IN ATTENDING THESE EVENTS DOWN IN THE WATERFRONT AND HERE IN REDONDO BEACH.

SO I THINK IN TERMS OF BUILDING MOMENTUM TOWARD THE WORLD CUP NEXT YEAR AND ALSO TOWARD THE OLYMPICS, THAT, YOU KNOW, THESE SHOULD BE SUCCESSFUL EVENTS FOR THE CITY AND YOU KNOW, A GOOD ADDITION TO THE AMENITIES AT THE WATERFRONT.

AND I THINK THEY HE TOLD ME THAT THEY HAD SWIMMERS FROM BRAZIL AND EUROPE FOR THE FIRST TIME.

SO IT'S GETTING WORLDWIDE RECOGNITION. EXACTLY, EXACTLY.

OKAY COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT. WELL, THANK YOU, MAYOR.

I DID WANT TO MAKE AN ANNOUNCEMENT THIS WEEK.

AND IT IS TO THANK MIKE KLEIN AND THE ENTIRE PUBLIC WORKS STAFF FOR REALLY A GREAT JOB.

THEY'VE DONE IN PARTICULAR AT ANDERSON PARK WITH RESPECT TO THE NEW PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT AND THE REPAIRS THEY'VE DONE TO BRING THAT BACK. BOTH THE SLIDE AND THE JUNGLE GYM NET HAS BEEN OUT OF ACTION FOR A WHILE.

BUT THROUGH, I THINK, PERSISTENCE AND SKILL, THEY'VE BEEN ABLE TO GET THAT DONE, AND IT'S UP AND WORKING.

YEAH AND FOR THOSE OF US WHO DON'T KNOW GETTING THINGS DONE IN PUBLIC WORKS AND THROUGHOUT THE ORGANIZATION.

IT'S NOT LIKE ORDERING A PIZZA, YOU KNOW. HEY, BRING THIS HERE.

AND IT'S ARRIVED AND DONE IN 30 MINUTES OR LESS.

THEY'VE GOT TO FIND THE MATERIALS, SOURCE IT, PRICE IT, PROCURE IT, SECURE IT, TAKE DELIVERY, STAY ON TOP OF THE ENTIRE CHAIN AND ULTIMATELY INSTALL IT.

AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THEY DID AT ANDERSON PARK.

AND IT'S APPRECIATED AS WELL AS AT DALE PAGE PARK, I THINK, AS YOU KNOW, MAYOR, THE PICKLEBALL COURTS,

[00:15:02]

AND IF I MAY, WHILE I'M ON IT, I WANTED TO THANK THE CITY MANAGER, WHO HAS ASSEMBLED, TRAINED AND MAINTAINED A STAFF THROUGHOUT THE ORGANIZATION THAT I KNOW YOU HOLD TO THE HIGHEST STANDARDS.

AND PERHAPS EVEN MORE TELLINGLY, THEY ARE MOTIVATED TO HOLD THEMSELVES TO THE HIGHEST STANDARDS.

AND I THINK THAT SHOWS LEADERSHIP. SO THANK YOU FOR DOING THAT.

OKAY THANK YOU AND COUNCIL MEMBER WALLER. THANK YOU.

LAST WEEK I ATTENDED THE CLEAN POWER ALLIANCE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING.

AT THAT MEETING, THE BOARD APPROVED TWO 15-YEAR AGREEMENTS WITH SUNZIA WIND NORTH AND SOUTH, ADDING 125MW OF RENEWABLE CAPACITY TO CLEAN POWER ALLIANCE'S PORTFOLIO.

THAT SHOULD HELP WITH SOME LONG TERM CLEAN ENERGY AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS AND ALLOW INCREASED CAPACITY.

CLEAN POWER LINES ALSO SECURED UP TO $964,000 IN GRANT FUNDING THROUGH THE EQUITABLE BUILDING DECARBONIZATION PROGRAM TO PROVIDE ELECTRIFICATION AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY UPGRADES SUCH AS HEAT PUMPS, INDUCTION STOVES AND INSULATION FOR INCOME QUALIFIED HOUSEHOLDS IN DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES. AND THE LAST MAJOR ACTION WE DID WAS THE BOARD VOTED TO EXTEND MEMBERSHIP TO THE CITIES OF CUDAHY AND FILLMORE, WITH SERVICE EXPECTED TO BEGIN IN 2027.

FILLMORE IS THE LAST CITY IN VENTURA COUNTY, MEANING THAT CLEAN POWER LINES WILL HAVE 100% OF VENTURA COUNTY COVERED.

ALSO, I ATTENDED THE ROUNDTABLE LAST WEEK AND HEARD A PRESENTATION FROM REDONDO BEACH UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT'S ANTHONY TARANTO TALKING ABOUT CAREER TECHNICAL EDUCATION PATHWAYS.

I ATTENDED SWIM THE AVENUES AS WELL, AND I'LL TAKE A REMATCH NEXT YEAR FOR THE LITTLE RACE THAT WE HAD WHEN I'M NOT RECOVERING FROM A BROKEN BONE.

EXCUSES [LAUGHTER]. DINE ABOUT ARTESIA IS TOMORROW, 05:00 P.M.

TO 8:30 P.M. FOLLOWED BY RISE AND SHINE REDONDO FROM NRBBA AT SOUTH BAY SOCIAL, THAT IS THURSDAY THE 11TH AT 7:45 A.M. LA KINGS 5K WAS MENTIONED ALREADY THAT THIS WEEKEND.

SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 14TH AT 2:00 P.M. CITIZENS FOR REDONDO'S TREES IS HOLDING ITS SECOND MEETING AND FORMING COMMITTEES.

THEY WILL BE AT THE REDONDO ROOM AT BEACH CITIES HEALTH DISTRICT 2:00 P.M.

ON SUNDAY, AND MY COMMUNITY MEETING WILL BE SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 13TH FROM 9:30 A.M.

TO 11:00 A.M. AT THE ALTA VISTA COMMUNITY CENTER THAT'S ALL I GOT.

OKAY THANK YOU. WITH THAT JUMPING DOWN TO ITEM E APPROVAL OF THE ORDER OF AGENDA.

[E. APPROVE ORDER OF AGENDA]

SECOND. OKAY GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL FOR? AYE. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. SO WE'LL BE FOLLOWING THE AGENDA THAT'S BEEN PUBLISHED.

WE HAVE NO AGENCY RECESSES. SO JUMPING DOWN TO G.

[F. AGENCY RECESS]

[G. BLUE FOLDER ITEMS - ADDITIONAL BACK UP MATERIALS]

FOR J.1 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION OF NON-AGENDA ITEMS, PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS FOR N.1 REGARDING DISCUSS AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING CHANGES TO THE PARKING REGULATIONS FOR COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES ALONG ARTESIA AND AVIATION, THE 2019 PARKING STUDY MEMORANDUM AND PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS.

P.1 DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING THE CHANGES TO THE RULES OF CONDUCT AND DECORUM FOR THE CITY COUNCIL AND COMMISSION MEETINGS.

PUBLIC COMMUNICATION THANK YOU. CAN I GET A MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILE? MOVE TO RECEIVE AND FILE. SECOND. ALL FOR? AYE.

OKAY THAT WAS UNANIMOUS. OKAY NOW WE'RE JUMPING TO CONSENT CALENDAR.

[H. CONSENT CALENDAR]

[00:20:09]

[J. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS]

THIS SECTION IS LIMITED TO 30 MINUTES. EACH SPEAKER WILL BE AFFORDED THREE MINUTES TO ADDRESS THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL, AND EACH SPEAKER WILL BE PERMITTED TO SPEAK ONLY ONCE.

WRITTEN REQUESTS WILL GO FIRST, FOLLOWED BY PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE AND THEN ANYONE ONLINE.

AND WE DO HAVE SOME WRITTEN REQUESTS TONIGHT. FIRST IS WAYNE CRAIG AND SECOND IS JIM MUELLER.

GETS AS HIGH AS IT GOES PART OF A TOUR THAT WENT TO THE WEST BASIN WATER RECYCLING CENTER IN EL SEGUNDO, AS PART OF THE SOUTH BAY ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS.

IF YOU HAVEN'T GONE, CHECK IT OUT. IT'S ACTUALLY REALLY INTERESTING.

BUT EVEN MORE INTERESTING IS WHEN YOU ASK THE DIRECTOR WHO'S GIVING THE TOUR, YOU KNOW, YOU GUYS ARE DOING GREAT WORK HERE, BUT WHAT ABOUT THE IMPACT OF ALL THE RHNA HOUSING ALLOCATION NUMBERS THAT WILL TAKE AWAY THE WATER THAT YOU'RE SAVING AND NOW HAVING TO GIVE IT UP? THAT'S A VERY INTERESTING LOOKS ON THEIR FACES. I SAID, WELL, YOU KNOW REDONDO, WE HAVE X AMOUNT OF HOUSES, ALL THESE OTHER CITIES. IT'D BE GREAT IF YOU MAYBE LET THE STATE REGULATORS KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON [LAUGHTER], BECAUSE IF YOU KEEP ON DOING THIS, YOU'RE GOING TO BE DIMINISHING THE IMPACT OF WHAT YOU'RE WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO EFFECTUATE IN THE CITY BY SAVING WATER.

ON ANOTHER ISSUE, I WANTED TO MENTION THE STREET SWEEPING APP THAT WE HAVE, WE WERE TOUTING IT AND EVERYTHING.

I DON'T KNOW IF IT WORKS ACROSS CITY, BUT IT DOESN'T WORK IN SOUTH REDONDO, PARTICULARLY SOUTH BROADWAY, WHERE I LIVE. I DON'T THINK IT'S BEEN ACCURATE FOR ABOUT A MONTH.

SO WHEN YOU CHECK ON IT DOESN'T SAY IT'S ALWAYS RED ALL DAY LONG, INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH.

AND I MENTIONED THAT BECAUSE ON THE SIDE OF THE STREET WHERE I LIVE YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T PARK ON TUESDAY MORNINGS, WHICH IS FINE. YOU KNOW, I MEAN, IT SAYS SIGNS.

I KNOW NOT TO PARK THERE OR ELSE. JIM, I KNOW YOU KNOW THIS AS WELL TOO.

WE LIVE ON THE SAME STREET. INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH, THE NEXT DAY ON WEDNESDAY, THIS IS THE DAY AFTER WE HAVE STREET SWEEPING ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE STREET. A TICKET WAS PUT ON MY CAR SAYING MY CAR HAD BEEN PARKED THERE FOR 72 HOURS.

I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT'S POSSIBLE BECAUSE THE DAY BEFORE STREET SWEEPING, AND I DEFINITELY WASN'T THERE BECAUSE I HAD A DOCTOR APPOINTMENT THAT I WENT TO. NOW, THANKFULLY IT WAS A WARNING TICKET. SO I DID CALL THE POLICE AND SAID, HEY, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU GOT THIS INFO, BUT [LAUGHTER] AT ANY RATE, THE STREET, I DON'T KNOW IF IT NEEDS TO BE UPDATED OR SOMETHING'S NOT WORKING, BUT IT'S NOT. AND FINALLY, I KNOW THIS MAY NOT BE THE MOST HAPPY NEWS, BUT I HEARD THAT ONE OF THE MY COUNCIL MEMBER'S DISTRICT MEETING LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO THAT WE DID GET SOME WORD BACK ABOUT THE GUN RANGE, AND I'D BE INTERESTED TO KNOW IF, KNOW IF IN FACT WE KNOW WHAT THE FINAL RESULT OF IT IS.

I WAS TOLD IT DIDN'T GET THROUGH. IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEN I WOULD MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY THAT WE ALLOCATE I THINK IT WAS $1.3 MILLION TOWARD THAT PROJECT. WE ALREADY SPENT $200,000 OF IT.

SEEING AS WE ARE IN A FISCAL. IN A STRUCTURAL DEFICIT RIGHT NOW, MAYBE APPLY THAT MONEY TO THE GENERAL FUND AND USE IT FOR SOMETHING LIKE PAVING PARTS OF GRANT AVENUE, WHICH I KNOW IS SOMETHING THAT WE STILL CAN'T FINISH BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY FOR. SO IF THAT'S THE CASE, YOU KNOW WHAT? LET'S TAKE IT AND MOVE ON AND APPLY IT TO SOMETHING THAT THE RESIDENTS CAN USE RIGHT NOW THANK YOU.

OKAY. THANK YOU. I GOT ONE OF THOSE 72 HOUR TICKETS ONCE, TOO [LAUGHTER] AND SAME THING IT HAD.

I HAD TO HAVE MOVED IT THE DAY BEFORE, SO I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT HAPPENS.

THE APP HAS BEEN WORKING FOR ME, BUT I DID NOT CHECK IT THE LAST TWO WEEKS.

SO WE'LL CHECK ON THAT. AND WE DID NOT GET THE GRANT FOR THE GUN RANGE.

SO WITH THAT, MR. MUELLER, YOU'RE NEXT. AND THEN HOLLY OSBORNE.

GOOD EVENING COUNCIL JIM MUELLER, DISTRICT 5.

ALWAYS A PLEASURE TO TALK TO YOU. OUR CITY HAS A UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY TO JUMPSTART DEVELOPMENT ON ARTESIA BOULEVARD AT MINIMAL COST.

CREATE A PUBLIC MARKET AT THE SITE WHERE THE POWER LINE CROSSES ARTESIA BOULEVARD.

FIRST, ARTESIA IS A MOST IMPORTANT CORRIDOR, BUT MUCH OF IT IS DOMINATED BY PASS THROUGH TRAFFIC AND UNDERUTILIZED PARCELS.

A PUBLIC MARKET WOULD TRANSFORM THAT SPACE INTO A TRUE COMMUNITY DESTINATION, SOMETHING THAT INVITES RESIDENTS TO STOP, SHOP AND GATHER. THE SITE THIS SITE IS CENTRALLY LOCATED, HIGHLY ACCESSIBLE BY FOOT OR BIKE, AND THERE IS PARKING NEARBY. HERE ARE THE BENEFITS OF HAVING A REGULAR PUBLIC MARKET AT THAT SITE.

IT OFFERS AFFORDABLE STALLS FOR LOCAL VENDORS, START UP FOOD ENTREPRENEURS AND ARTISANS WHO MIGHT NOT YET AFFORD A PERMANENT STOREFRONT,

[00:25:05]

NEXT, SURROUNDING SHOPS AND RESTAURANTS ALONG ARTESIA WILL BENEFIT FROM FOOT TRAFFIC ATTRACTED TO THE MARKET.

PUBLIC MARKETS ARE NOT ALL COMMERCIAL. THEY'RE CULTURAL SPACES THAT SHOWCASE LOCAL FOOD, MUSIC AND CRAFTS.

THEY CREATE PRIDE OF PLACE AND SENSE OF BELONGING.

BY BRINGING IN FRESH PRODUCE PUBLIC MARKETS TEND TO IMPROVE ACCESS TO HEALTHY FOODS AND REDUCE THE NEED TO DRIVE LONG DISTANCES FOR SPECIALTY GOODS.

FINALLY, PUBLIC MARKET SALES ARE TAXED AND THE REVENUE ACCRUES TO THE CITY.

THE SITE UNDER THE POWER LINE IS CHALLENGING FOR TRADITIONAL DEVELOPMENT, BUT IDEAL FOR OPEN AIR OR POP UPS.

MANY CITIES FROM SANTA MONICA'S MAIN STREET TO SAN DIEGO'S LIBERTY STATION HAVE PROVEN HOW PUBLIC MARKETS CAN THRIVE IN UNCONVENTIONAL SPACES.

REDONDO BEACH CAN TAKE THAT SAME SPIRIT AND TAILOR IT TO OUR OWN COMMUNITY CHARACTER.

DOES REDONDO HAVE THE RESOURCES TO SET UP A PUBLIC MARKET IN NORTH REDONDO? I'VE SPOKEN WITH LINDA HABASH, WHO MANAGES THE RIVIERA MARKET, AND SHE EXPRESSED INTEREST IN THE IDEA.

A PUBLIC MARKET ALIGNS PERFECTLY WITH ARTESIA AND AVIATION CORRIDOR ACTION PLAN GOALS BY REVITALIZATION, SMALL BUSINESS INCUBATION, AND CREATING QUICK WINS THAT RESIDENTS CAN ENJOY WITH A SHORT TIME FRAME.

A PUBLIC MARKET AT THE POWER LINE CROSSING ON ARTESIA BOULEVARD IS A CHANCE TO REIMAGINE A DIFFICULT SITE INTO SOMETHING LIVELY, HEALTHY, AND UNIQUELY REDONDO BEACH. IT'S LOW COST, HIGH IMPACT PROJECT THAT CAN BRING PEOPLE TOGETHER WHILE SUPPORTING OUR SMALL BUSINESS ECOSYSTEM. THANK YOU FOR CONSIDERING THIS IDEA.

I HOPE WE CAN EXPLORE THE NEXT STEPS TO MAKE IT A REALITY THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. CAN I JUST MAKE A QUICK COMMENT ASSOCIATION ABOUT DOING A FARMERS MARKET FOR THAT AREA ALONG ARTESIA.

AND AS YOU KNOW, YOU SPOKE TO LINDA HABASH FROM THE RIVIERA FARMERS MARKET.

AND ACTUALLY, THAT'S RUN BY THE RIVIERA THE RVA SO I THINK THAT WORKING WITH THE BUSINESS ASSOCIATION WOULD BE A GREAT PLACE TO START.

WELL, THAT'S TRUE, BUT THEY DON'T SEEM TO BE INTERESTED IN ANYTHING BUT ONE OFF KIND OF EVENTS.

ONE OFF EVENTS? IT'D BE INTERESTING TO SEE IF THEY'RE INTERESTED IN AN ONGOING EVENT.

OKAY. AND SPONSORING THAT, BUT I HAVE MY DOUBTS.

OKAY ALL RIGHT. WE'LL KEEP PUSHING FOR IT THANKS.

OKAY THANK YOU, HOLLY OSBORNE AND THEN NIKKI NEGRETE-MITCHELL.

GOOD EVENING THIS IS HOLLY OSBORNE, DISTRICT 5.

SO GOOD EVENING, MR. MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL AND STAFF.

I SENT YOU ALL A SPEECH THAT I HAD GIVEN ABOUT THREE MONTHS AGO.

IT IT MET ONE OF THE METRO COMMITTEES. THEY'VE ALL HEARD VARIATIONS OF IT, BUT I THINK IT'S NEW INFORMATION FOR YOU.

AND SEE, I WANT TO KEEP YOU INFORMED. SO, AS YOU KNOW, FOR THE GREEN LINE HAS SUBMITTED.

METRO HAS SUBMITTED PLANS TO ADD AN LRT, WHICH MEANS TWO ADDITIONAL TRACKS ON A NARROW ROAD RIGHT OF WAY THAT ALREADY HAS PIPELINES IN A BNSF FREIGHT TRAIN ON IT. OKAY? THIS IS THE FREIGHT TRAIN.

OKAY? THESE ARE THE PIPELINES. NOW, FOR ANYBODY THAT'S WATCHING ON TV, I REALLY NEED TO EMPHASIZE THIS.

A LOT OF PEOPLE STILL THINK THAT THE LRT IS GOING TO IS NOT TWO ADDITIONAL TRAIN TRACKS.

THEY THINK IT'S ALL GOING TO BE ON ONE TRACK.

YOU WOULD NOT BELIEVE THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT THINK THAT.

OH, CAN'T YOU JUST USE THE TRACK THAT'S ALREADY THERE? NO. YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PUT IN TWO MORE SETS OF TRACKS AND THE ROW IS TOO NARROW.

THIS IS 75FT WIDE IN THE NARROW PART IN LAWNDALE, AND THERE ARE RULES ABOUT WHERE THE PIPELINES CAN BE.

THEY'RE RIGHT HERE NOW. THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE AT LEAST 25FT FROM THE FREIGHT TRAIN, WHICH THEY ARE.

METRO IS GOING TO MOVE THEM HERE. THERE WAS A BNSF ENGINEER AT ONE OF THE LAWNDALE MEETINGS, AND I SHOWED HIM THIS DIAGRAM, AND HE SAID, THAT IS A VIOLATION OF OUR RULES.

I PUT IT IN BIG TYPE ON YOUR THING. NO PIPE MAY BE PLACED CLOSER THAN 25FT FROM THE CENTER LINE OF ANY TRACK. THIS IS CLOSER.

OKAY? NOW, THIS DIAGRAM IS NOT MINE. THIS APPEARED IN AN APRIL VIDEO. APRIL 2024. AFTER THE DEIR CAME OUT, THE DEIR WAS SILENT ON ALL THIS.

[00:30:05]

BUT ANYWAY, THIS IS JUST ONE PROBLEM. OKAY? I'M AN ENGINEER, SO I TRACK MATHEMATICAL PROBLEMS. BUT I WAS EXPLAINING THIS TO A NEIGHBOR OF MINE WHO STILL THOUGHT THE ONE THING I SAID, NO, IT'S TWO. TWO MORE. AND HE SAID, WHAT? I SAID YES.

HE SAID, WELL, THAT SUCKS. THERE'S NO ROOM AND THAT'LL REALLY TANK THE PROPERTY VALUES, BUT IT ALSO TANKS THE QUALITY OF LIFE.

AND THAT'S ACTUALLY EVEN MORE IMPORTANT. SO THIS I'M SURE YOU ALL UNDERSTAND THIS, BUT I DON'T KNOW ABOUT EVERYBODY ONLINE.

OKAY? THANK YOU. YOU SAID YOU EMAILED THIS TO US? YEAH. IT'S A BLUE FOLDER ITEM. JUST TODAY? YES.

OKAY I HAVEN'T BEEN ON MY COMPUTER THAT MUCH, SO THANK YOU.

DID ANYBODY SEE IT? THANK YOU OKAY LAST CARD I HAVE IS NIKKI NEGRETE-MITCHELL.

GOOD EVENING EVERYBODY. NIKKI NEGRETE-MITCHELL, DISTRICT 3.

IT'S BEEN A WHILE. IT'S GOOD TO SEE YOU. I WANT TO THANK COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI FOR THE REPORT.

AND IT'S NO SURPRISE THAT THEY REALIZED THE COST ON TRYING TO MAKE THE RIGHT OF WAY WORK IS WAY BEYOND WHAT THEY ANTICIPATED. AND WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO TELL THEM ALL ALONG, YOU KNOW, BUT SO I JUST WANTED TO COME AND JUST KIND OF BRING THE CONVERSATION BACK AND REITERATE SOME THREE MAJOR POINTS.

THE FIRST ONE IS ABOUT THE FUEL. THAT'S A FUEL CORRIDOR.

THAT THAT CORRIDOR IN THE RIGHT OF WAY IS ONLY USED FOR FUEL.

IT'S ALL HIGHLY PRESSURIZED, SEVEN PIPELINES RIGHT BEHIND MY HOUSE.

AND THESE FREIGHT TANKERS THAT SOMETIMES TOTAL UP TO 42 TANKERS OF THIS HIGHLY PRESSURIZED GAS.

SO I'M AT MY BLOCK PARTY A COUPLE WEEKS AGO AND I MEET A NEIGHBOR I'VE NEVER MET, AND HE IS A REFINERY WORKER.

TORRANCE REFINERY. AND HE WAS JUST DYING TO TELL ME ABOUT HIS CONCERNS.

AND I COULD SEE THE THE EMOTION AS HE'S TALKING TO ME ABOUT IT.

YOU CAN JUST TELL, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE ARE KIND OF, YOU KNOW, GET KIND OF SHAKY.

BUT THE RISK. HE'S HAVE YOU HEARD ABOUT THIS EXPLOSION OVER HERE? AND TEXARKANA HE SAID I, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NO WAY THEY SHOULD DO THE METRO.

YOU KNOW, THAT'S THAT'S TOTALLY INCOMPATIBLE.

COMPLETELY INCOMPATIBLE THAT THEY MIX COMMUTER RAILS INTO A FUEL CORRIDOR.

SO THAT'S ONE PROBLEM. BUT THE OTHER PROBLEM, ACCORDING TO HIM, IS JUST THE RISK AS IT IS NOW, YOU KNOW, WITH JUST THE TANKERS GOING THROUGH AND THE PIPELINES.

SO, YOU KNOW, HOPEFULLY SOMEBODY CAN LOOK AT THAT IN THE FUTURE.

SO THERE WAS A NEW SINKHOLE IN LAWNDALE AND THAT'S RELEVANT TO OUR UNSTABLE SOILS ARGUMENTS.

AND IT WAS UNDER THE STREET. METRO SAYS THEY CAN HAUL FOUR AND A HALF MILES OF BAD SOIL AND REPLACE IT WITH THEIR GOOD SOIL.

THEY CAN, BUT THEY CAN'T DIG UNDER OUR HOMES, AND THEY CAN'T DIG UNDER CITY INFRASTRUCTURE.

THEY CAN'T DIG UNDER THE ASPHALT ON THE ROADS, YOU KNOW, TO REPLACE THAT SOIL.

SO THAT IS, YOU KNOW, BAND-AID DOESN'T FLY. THE OTHER SERIOUS CONCERN HAS TO DO WITH HOLLY'S ARGUMENTS ABOUT WITH, YOU KNOW, CONTRACTORS OVER THERE HAVE STATED THAT THERE'S NOT ENOUGH ROOM WHICH POINTS TO PROPERTY ACQUISITIONS.

METRO STATES THEY DON'T ANTICIPATE TAKING HOMES, BUT THAT DOESN'T SPECIFY PARTIAL YARDS OR, YOU KNOW, THAT SORT OF THING. EITHER DRIVEWAYS AND I'M RUNNING OUT OF TIME.

BUT I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR SUPPORT.

IT'S GOOD TO SEE YOU AGAIN AND THANK YOU. OKAY THANK YOU.

ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE WISH TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS? GOOD EVENING. GEORGETTE GANTNER DISTRICT 2. IN THE LAST MONTH OR SO, I'VE COME ACROSS A COUPLE OF INTERESTING ARTICLES.

ONE OF THEM REFERS TO ANTELOPE VALLEY RESIDENTS ARE ENGAGED IN LEGAL BATTLE AGAINST MASSIVE ILLEGAL DUMPING.

AND ONE OF THE COMPANIES NAMED IN THAT IS ATHENS DOING BUSINESS.

OR IT'S ENTERPRISE DOING BUSINESS AS ATHENS. AND THEN THERE'S NAMES THAT FOLLOW.

I DIDN'T MAKE COPIES FOR EVERYONE, BUT IF I CAN GET A MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILE, I'D LIKE TO SUBMIT THIS TO YOU.

AND THE SECOND ONE IS FROM JULY. IT'S JUST IT'S A REALLY GOOD STATISTICAL ARTICLE ABOUT CANNABIS, AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S FROM THE DAILY BREEZE. YOU GUYS MAY HAVE READ ALL OF THESE, BUT IF NOT, IT'S HELPFUL, I THINK SO. COULD I SUBMIT? MOVE TO RECEIVE AND FILE.

SECOND. OKAY MOTION A SECOND. ALL FOR? AYE. OKAY THANK YOU.

[00:35:02]

SOMEONE CHANGED THE SIGN ON THAT STREET. WHOEVER DID IT, THANK YOU.

BECAUSE NOW THEY'RE SWEEPING THE STREETS THE WAY THEY SHOULD, AND IT'S ON BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET.

AND THEY WERE INTELLIGENT ABOUT IT BECAUSE THE STREETS WERE BEING HOURS BETWEEN 7:00 AND 08:00.

SO IT'S LESS TRAFFIC WITH JOE'S, SO MAYBE IT DOESN'T IMPEDE THEIR BUSINESS.

BUT GOOD JOB I APPRECIATE IT THANK YOU. THANK THE CITY MANAGER AND THE POLICE CHIEF.

GOOD JOB [LAUGHTER]. WAS IT BECAUSE OF ME OR JUST OVERALL COMPLAINTS? WHO KNOWS? THANK YOU [APPLAUSE] GOOD JOB [LAUGHTER]. OKAY.

ANYONE ELSE WISH TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS? ANYONE ONLINE? YES I HAVE WARREN HSU, GO AHEAD.

YEP. OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL APPRECIATE THE TIME.

MY NAME IS WARREN HSU DISTRICT 5. HAD A COUPLE OF THINGS I WANTED TO ADDRESS.

I'VE SPOKEN WITH COUNCILMAN BEHRENDT ABOUT ONE OF THESE BEFORE, BUT I HAVE A COUPLE THINGS TO ADD ON TOP OF THAT.

THE FIRST IS AROUND CONCERNS FOR TRAFFIC AROUND VAIL AND PLANT.

FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO KNOW THE AREA THAT'S RIGHT WHERE LINCOLN ELEMENTARY IS AND THAT'S WHERE THE KINDERGARTEN LITTLE CORNER IS ESPECIALLY DURING SCHOOL DROP OFF AND PICKUP HOURS. THE TRAFFIC THERE IS PRETTY SIGNIFICANT.

AND A LOT OF A LOT OF FAMILIES TRY TO CROSS THERE.

AND SPECIFICALLY ON VAILLANT PLANT YOU KNOW, I'D REALLY LIKE TO SEE EITHER A CROSSWALK OR CROSSING GUARDS A SIGN THERE BECAUSE JUST SINCE THIS SCHOOL YEAR HAS STARTED. SO WE'RE ABOUT ABOUT A FEW WEEKS IN WE'VE SEEN A FEW, A HANDFUL OF NEAR MISSES FROM CARS HITTING KIDS.

YOU KNOW, EVEN WITH PARENTS CROSSING WITH KIDS AND HOLDING KIDS HANDS. KIDS ARE RUNNING AHEAD AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF.

AND I'VE SEEN A PRETTY GOOD HANDFUL OF NEAR NEAR ACCIDENTS THERE.

THIS ONE IS ONE THAT COUNCILMAN BEHRENDT HEARD FROM ME BEFORE WHICH IS THE TRAFFIC ON ROBINSON.

AND I UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S A IT'S AN EMERGENCY VEHICLE THRUWAY.

BUT I THINK, YOU KNOW, MY REQUEST TO YOU GUYS IS THAT WE NEED TO REEVALUATE THAT AND HOW THAT WORKS.

BECAUSE THE TRAFFIC ON ROBINSON IS PRETTY RIDICULOUS AT THIS POINT.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THERE WAS A STUDY DONE BEFORE WITH THE SPEED. WITH THE SPEED RADAR THERE.

BUT PEOPLE ARE STILL SPEEDING LIKE CRAZY. PEOPLE ARE RUNNING STOP SIGNS.

YOU KNOW, E-BIKERS ARE GOING REAL FAST WITHOUT STOPPING AT ALL.

THERE ARE QUITE A FEW SMALL KIDS, INCLUDING MINE ON ROBINSON.

AND WE'VE HAD NEAR ACCIDENTS WITH E-BIKES AND WITH CARS WHO ARE JUST SORT OF DRIVING THROUGH.

SO WE'D REALLY LIKE TO SEE AND HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT HOW DO WE POTENTIALLY REEVALUATE THAT AS A THROUGH STREET, BECAUSE THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC THAT GOES THROUGH WHAT IS A RESIDENTIAL AREA WITH LITTLE KIDS WALKING ON SIDEWALKS IS TREMENDOUSLY DANGEROUS.

THE LAST ONE IS THE SAME INTERSECTION ON ROBINSON AND GREEN, WHERE YOU GO FROM AVIATION HEADING TOWARDS INGLEWOOD.

THAT ONE SECTION IS A ONE WAY. BUT WHAT WE'VE BEEN SEEING A LOT MORE IS PEOPLE GOING THE WRONG WAY DOWN THERE.

SO PEOPLE ARE DRIVING FROM AVIATION WAY OR AVIATION COMING DOWN ROBINSON.

WHEN IT'S THE WRONG WAY. AND THEN JUST USING THAT AND SORT OF THERE'S ALSO A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF DANGER INVOLVED IN THAT AS WELL THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? YES THE NEXT PERSON IS KYLE JOHNSON.

GO AHEAD. KYLE DID YOU SAY? SORRY? NO GO AHEAD KYLE OH, SORRY. HELLO, MY NAME IS KYLE JOHNSON AND I'M A MEMBER OF DISTRICT 1.

I'M AN AVID TRANSIT USER AND SUPPORT OF THE RIGHT OF WAY OR ROW OPTION.

I BELIEVE I'M IN SUPPORT OF IT BECAUSE IT'S FASTER, CHEAPER, AND MORE POPULAR.

I WOULD LOVE TO BE CLOSER TO PUBLIC TRANSIT. SIMPLY PUT, THE ROW OPTION, ACCORDING TO METRO'S OWN SCHEDULES IS FASTER THAN ANY OTHER OPTION BY MANY YEARS, AND I WOULD LOVE TO SEE TRANSIT BUILT AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE IN L.A.

COUNTY. THE ROW OPTION IS ALSO THE CHEAPEST OF THE OPTIONS.

AS COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI SAID, WHILE THERE IS A $1 BILLION OVERRUN ON THE ROW OPTION THE HAWTHORNE OPTION IS EVEN MORE EXPENSIVE.

AND WITH CALTRANS OFFERING A POTENTIAL VETO TWO THIRDS OF THE WAY THROUGH THE PROJECT, THERE'S NO GUARANTEE THE HAWTHORNE OPTION WOULD EVEN GET DONE.

IN ADDITION, THE ROW OPTION WOULD ALREADY CONNECT TO THE EXISTING REDONDO BEACH PUBLIC TRANSIT CENTER.

THAT WE SPENT A LOT OF MONEY AND TIME BUILDING.

I ALSO WORK ON WORK ON THE C LINE AND WOULD LOVE TO BE ABLE TO COMMUNICATE.

EXCUSE ME. COMMUTE TO WORK ON IT. THE ROW OPTION PROJECTS $1.5 MILLION NEW RIDERS.

IN THE WHEN IT'S BUILT THE ROW OPTION IS ALSO MORE POPULAR AMONG SOUTH BAY RESIDENTS BY METRO'S OWN STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT SURVEY AND INVOLVES

[00:40:03]

WHILE THERE MIGHT BE SOME EMINENT DOMAIN, THERE WOULD BE SIGNIFICANTLY LESS, MAKING THE ROW OPTION SIGNIFICANTLY MORE POPULAR.

I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE CITY COUNCIL TO WRITE A LETTER TO METRO IN FAVOR OF THE ROW OPTION.

AND FAILING THAT, TO NOT TAKE A POSITION ON THE PREFERRED ROUTE.

BECAUSE I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT CONSENSUS AMONG REDONDO BEACH RESIDENTS AS TO WHAT IS THE MOST POPULAR OPTION.

THANK YOU. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? THAT CONCLUDES OUR COMMENTS.

OKAY. ANY ECOMMENTS? NO? NONE. OKAY THANK YOU. OKAY WE HAVE NO PUBLIC HEARINGS, SO WE WILL NOT HAVE EX PARTE COMMUNICATION, NO ITEMS CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS AGENDAS. SO WE WILL NOW SKIP DOWN TO N ITEM N.1 THIS REGARDS PARKING REGULATIONS FOR COMMERCIAL

[N. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION PRIOR TO ACTION]

YEAH THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL TONIGHT, I'M JOINED BY MY PLANNING MANAGER, SEAN SCULLY. AND JUST TO PROVIDE SOME BACKGROUND ON THIS ITEM, IN 2020, THE CITY ADOPTED THE ARTESIAN AVIATION AREA CORRIDOR PLAN, ALSO REFERRED TO AS THE AACAP AND THE INTENT OF THE PLAN IS TO DEVELOP STRATEGIES AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT WILL LOOK TO REVITALIZE THE CORRIDOR. AS PART OF THAT, THE CITY WENT AHEAD AND REDUCED THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTAIN PREFERRED USES THAT INCLUDED RESTAURANTS AND OFFICE USES. IT ALSO MADE SOME MINOR CHANGES TO THE FLOOR AREA RATIO ALONG THE AACAP.

ON AUGUST 8TH STAFF PRESENTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL ON THE UPDATE TO THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT, WITH A SPECIFIC FOCUS ON THE AACAP AREA. AND THAT'S BECAUSE THERE ARE VARIOUS POLICIES, INCLUDING THE FLOOR AREA RATIO, THAT ARE IN THE LAND USE ELEMENT THAT AFFECT THE AACAP.

SO THAT'S WHY WE WE FOCUSED ON THAT AS PART OF THE LAND USE ELEMENT.

AT THAT MEETING, THE CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERED VARIOUS OPTIONS FOR THE AACAP.

ONE IS TO INCREASE THE FAR FROM 0.6 TO 1.5 ALONG THE CORRIDOR.

THE OTHER IS A REDUCTION OR ELIMINATION OF PARKING REQUIREMENTS.

THE CITY COUNCIL ALSO CONSIDERED ELIMINATING THE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS, WHICH IS A BARRIER TO MAXIMIZING FAR ON THE PROPERTY, AND THEN ALSO OTHER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SUCH AS ROOFTOP DINING AND SIGNAGE, WHICH ARE SET TO GO TO THE CITY COUNCIL AT A LATER DATE.

SO THESE WERE ALL TOPICS OF DISCUSSION REGARDING THE AACAP.

AND AS PART OF THE PRESENTATION, STAFF DEMONSTRATED SOME OF THE CHALLENGES WITH ACHIEVING A 1.5 FAR OR EVEN THE CURRENT 0.6 FAR.

WHILE ALSO MEETING THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS. THE CITY CODE PARKING REQUIREMENTS.

SO IN RESPONSE TO THAT, THE CITY COUNCIL DECIDED IN CONCEPT TO ELIMINATE THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS ALONG THE AACAP AND DIRECTED STAFF TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE THAT WOULD EFFECTUATE THAT. SO TONIGHT WE'RE BACK BEFORE THE COUNCIL.

WE'RE SEEKING ADDITIONAL INPUT BEFORE WE GO FORWARD WITH THIS AND TAKE IT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

IT'S SCHEDULED FOR NEXT WEEK TO BE HEARD BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

WITH THAT, I DO WANT TO I JUST WANTED TO SHARE TWO EXAMPLES OF THE DIAGRAMS THAT WERE PRESENTED AT THE LAST MEETING, DEMONSTRATING THE CHALLENGES OF PARKING. THIS ONE SHOWS THE .64 FAR.

WHICH IS AROUND WHAT'S ALLOWED RIGHT NOW. AND IT DEMONSTRATES THAT EVEN AT THE CURRENT FLOOR AREA RATIOS, IF SOMEONE WERE TO BUILD A NEW BUILDING THEY WOULD NEED TO HAVE TANDEM VALET PARKING IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE USE. THE 1.5 FAR WAS DEMONSTRATED ON A 19,500 SQUARE FOOT LOT.

AND WHAT'S DEMONSTRATED BY THIS IS YOU WOULD NEED APPROXIMATELY 98 TO 117 PARKING SPACES THAT WOULD REQUIRE THREE LEVELS OF SUBTERRANEAN PARKING TO PROVIDE THAT. THAT'S THE ONLY WAY YOU COULD ACHIEVE THE 1.5 FAR.

SO THIS WAS SOME OF THE BASIS FOR THE CITY COUNCIL'S DECISION TO ELIMINATE THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS.

THE COUNCIL ALSO DISCUSSED A PARKING STUDY THAT WAS PREPARED AS PART OF THE AACAP PLAN WHICH IDENTIFIED THAT THERE'S A SURPLUS OF PARKING ALONG THE AACAP. IT WAS THE STUDY WAS PERFORMED IN 2019.

[00:45:04]

AND IT'S TYPICALLY AT 68% FOR PUBLIC SPACES IS WHAT THEY FOUND AND 50% FOR PRIVATE.

SO THAT LEAVES ABOUT A 1300, GIVE OR TAKE PARKING SURPLUS ON ANY GIVEN DAY.

AND I DO WANT TO REMIND THE COUNCIL THE REASON THE OVERALL INTENT, THE REASON THE CITY IS LOOKING TO INCREASE THE FAR IS A PART OF THE AACAP. IT IDENTIFIED SOME OF THE CHALLENGES WITH REDEVELOPING THESE PROPERTIES, AND ONE IS THE LIMITED FLOOR AREA RATIOS.

THERE'S REALLY NOT MUCH OF AN INCENTIVE FOR SOMEBODY TO COME IN AND BUILD A NEW STRUCTURE, BECAUSE THE STRUCTURE WOULD NEED TO BE SMALL.

FURTHERMORE, THEY LIKELY ARE NON-CONFORMING WITH REGARD TO PARKING NOW, AND IF THEY WERE TO DEMO THE BUILDING AND BUILD SOMETHING NEW, THEY WOULD HAVE TO BRING IT INTO COMPLIANCE. AND AS THE IMAGES DISPLAYED, THAT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO ACHIEVE.

SO THAT'S REALLY THE INTENT BEHIND INCREASING THE FAR.

REDUCING THE PARKING IS TO PROMOTE REVITALIZATION AND REDEVELOPMENT OF THE CORRIDOR.

SO STAFF HAS PREPARED A DRAFT ORDINANCE. I'M JUST GOING TO SUMMARIZE REAL QUICKLY WHAT IT INCLUDES.

IT WORKED OFF OF A ORDINANCE THAT WAS PREPARED IN RESPONSE TO THE AACAP WHERE WE REDUCED PARKING STANDARDS FOR PREFERRED USES.

SO IT'S WORKING OFF EXISTING CODE SECTIONS. IT DOES ELIMINATE PARKING REQUIREMENTS WITHIN THE AACAP FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL USES.

IT REQUIRES DESIGN REVIEW FOR ANY OVERLAP PARKING AGREEMENTS BETWEEN ADJOINING PROPERTIES AND THEN ALSO FOR PARKING WHERE THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSING VALET TANDEM AND MECHANICAL LIFTS.

AND THE PURPOSE BEING IS THAT IF THEY IT WOULD GIVE THE CITY SOME OVERSIGHT OF THESE FEATURES LIKE A CAR LIFT OR IF THEY'RE PROPOSING TO SHARE PARKING BETWEEN PROPERTIES, HOW THAT'S GOING TO BE MANAGED AND COORDINATED.

SO THAT'S WHY THE ORDINANCE INCLUDES THAT REQUIREMENT.

AND IT ALSO INCLUDES REFERENCES, THE DESIGN STANDARDS, SHOULD THE DEVELOPER CHOOSE TO BUILD A PARKING GARAGE OR LOT, WHICH WAS PROBABLY WOULD BE LIKELY FOR SOME OF THESE PROJECTS.

BUT THE CONCEPT OF THIS IS IT WOULD BE DETERMINED MORE BY THE MARKET THAN BY CITY CODE AS TO WHAT EXTENT THE PARKING WOULD BE PROVIDED BY THE SITE.

SO THOSE ARE REALLY THE HIGHLIGHTS OF THE ORDINANCE.

IT'S A FAIRLY LIMITED TEXT CHANGE. IT'S BEING PRESENTED.

I DO WANT TO NOTE BECAUSE THIS CAME UP AS A QUESTION.

THERE'S A REFERENCE IN THE ORDINANCE TO FAST FOOD AND DRIVE-THROUGH RESTAURANTS, AND THERE'S SOME LANGUAGE THAT WAS IN THE CODE BASED ON THE AACAP THAT REDUCED PARKING FOR PREFERRED USES, AND IT DID REDUCE IT FOR RESTAURANTS.

HOWEVER, THERE WAS A CARVE OUT FOR FAST FOOD RESTAURANTS AND DRIVE-THROUGH THAT.

THOSE WOULD NOT BE PROVIDED THE SAME PARKING BENEFITS AS A MORE STANDARD RESTAURANT.

SO WORKING WITH THE EXISTING CODE THAT'S STILL IN THERE STAFF HAD CARRIED THAT THROUGH, AT LEAST IN THE DRAFT ORDINANCE WHERE THE THESE TYPES OF RESTAURANTS WOULD NOT RECEIVE THE PARKING BENEFIT.

THE OUTRIGHT PARKING WAIVER WITH THIS ORDINANCE.

HOWEVER, THE COUNCIL MAY CONSIDER JUST HAVING A BLANKET WAIVER OF PARKING FOR ALL COMMERCIAL USES, BUT I JUST WANTED TO GIVE THE BACKGROUND ON THAT AND WHY IT'S SHOWN THAT WAY IN THE DRAFT ORDINANCE.

I ALSO WANTED TO NOTE THERE'S SOME LANGUAGE IN THE CODE, AND REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE CITY COUNCIL DECIDES ON PARKING FOR FAST FOOD AND DRIVE-THROUGH THAT STATES THAT FAST FOOD AND DRIVE-THROUGH IS NOT ALLOWED ON ARTESIA AND AVIATION.

THIS ACTUALLY CONFLICTS WITH OTHER SECTIONS OF THE CODE.

THE PARTICULARLY THE LAND USE TABLES AND THE ZONING DISTRICT THAT STATE THAT THESE USES ARE ALLOWED.

SO THERE'S A CONFLICT THERE. IT WOULDN'T THE PROVISIONS ARE PRESENTED AS PART OF THIS THAT INCLUDE THAT A LANGUAGE THAT DISALLOWS THAT'S PART OF THE PARKING SECTION OF THE CODE. SO THE POINT BEING IS THAT DOES NEED TO BE CLEANED UP.

AND IF IT ISN'T ALLOWED USE WE WOULD RECOMMEND STRIKING THAT PROHIBITION.

IT'S IN THE PARKING SECTION OF THE CODE UNLESS THE COUNCIL DIRECT STAFF TO PROHIBIT THESE USES OUTRIGHT.

BUT THAT WOULD BE A LARGER CODE AMENDMENT. SO I JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT.

IS IT IS IT A FAST FOOD DRIVE-THROUGH THAT'S PROHIBITED OR ANY DRIVE-THROUGH THAT'S PROHIBITED? SO IT'S IT THE CODE JUST SAYS FAST FOOD OR DRIVE-THROUGH IT DOESN'T REALLY SPECIFY.

OKAY. BUT THE COFFEE BEAN THAT WAS THAT CAME INTO DEVELOPMENT PROBABLY IN THE LAST FOUR YEARS HAS A DRIVE-THROUGH AND THAT WAS ALLOWED.

[00:50:05]

YEAH IF WE RECEIVED AN APPLICATION FOR A DRIVE-THROUGH OR FAST FOOD, WE WOULD NOT.

WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT THE TWO CODE SECTIONS AND GO WITH THE SECTION THE CHAPTER THAT ADDRESSES ALLOWED LAND USES.

THIS IS KIND OF A JUST AN ISOLATED SENTENCE IN THE PARKING SECTION OF THE CODE, WHICH REALLY DOESN'T APPLY LAND USE.

OKAY GOT IT THANK YOU I HAVE SOME. ARE YOU CONCLUDED? ALMOST. I HAVE ONE MORE SLIDE ON THIS SLIDE.

YEAH VERY QUICK. SO THIS WOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO REMOVE THAT PROHIBITION ON THE, QUOTE, FAST FOOD AND DRIVE-THROUGH. CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT YES.

AND WE'D HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY IF THE COUNCIL DECIDED TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THIS LIFT ON PARKING RESTRICTIONS APPLIES TO ALL NON-RESIDENTIAL USES? THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THANK YOU. AND THAT'S THE POLICY DIRECTION THAT WE ARE SEEKING FROM COUNCIL ON THIS.

SINCE IT WAS IT WAS CONSIDERED WITH THE PREVIOUS ADOPTION OF THIS CODE SECTION ON PARKING WITHIN THE AACAP.

AND THEN ALSO OTHER THINGS TO CONSIDER FOR THE ORDINANCE.

AS THIS MOVES FORWARD THERE COULD BE A BUILT IN REQUIREMENT THAT'S PERIODICALLY REVIEWED, POSSIBLY ANNUALLY BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND OR PLANNING COMMISSION, WE COULD EVALUATE ITS EFFECTIVENESS IN TERMS OF PROJECTS THAT ARE COMING THROUGH IN TERMS OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS THAT HAVE BEEN OBSERVED.

SO THERE COULD BE A SCHEDULED REVIEW AND CHECK IN.

THERE COULD ALSO BE A TERMINATION PROVISION BASED ON OBJECTIVE IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE ORDINANCE.

IF WE FIND THAT IT'S BEING SUCCESSFUL AND WE'RE GETTING AN ABUNDANCE OF PROJECTS, HOWEVER, THAT WE'RE GETTING SPILLOVER TRAFFIC IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS.

THE COUNCIL COULD REPEAL THE ORDINANCE. THEY COULD MODIFY IT.

YOU COULD EITHER DO THAT THROUGH YOUR REVIEW OR THERE COULD BE LIKE A SET SUNSET CLAUSE UNLESS THE COUNCIL CONTINUES IT.

SO THAT'S SOMETHING TO CONSIDER. IT'S JUST A WAY OF CHECKING BACK IN ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THIS AND WHETHER THERE'S ANY ISSUES THAT ARISE.

AND ALSO, THERE COULD BE A REQUIREMENT THAT THE ORDINANCE INCLUDE A DISCRETIONARY ENTITLEMENT ASSOCIATED WITH WAIVING PARKING THAT COULD BE A CUP CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT OR ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW.

I THINK THE ONE CHALLENGING OF THE CHALLENGING ASPECT OF THIS IS IT WOULD BE IT MAY BE CHALLENGING TO MEET THE CRITERIA TO MAKE THE FINDINGS THAT A PROJECT THAT ALL THE PARKING CAN BE WAIVED AT.

IT'S LESS OF A BUY WRITE PROCESS. BUT WE DID WANT TO PRESENT THIS TO THE COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION OF A WAY OF CHECKING IN ON THIS AND HAVING MORE OVERSIGHT OVER THE PARKING SITUATION ALONG THE AACAP.

AND WITH THAT, THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO PROVIDE DIRECTION TO STAFF.

AND THAT CONCLUDES THE PRESENTATION. I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS, AS IS SEAN.

OKAY THANK YOU AND I APPRECIATE YOU SENDING OUT THAT PARKING STUDY.

WHEN I LOOKED AT THAT PARKING STUDY, I THINK IT WAS DATED 2018.

CORRECT? I THOUGHT I HAD A DATE AT 2019, BUT I COULDN'T.

YEAH. BUT IT'S PRE-COVID? OKAY. YEAH, IT WAS CONDUCTED 2018. CORRECT. AND IT DID NOT INCLUDE FRIDAY OR SATURDAY NIGHTS, WHICH SURPRISED ME. YEAH IT WAS IT WAS A WEEKDAY AND SATURDAY MIDDAY.

SATURDAY MIDDAY CORRECT. AND BUT THERE WERE SECTIONS THAT SHOWED RED WHICH IS OVER 90% OR OVER.

A COUPLE, COUPLE OF AREAS ON SITE, VERY LIMITED ON SITE.

IT WOULD ONLY IN MOST PLACES I GO, FRIDAY AND SATURDAY NIGHTS ARE PEAK PEAK USAGES.

THAT'S NOT ARTESIA BOULEVARD. IS THAT TRUE? YEAH YOU THINK MIDDAY ON A WEEKDAY IS A IS PEAK? THAT'S ARTESIA UNFORTUNATELY, WE DON'T HAVE A PEAK DAY [LAUGHTER].

TOUCHE. AND YOU SAID SO THIS WOULD APPLY TO NON-RESIDENTIAL.

WHAT IF MIXED USE COMES UP? WELL FOR MIXED USE IT WOULD THERE WOULD BE A WAIVER OF PARKING FOR THE COMMERCIAL. BUT THERE WOULD BE A REQUIREMENT FOR THE RESIDENTIAL UNITS.

HOWEVER MIXED USE IS NOT CURRENTLY ALLOWED WITHIN THE AACAP, AT LEAST NOT PER THE NEW THE UPDATED LAND USE ELEMENT, WHICH IS SET FOR ADOPTION BY THE COUNCIL IN THE COMING MONTHS.

OKAY I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED BASED ON WHAT WE SEE IN OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY, THAT IF WE WAIVE THIS AND WE

[00:55:08]

I THINK WE WOULD WELCOME THAT PROBLEM. COMPARED TO WHAT WE HAVE TODAY AND OUR HOPE WOULD BE THAT WE WOULD ADDRESS THOSE IMPACTS WHEN THEY OCCUR. AND I THINK THAT'S PART OF THE REASON.

AND ONE THING TO NOTE AS THING I WANT TO MAKE SURE COUNCIL UNDERSTANDS. I THINK WE TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THIS IN AUGUST WHEN WE FIRST BROUGHT IT UP. WE ALWAYS HAVE THE ABILITY TO PIVOT. WE CAN COME BACK WITH ORDINANCE CHANGES AS WE SEE IMPACTS ON THE GROUND WHETHER WE EMBED IT IN THE ORDINANCE LANGUAGE OR NOT.

WE COULD COME BACK ADMINISTRATIVELY WITH PERIODIC REVIEWS.

WE COULD PROVIDE YOU AN UPDATE, SAY A YEAR FOLLOWING IMPLEMENTATION, LET YOU KNOW WHAT'S OCCURRING ON ARTESIA AS A RESULT OF THESE CHANGES.

WE COULD YOU KNOW, PROVIDE EVEN MORE PERIODIC METRICS ASSOCIATED WITH PROJECTS AS THEY COME FORWARD.

SO WE WOULD WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO DO THAT. ULTIMATELY, IF THE COUNCIL DOES CHOOSE TO PROCEED AND YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS HERE IS, I THINK THE COUNCIL NOTED LAST TIME WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT TO STIMULATE INVESTMENT IN THE IN THE CORRIDOR.

AND I THINK WE WANT TO GIVE THE PRIVATE SECTOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE AS SUCCESSFUL AS THEY CAN.

AND GIVEN THAT WE HAVE THE SURPLUS THAT'S BEEN IDENTIFIED, AND I WOULD ARGUE THAT THE 2019 THAT DECEMBER OF 2018, 2019 PERIOD IS A PRETTY BUSY TIME IN OUR RETAIL HISTORY.

THAT WAS ONE OF OUR PEAK SALES TAX YEARS. THE 18-19 FISCAL YEAR IS ON A ON A ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION, PROBABLY OUR SINGLE LARGEST SALES TAX GENERATING YEAR.

SO BUSY FROM A COMMERCE PERSPECTIVE, PRE-COVID FOR US.

SO I DO THINK IT'S PROBABLY A FAIR INDICATION IT'S A LITTLE LONG IN THE TOOTH, TO YOUR POINT.

I MEAN, THINGS HAVE CHANGED IN THE LAST SIX YEARS, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S A QUIET YEAR. YOU KNOW, BY COMPARISON BE MORE CONCERNED. IF IT WAS, IT WOULD HAVE GONE DOWN POST-COVID. IT'S PROBABLY GOTTEN BETTER SINCE THEN.

RIGHT? IN TERMS OF IMPACTS. YEAH IF IT WERE 2020, I'D HAVE MORE CONCERNS.

I THINK ABOUT THE TIMING. BUT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS.

THESE ARE NOT THESE ARE NOT CHARTER EMBEDDED REQUIREMENTS MUNI CODE ADJUSTMENTS CAN HAPPEN FAIRLY EASILY FOR US IF WE SEE IMPACTS.

SO THAT'S JUST KEEP THAT IN MIND AS YOU DELIBERATE ON THIS.

SO TO USE COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT'S TERM. WE'RE TRYING TO DO SOMETHING BOLD HERE.

SO THAT WAS MY TERM. WAS THAT YOUR TERM? WELL I HEARD MULTIPLE PEOPLE CREDIT TO YOU ALL. AND I DON'T DISAGREE WITH THAT.

I DO THINK IT'S KIND OF OF ALL THE PLACES TO NOT REQUIRE PARKING, IT SEEMS LIKE A DRIVE-THROUGH IS A GOOD PLACE NOT TO REQUIRE PARKING.

SO. AND WE SHOULD WE SHOULD ALIGN THE ORDINANCES SO THAT THEY'RE CONGRUENT WITH ONE ANOTHER AND THERE IS NO CONFLICT.

IF WE'RE GOING TO DO SOMETHING BOLD, I DON'T THINK DISCRETIONARY CUP/ADR IS IS WARRANTED OR DESIRED.

THAT'S NOT AS BOLD, STILL INCLUDES THE BUREAUCRACY, AND I DON'T PERSONALLY, I DON'T THINK WE NEED A SUNSET CLAUSE.

I THINK IF IT'S NOT WORKING, WE'LL ALL HEAR ABOUT IT BEFORE ANY STATS COME THROUGH SO I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT. AND THEN WE CAN WE CAN AGENDIZE IT THROUGH REFERRALS TO STAFF.

BUT THAT'S JUST MY THOUGHTS. COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI.

SURE WELL, THANKS, MAYOR. SO IT'S IMPORTANT TO KEEP IN MIND THAT BEFORE THIS, WE TRIED SOMETHING ELSE.

WE TRIED, DID A WHOLE STUDY AND TRIED TO COME UP WITH A WHOLE FLEXIBLE SCHEME WHERE PEOPLE COULD USE THE PARKING PROVIDED BY ANOTHER BUSINESS THAT WAS OPERATING DURING DIFFERENT HOURS AND SO ON AND SO FORTH, AND RELAXED PARKING REQUIREMENTS.

THAT WAY IT DIDN'T WORK. WE DON'T HAVE ANY NEW BUSINESSES AS A RESULT OF THE PARKING CHANGES.

SO IT IS TIME FOR SOMETHING BOLD AND RADICAL.

I DON'T SEE IN HERE, DIRECTOR WIENER. THE PROHIBITION ON PARKING FRONTING ARTESIA BOULEVARD, WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT I THOUGHT WE DISCUSSED AND HAD VOTED TO INCLUDE IN THERE, BORROWED FROM PASADENA.

WE HAD PUT IN A REQUIREMENT OR A PROHIBITION ON PARKING FRONTING ARTESIA BOULEVARD, UNLESS IT'S A CITY OWNED LOT.

I MAY I MAY HAVE MISSED THAT AT THE LAST MEETING, BUT IF THE COUNCIL WANTS TO DIRECT STAFF TO INCORPORATE THAT, WE CAN DO THAT BEFORE IT RETURNS AND BEFORE IT GOES TO PLANNING COMMISSION.

AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, DO YOU MEAN PRIVATE PARKING SHOULD BE IN THE REAR OF THE LOT? RIGHT

[01:00:01]

YEAH. THE NORTHERN BLOCK BETWEEN MACKAY AND SLAUSON.

IT'S A WHOLE MINI MALL OF ALL PARKING. AND BEHIND IT THE SUBWAY AND THE YANAGI KITCHEN AND SO ON AND SO FORTH SHOULD BE THE OTHER WAY AROUND, RIGHT? IF WE WANT TO CREATE A PEDESTRIAN NEIGHBORHOOD THE STORE SHOULD BE ON THE FRONT AND THE PARKING IN THE REAR.

I GUESS ONE QUESTION I WOULD HAVE IN THE SCENARIO, LIKE WE HAVE WITH GROCERY OUTLET, THOUGH, AS AN EXAMPLE, WHERE YOU HAVE A LARGE LOT I MEAN, WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF THOSE EXAMPLES, BUT WE DO HAVE PARKING IMMEDIATELY BEHIND SIDEWALK.

IN THAT SENSE. WE DO HAVE A LARGER LOT THAT WOULD ACCOMMODATE THAT.

THE BUSINESS IS OBVIOUSLY IN THE ON THE WESTERN SIDE OF THE PROPERTY SO.

IN THAT CIRCUMSTANCE IS BUILT. WE'RE NOT CHANGING THAT RIGHT? CORRECT, CORRECT THIS WOULD BE YEAH GOING TO TEAR THAT DOWN AND BUILD SOMETHING NEW A BOUTIQUE HOTEL, THEN THE PARKING IS EITHER GOING TO BE UNDERGROUND OR ON THE REAR SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.

RIGHT? IF WE HAD IF WE HAD, LET'S SAY, AN AMBITIOUS DEVELOPER THAT AGGREGATED 3 OR 4 LOTS AND WANTED TO COME UP WITH A WITH THE PROGRAM.

YOU KNOW, WE MAY WANT TO HAVE SOME FLEXIBILITY IN THAT STANDARD DEPENDING ON HOW THAT WOULD WORK.

I MEAN, IF IT'S IF IT'S TANDEM, MAYBE IN A SENSE WHERE IT'S NOT FRONTING, BUT YOU'VE GOT BUILDING AND YOU'VE GOT PARKING AND A DRIVE LINER.

I MEAN, I THOUGHT THAT'S WHAT THE WHOLE PART.

WHAT THE AACAP. SUBJECT TO YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS.

I'M WILLING TO TAKE INPUT, BUT I THOUGHT WHAT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE AACAP WAS, WAS MAKE IT WALKABLE, MAKE STORES FRONT TO THE SIDEWALKS, MAKE THE SIDEWALKS WIDER.

RIGHT. BUT IF YOU'RE WALKING BY PARKING LOTS, THAT'S NOT EXACTLY AN APPEALING PLACE RIGHT? AND YOU'RE NOT SEEING ANYTHING AT THAT. YEAH I DO RECALL THAT AS PART OF THE DISCUSSION AT THE LAST MEETING SO WE COULD INCORPORATE THAT.

I THINK IT MAY BE A GOOD IDEA TO HAVE SOME LEAVE SOME ROOM FOR FLEXIBILITY, SAY, ON CORNER SITES WHERE MAYBE IT'S CHALLENGING TO FULLY SCREEN IT.

BUT THAT'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING THAT WE COULD INCORPORATE. IT WOULD PROBABLY GO IN A SEPARATE SECTION THAT ADDRESSES THE PARKING LOT DESIGN GARAGE DESIGN, WHICH IS REFERENCED HERE. SO YEAH, WE CAN WE CAN ADD THAT.

ALL RIGHT THANKS AND I WOULD WANT IT TO APPLY THIS ROLLBACK TO APPLY TO BOTH ARTESIA AND AVIATION BOULEVARDS IN THE WHOLE AACAP REGION AND THAT'S IT THANKS. OKAY THANK YOU COUNCIL MEMBER WALLER.

THANK YOU. GOING TO THE QUESTION ABOUT DRIVE-THROUGHS AND ALL THAT.

I DON'T REMEMBER THE DISCUSSIONS AT GPAC IF WE TALKED ABOUT THAT OR NOT, BUT AT THIS POINT, WE'RE TRYING TO NOT DETER BUSINESSES. AND SO TO SAY ONE TYPE OF BUSINESS IS, IS DIFFERENT.

I'M HAPPY TO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE PERIODIC REVIEWS, BUT NOT PERIODIC REVIEWS OF, HERE HOW'S PARKING DOING? IT'S WHAT'S GOING ON WITH PARKING? HOW MANY NEW BUSINESSES DO WE HAVE? WHAT'S GOING ON WITH REVENUE? SORT OF A GENERAL SUCCESS OF THIS PLAN, BECAUSE IF TWO YEARS FROM NOW WE SAY, OH YEAH, THERE'S STILL NO PROBLEMS WITH PARKING, BUT WE HAVE NO NEW BUSINESSES AND REVENUES DOWN.

MAYBE WE NEED TO LIKE THROW, YOU KNOW, BE BOLD AND COME UP WITH ANOTHER IDEA SINCE THEN.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO I LIKE THE IDEA OF THE PERIODIC REVIEWS, BUT IT'S ALMOST MORE OF A WHAT'S GOING ON? HOW SUCCESSFUL ARE WE? AND WHAT MIGHT WE WANT TO CHANGE AS OPPOSED TO, HEY, LET'S FIX THIS.

BECAUSE AT SOME POINT, IF THIS IS WORKING, ONE OF THOSE REVIEWS WILL BE THE RESULT WILL SAY PARKING IS AT 80% 90%.

WE NEED TO START PUTTING A HALT ON THE THE ABILITY TO NOT HAVE ANY PARKING, SO I'M GOOD WITH THAT.

AND I DO RECALL COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI TALKING ABOUT THE ARTESIA FRONTING PARKING, AND I DEFINITELY AGREE WITH THAT.

WE WANT TO MAKE IT WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE CARS BEING WHAT PEOPLE WALK PAST.

IF YOU NEED THE FLEXIBILITY FOR CERTAIN. LOTS LARGER LOTS OR CORNERS OR SOMETHING.

MAYBE IT COULD BE A CUP. I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU WANT TO DO THAT.

I'LL LEAVE THAT UP TO YOU, BUT WHERE POSSIBLE, I WOULD LOVE TO MAKE IT SO THAT WHEN SOMEBODY WALKS DOWN OR DRIVES DOWN ARTESIA, THEY'RE NOT SEEING A PARKING LOT. THAT'S IT FOR ME.

THAT'S IT? YES. OKAY COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT.

THANK YOU, MAYOR AND THANKS TO STAFF FOR BRINGING THIS BACK AND PUTTING THIS IN PLACE FOR OUR CONSIDERATION.

ON THE ARTESIA FRONTAGE PARKING ISSUE. YOU KNOW, ONE POTENTIAL CONCERN ABOUT THAT IS SOMETIMES BUSINESSES ARE MORE SUCCESSFUL WHEN THE SHOP IS BEHIND AND THEY HAVE THE PARKING IN FRONT.

[01:05:05]

AND I'M NOT IN THE MARKET. I'M NOT AN INVESTOR DEVELOPER IN THE MARKET.

SO I WOULD I THINK COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI AND WALLER RAISE GOOD POINTS.

YET AT THIS STAGE, WHEN WE'RE PURSUING THE BOLD ACTION, I'D LIKE TO GIVE THE MARKET SOME FLEXIBILITY ON USING THEIR JUDGMENT, SO TO SPEAK, AS TO WHAT WOULD BE BEST TO BRING IN A BUSINESS THAT WOULD BE ATTRACTIVE TO RESIDENTS AND CUSTOMERS AND HELP TO REVITALIZE.

AND ALTHOUGH I REALLY LIKE THE CONCEPT OF DOING EVERYTHING WE CAN TO MAKE ARTESIA MORE WALKABLE, I LIVE NEAR THERE. OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS LIVE CLOSE BY.

THAT WOULD BE MY ONLY RELUCTANCE WOULD BE TO INCLUDE IN THIS INITIAL ROLLOUT OF AN ORDINANCE, THAT TYPE OF RESTRICTION, WHICH MAY BE PRETTY SIGNIFICANT AND PREVENT THIS FROM TAKING OFF IN THE FIRST PLACE.

THE ALTERNATIVE WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, TO COME BACK PART OF A PERIODIC REVIEW AND SEE, YOU KNOW, IF WE'RE SO FORTUNATE TO HAVE SOME DEVELOPMENT THERE THAT'S POSITIVE AND GO FROM THERE.

SO THAT WOULD BE MY ONLY CONCERN AND REQUEST ON THAT IS WE HOLD OFF ON THE, THAT PARTICULAR RESTRICTION AND KIND OF PREJUDGE WHAT THE MARKET MAY BE DOING. SO ANYWAY, THAT WAS IT.

COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI. ON COUNCIL MEMBER WALLER'S POINT ABOUT CHECKING ON THIS, SEE HOW IT'S DOING.

I THINK ONE THING WE DID THE LAST STRATEGIC PLAN WAS PUT IT ON THE STRATEGIC PLAN TO KIND OF GET A REPORT ON HOW DEVELOPMENTS GOING ALONG ARTESIA BOULEVARD WITH REGARD TO THE PARKING CHANGES THAT WE DID MAKE. AND SO WE COULD JUST CONTINUE TO KEEP THAT ON THE STRATEGIC PLAN TO CHECK IN ON THAT.

I THINK SOME FLEXIBILITY, IF YOU CAN THINK OF ANY THAT YOU CAN PUT IN FOR THE FRONTAGE WOULD BE SUFFICIENT.

BUT IF YOU GIVE PEOPLE THE OPTION TO PUT IT IN THE FRONT, I THINK THEY MIGHT JUST BE INCLINED TO PUT SOME SPOTS IN THE FRONT.

WHEREAS IF THEY DON'T HAVE TO DO ANY PARKING AND THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED TO PUT IT IN THE FRONT, THEY'LL EITHER THINK, OKAY, IT'S GOT TO BE EITHER AN UNDERGROUND GARAGE OR I GOT TO PUT A DRIVEWAY TO GET IT TO THE BACK, OR I'M JUST NOT GOING TO DO PARKING ALTOGETHER.

BUT WHICH IS FINE, BECAUSE WE'VE GOT PLENTY OF SPACE IN, YOU KNOW, IN THE AREA.

AND IF THEY THEY CAN REACH AN AGREEMENT WITH AN ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER THAT HAS PARKING.

BUT LET'S SEE HOW IT GOES. YEAH, WE CAN THINK ON IT.

I MEAN, WE COULD SUBJECT PERHAPS FRONTAGE PARKING TO AN ADR OR SOMETHING, WHERE AT LEAST PLANNING HAS GOT TO WORK WITH THE DEVELOPER AND THINK ABOUT THAT, YOU KNOW, AS A MEANS TO COMPEL THEM TO THINK PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED DESIGN, ETC.

TO YOUR POINT EARLIER. AND THAT WAS PULLED. THAT WASN'T JUST PULLED OUT OF A HAT, BUT IT WAS PULLED FROM THEY HAVE THE EXACT THAT EXACT PROHIBITION RELATIVE TO COLORADO AND EVEN THEIR CITY LOTS ARE OFF OF COLORADO.

THEY'RE ON THESE OTHER STREETS SURROUNDING. GRANTED, THEY HAVE COMMERCIAL AREAS ADJACENT TO THEIR MAIN COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR.

SO I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK TO OTHER AREAS THAT PROVIDE INSPIRATION FOR WHAT OUR TWO LANE, FOUR LANE ARTESIA BOULEVARD CAN BECOME. AND, AND BORROW FROM THEM WHAT THEY'VE DONE FOR SUCCESS.

AND ON THAT POINT IN ADR IS SOMETHING THAT YOU THINK WOULD STRIKE THE RIGHT BALANCE? YEAH, I THINK IT WOULD GIVE US A CHANCE TO INFLUENCE DESIGN IN A QUALITY WAY.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO COMMENT ON, I THINK THE CODE COULD BE WRITTEN IN A WAY WHERE THE FIRST PREFERENCE IS PARKING AT THE REAR, AND IF THEY WANT TO PROVIDE AT THE FRONT, THAT WOULD BE AN EXCEPTION.

IT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO CERTAIN STANDARDS AND REASONING AS TO WHY IT NEEDS TO BE IN FRONT.

SO THE STAFF CAN WORK ON CRAFTING SOMETHING, RETURN TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH IT, AND IF COUNCIL IS COMFORTABLE TO MOVE FORWARD, IF NOT, WE'LL JUST LIMIT IT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. I THINK YOU NEED TO BE CAREFUL WITH IT, BECAUSE THERE'S IF I LOOK AT SEVERAL BUSINESSES, FOR EXAMPLE, ON PCR THERE IN HERMOSA, THERE'S A ELECTRIC CART SALES AND THEY DON'T HAVE, THEY DON'T HAVE PARKING ON THEIR PROPERTY.

SO THEY PARK THEIR CARTS IN PARKING, IN PUBLIC PARKING TO DISPLAY THEM AS PEOPLE ARE DRIVING BY TO ATTRACT THEM IN.

SIMILARLY, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE YOU DO HAVE THINGS LIKE BICYCLE SHOPS THAT WILL USE THE FRONT PARKING LOT TO DISPLAY BICYCLES OUTSIDE YOU KNOW, SO TO ATTRACT PEOPLE IN. SO I THINK YOU NEED TO BE CAREFUL OF THAT.

I LIKE THE ADR IDEA, MAYBE AT LEAST TO GIVE SOME FLEXIBILITY IN THAT I WOULD BE AFRAID OF A ONE SIZE FITS ALL THAT WE'RE THINKING UP HERE AND NOT LOOKING AT ALL POTENTIAL BUSINESSES. I DO THINK, I THINK THERE'S SOME, I KNOW THERE'S SOME AUTO SHOPS ALONG THERE.

NOT NECESSARILY THAT YOU WANT THEM PARKING IN FRONT, BUT I DON'T THINK YOU WANT TO ENCOURAGE THEM TO PARK THE CARS THAT ARE WAITING TO BE

[01:10:04]

SO THOSE ARE CONSIDERATIONS I THINK, I LIKE THE ADR IDEA VERSUS JUST BLANKET RULING IT OUT.

THAT'S THE LAST ONE I HAD. COUNCIL MEMBER CASTLE AND KALUDEROVIC.

DID YOU WANT TO OPINE ON THIS BEFORE WE CALL FOR A MOTION? YEAH, I MEAN, I IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE ALL IN ALIGNMENT ON BEING BOLD WITH THESE CHANGES.

I HEAR COUNCILMAN BEHRENDT'S CONCERN, AND I THINK THE ADR OPTION IS A GOOD WAY TO SUGGEST WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR, BUT MAYBE ADD A LITTLE BIT OF FLEXIBILITY TO IT.

SO I THINK THAT'S A GREAT COMPROMISE. AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK THIS COULDN'T COME FAST ENOUGH, SO. AND I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH WHAT THE OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE SAID AS WELL.

AND AGAIN, I THINK YOU KNOW, IT WOULD WE WOULD THROUGH OUR STRATEGIC PLAN REVIEW IT TO SEE HOW IT'S WORKING, IF IT ACTUALLY IS ENCOURAGING NEW DEVELOPMENT ALONG ARTESIA AND AVIATION, AND I WOULD NOT LIKE TO MAKE IT BASICALLY A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WHERE IT WOULD HAVE TO BE DEVELOPERS WOULD HAVE TO COME BECAUSE WHEN A DEVELOPER IS COMING IN TO LOOK AT A PROPERTY, THEY'RE MAKING A PLAN OF WHAT THEY CAN DO, BIDDING ACCORDING TO THAT PLAN.

AND IF THERE'S SOME QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER THEY CAN OR CANNOT HAVE PARKING, THAT THEY'LL JUST GO WITH THE, YOU KNOW, LEAST RISKY AND HOPE FOR THE BEST. SO I THINK TO ACCOMPLISH EVERYTHING THAT WE WANT TO WE'LL MONITOR IT THROUGH OUR STRATEGIC PLAN AND AND, BUT MAINTAIN SOME FLEXIBILITY TO SEE HOW IT'S SEE IF IT'S WORKING AND HOW EFFECTIVE IT IS.

YEAH. SO I THINK WHAT I'M HEARING IS, NUMBER ONE, THE CONSENSUS IS REMOVE ALL THE, THERE IS NO PARKING STANDARD FOR NON RESIDENTIAL USES IN ARTESIA AND AVIATION, THAT THERE'S NO PARKING, GENERALLY THE DESIRE IS NOT TO HAVE PARKING IN FRONT. BUT IF YOU WANT TO IT WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH AN ADR PROCESS.

AND I HEARD TWO OF YOU SAY YOU'D LIKE TO REVISIT, BUT YOU'D LIKE TO KEEP IT ON THE STRATEGIC PLAN VERSIS THIS ACTION.

IS THAT CORRECT? COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI? YEAH, I THINK WE CAN JUST ENSURE WE KEEP OUR, ARTESIA BOULEVARD PERMEATES THE STRATEGIC PLAN.

IT'S LIKE FOUR ITEMS ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

SO I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO LOSE TRACK OF IT. JUST KEEP IT ON THAT.

THIS IS A CHANGE WE'VE MADE. WE GOT TO KEEP IT I THINK.

SO DOES SOMEONE HAVE A NICE PROBLEM OF OF NOT NEEDING TO FOCUS ON ARTESIA BOULEVARD? THAT'D BE FANTASTIC. DID I MISS ANY? I DON'T KNOW, JUST ON THAT.

OH, THE NOT, THE CONFLICT BETWEEN DRIVE THRUS.

YEAH, WE'LL CLEAN THAT UP. IT SOUNDS LIKE, YOU KNOW, AND WE'LL AND WE'LL CREATE FLEXIBILITY FOR THOSE USES AS WELL.

CONSISTENT WITH THE, YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING BUT RESIDENTIAL EFFECTIVELY SOMEONE WANT TO MAKE A MOTION TO THAT EFFECT.

WE NEED A MOTION. OR IS IT JUST DIRECTION TO STAFF.

DO YOU NEED MOTION ON THIS? I MEAN IT CAN'T HURT.

I THINK AS LONG AS YOU'RE ALL COALESCING AROUND THOSE INPUTS, WE'LL WE'LL MASSAGE THOSE.

THE NEXT STEP ON THIS, JUST SO YOU KNOW, IS THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

THEY'LL BE REVIEWING IT NEXT THURSDAY NIGHT. THEY'LL BE PROVIDING THEIR INPUT, SO WE'LL BE BRINGING BACK A FORMALIZED ORDINANCE FOR FOR CONSIDERATION OF FIRST READING INTRODUCTION FOLLOWING PLANNING COMMISSION'S REVIEW. IT.

JUST FOR CLARIFICATION. THE FRONTAGE OKAY ON CORNER LOTS.

I DIDN'T QUITE CATCH THAT. WHY IS THAT SO? IS THERE IS THAT FRONTAGE PARKING? I HEARD SOMETHING LIKE. WELL IT'LL BE OKAY ON CORNER LOTS. WHAT'S THE DISTINCTION FROM.

I'LL LET MARC COMMENT ON THAT. BUT I THINK THE ADR WILL ADDRESS, ADR IN THE ORDINANCE TO DISSUADE THAT. BUT IT WILL HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY WE NEED.

ALL RIGHT. SO I'LL MAKE A, COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI WAS ABOUT TO MAKE A MOTION.

OKAY. SO I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO THAT EFFECT. WHAT YOU HEARD FROM THE MAYOR.

AND THE MINUTES CAN REFLECT IN. OUR CLERK IS WRITING DOWN AND I'LL [INAUDIBLE] IN ITS DIRECTION FOR DRAFTING ANYWAY.

SO WE'RE INCORPORATING THAT INTO WHAT WILL COME BACK TO YOU.

AND OF COURSE, WE MAY HAVE INPUTS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION AS WELL THAT WE'LL PRESENT TO YOU WHEN THE TIME COMES. REMOVE PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR NON RESIDENTIAL USES ALONG AVIATION AND ARTESIA. IT WAS PREFERRED PARKING BEHIND THE THE BUILDING. AND IF THEY'D OTHERWISE LIKE THAT IT WOULD GO THROUGH AN ADR WHICH IS ADMINISTRATIVE AND

[01:15:05]

SO IT COULD BE BEHIND OR UNDER. RIGHT. SORRY ABOUT THAT.

MAKE SURE WE BRING INTO ALIGNMENT THE ORDINANCES RELATED TO DRIVE THRUS.

AND THEN WHAT WAS YOUR FINAL ONE THAT YOU JUST ADDED? YEAH. DRIVE THRUS AND FAST FOODS. AND TO CORRECT THE CURRENT CONFLICT CONCERNING THE THAT PROHIBITION IN THE FIRST INSTANCE.

RIGHT. YEAH. AND PROVIDE DISCRETION FOR AN ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW.

IF THE PROHIBITION ON PARKING FRONTING ARTESIA BOULEVARD IMPOSES A HARDSHIP OR.

OH, THAT'S WHAT. YEAH, WE'VE GOT THAT AND THE ADR IS ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW IN THAT SENSE.

YEAH OKAY. YEAH OKAY. SO YOU GOT THAT. DO WE HAVE A SECOND.

SECOND OKAY. BEFORE WE VOTE WE'LL TAKE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC.

I DO HAVE ONE CARD. TERESA MITCHELL. HI, COUNCIL.

THANK YOU. FOR HEARING ME. I AM A RESIDENT OF DISTRICT FOUR.

JUST THREE HOUSES OFF AVIATION. I'M ALSO A BY EDUCATION, A MASTER'S AND BACHELOR'S IN URBAN PLANNING, AND 30 YEARS IN LAND DEVELOPMENT. SO I'M SPEAKING AS AN INDUSTRY PROFESSIONAL AS WELL AS A RESIDENT.

SO I DO SUPPORT LIKE, THE AACAP IS FANTASTIC.

IT WAS ONE OF THE DECIDING FACTORS. AND WHEN I BOUGHT MY HOUSE FIVE YEARS AGO BECAUSE I COULD SEE THE POTENTIAL IN IT.

AND I DO SUPPORT THE REDUCTION OF THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS AS WELL AS THE ZONING ACCOMMODATIONS OF THE INCREASE OF FAR.

BUT THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I'D LIKE YOU GUYS TO CONSIDER IS ONE, IS THAT THE, ONE OF THE THE BRILLIANCE OF THE AACAP IS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE AREA THAT INCLUDED SOME OF THE ACCOMMODATIONS THAT SEEM TO BE NOT DISCUSSED IN THE PARKING ORDINANCE.

SO WHAT THE RESEARCH IS VERY CLEAR THAT IN ORDER TO MAKE SOMETHING, TO MAKE A NEIGHBORHOOD WALKABLE, TO BE SUCCESSFUL, IT'S NOT JUST CHANGING THE ZONING ORDINANCE, BUT ALSO TO THE SMALLER FEATURES LIKE COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI HAS MENTIONED OF THE STREET FRONTAGE. SO THINGS LIKE THE LONG RANGE PARKING STRATEGIES, BECAUSE IT WILL, IT'S ALREADY WITH LAVENDER HONEY COMING INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, QUITE SIGNIFICANTLY. IT'S VERY NOTICEABLE. SOMEHOW SOME HAVING SOME KIND OF LONG RANGE PARKING STRATEGY FOR EMPLOYEES AND THE IMPACTS OF THE RESIDENTS TO BE DISCUSSED AND NOT JUST SEPARATE AND PUSHED ASIDE. PEDESTRIAN ACCOMMODATIONS, BECAUSE IT IS ABOUT A QUARTER OF A MILE BETWEEN IT'S BETWEEN CROSSWALKS. SO CROSSING AVIATION AND CROSSING ARTESIA IS NOT EASY.

SO YOU, YOU BASICALLY HALF THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO ARE WILLING TO WALK TO THAT ESTABLISHMENT, WHETHER IT'S A RESTAURANT OR A STORE. SO WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE ARE ACCOMMODATING.

AND THEN THE PLACEMAKING FEATURES OF THE SIDEWALKS, THE BIKE STANDS THAT, YOU KNOW, POSSIBLY CAN GET INCORPORATED INTO THIS ORDINANCE AND JUST NOT BE SEPARATE. THE SECOND COMMENT THAT I HAVE IS THAT THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES BETWEEN AVIATION AND ARTESIA THAT I THINK SHOULD BE, THERE'S PHYSICAL DIFFERENCES, LIKE THE 60 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY VERSUS 100 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY, AND A 90 FOOT LOT VERSUS A 130 FOOT LOT.

THAT DOES CHANGE THE DESIGN SIGNIFICANTLY, AND IT ALSO CHANGES THE WAY THE PUBLIC INTERACTS WITH IT.

AVIATION IS CURRENTLY COMPETING WITH PIER AVENUE.

IT'S VERY EASY TO WALK DOWN TO PIER AVENUE, WHICH DOES HAVE ALL THE ACCOMMODATIONS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

IT HAS CROSSWALKS, IT HAS STREET LIGHTS, IT HAS NICE SEATING, IT HAS STREET TREES AND AND IT IS ALREADY WALKABLE.

SO I THINK THAT THERE SHOULD BE SOME KIND OF SPECIFICATIONS LIKE LOOKING TOWARDS AVIATION AS WELL.

BECAUSE WE'RE IN A, WE'RE IN A PUBLIC SPACE DESERT RIGHT THERE.

THERE'S NO PARKS, AND THEN THE THIRD THING IS, IS THAT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT BOUNDARY LINES REQUIRES KIDS TO CROSS AVIATION, BOTH TO GO TO BOTH THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS AND MIDDLE SCHOOLS.

I'M SORRY, BUT YOUR TIME IS UP. YES. SO THANK YOU.

OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC? THAT'S THE LAST CARD I HAD. GOOD EVENING. MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

LESLIE CAMPEGGI REDONDO BEACH. I THINK THERE'S ANOTHER CONSIDERATION THAT YOU HAVE TO TAKE A LOOK AT WITH THE PARKING BEHIND THE BUILDING, AND THAT IS THE BUSINESS ITSELF. HOW LATE IS IT OPEN? BEING A WOMAN, I'M NOT GOING TO WANT TO PARK BEHIND A BUILDING UNLESS IT'S VERY WELL LIT.

SO ALONG ARTESIA BOULEVARD, WHAT'S BEHIND THOSE BUILDINGS? RESIDENTS. SO NOW YOU WOULD HAVE LIGHTING THAT MIGHT INTERFERE WITH THE RESIDENTS BACKYARDS OR THEIR WINDOWS.

SO I THINK SAFETY AND SECURITY IS ANOTHER CONSIDERATION THAT HAS TO BE PART OF THIS FACTOR.

[01:20:02]

THANK YOU, THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? GEORGETTE GANTNER DISTRICT 2.

THE OTHER THING TO THINK ABOUT IS WITH PARKING IS MAYBE WHEN VACANCIES COME UP IN LOTS MAYBE EVERY SO OFTEN, EVERY FEW BLOCKS, THERE'S AN AREA JUST ALLOCATED FOR PARKING WHICH WILL TAKE PEOPLE OFF THE STREET, EVEN THOUGH WE'LL WALK BY AND THERE'LL BE CARS, BUT MAYBE IT CAN BE RELEGATED TO CERTAIN AREAS.

PEOPLE HAVE TO WALK A COUPLE OF BLOCKS, BUT, YOU KNOW, IF IT BECOMES WALK, YOU KNOW, WALKING FRIENDLY, THEN PEOPLE PROBABLY WON'T MIND PARKING IN A DESIGNATED LOT TO GET TO WHERE THEY NEED TO GO.

THE OTHER THING IS, IT'S NOT EXACTLY PARKING A LITTLE OFF THE TOPIC, BUT YOU HAD MENTIONED ONE OF YOUR MEETINGS ABOUT MAINTENANCE WHEN YOU BRING IN LANDLORDS.

I REALLY THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE SOME KIND OF A COMPULSORY, YOU KNOW, REQUIREMENT THAT SAYS YOU MUST MAINTAIN UP TO A CERTAIN POINT BECAUSE AS NICE OF AN AREA AS THE COFFEE BEAN IS WITH THOSE OTHER RESTAURANTS IN THERE, BLUE SALT.

I REALLY LIKE THAT AREA, THE PARKING REALLY NEEDS TO BE THE PARKING LOT REALLY NEEDS TO BE REDONE.

SO, AND ALSO TO ADD SOME ELEMENTS OF GREENERY IN THERE, THEY'VE GOT AREAS THAT THEY'VE DESIGNATED FOR GREENERY WHERE THERE'S DIRT BUT NO ONE'S DONE ANYTHING. SO WHO'S RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT? SOMEONE'S GOT TO BE AND TO MAKE IT IN A NICE WAY.

BUT IT'S ENCOURAGING TO EVERYONE TO HAVE IT MORE ESTHETICALLY PLEASING.

SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? HOLLY. YOU KNOW, I'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS BEFORE, THIS HOLLY OSBORNE. GOOD EVENING, MR. MAYOR. CITY COUNCIL AND STAFF, BUT PARKING IN ARTESIA.

I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHEN YOU TOOK YOUR PARKING SURVEY, YOU SAID 2019, WHICH, IF ANY, STORES WERE VACANT AT THE TIME.

OKAY. BECAUSE RECALL, WE ALSO TURNED PART OF THE EDISON RIGHT OF WAY INTO PARKING BECAUSE THERE WAS NOT ENOUGH PARKING.

SO I DON'T KNOW WHICH STORES, IF THERE WERE ANY BIG STORES THAT WERE CLOSED THEN.

AND SO OBVIOUSLY YOU MISSED. WE DIDN'T HAVE AS IT LOOKED LIKE WE HAD PARKING AVAILABLE.

SECOND, I WANT TO TALK ABOUT GROCERY OUTLET. NONE OF YOU COUNCIL MEMBERS WERE ON THE COUNCIL WHEN ALBERTSONS CLOSED, AND WE WERE WITHOUT A GROCERY STORE FOR 3 OR 4 OR 5 YEARS.

I CAN REMEMBER EVERY DISTRICT 5 MEETING, STARTING WITH THE PEOPLE ASKING, HAVE YOU FOUND A NEW GROCERY STORE FOR US YET? AND THIS WAS IN BOTH DISTRICT AND FOUR AND FIVE BECAUSE THAT STORE IS ON THE BOUNDARY.

THE ANSWER WAS ALWAYS NOT YET. SOUTH REDONDO HAD LOST TWO GROCERY STORES AT THE SAME TIME, BUT THEN MAYOR ASPEL FOUND TENANTS FOR THOSE, SMART AND FINAL.

IN NORTH REDONDO WE HAD NOTHING. PART OF THE PROBLEM WAS THE STORE WAS A LITTLE SMALLER THAN WHAT MANY GROCERY STORES WANTED, BUT AS I REMEMBER, THE BIGGEST PROBLEM WAS AN OUT OF TOWN LANDLORD WHO WAS CONTENT TO HAVE AN EMPTY STORE BECAUSE HE OR SHE WAS HOPING THE STORE WOULD BE ZONED MIXED USE, AND THE LANDLORD WANTED TO SELL IT FOR MORE.

NOW I'M, AND I BELIEVE ALSO AT THE TIME THE LANDLORD WAS STILL COLLECTING RENT, SO ALL I BELIEVE WAS A SHE WAS CONTENT TO EVEN LET THE PARKING LOT JUST GO TO WEEDS AND WHATEVER. IT WAS A MESS AND NONE OF YOU GUYS SAW IT.

MAYBE MR. LIGHT DID, BUT THE REST OF YOU WEREN'T EVEN HERE.

OKAY, BUT THANK GOODNESS THE CITY DID NOT ZONE IT FOR MIXED USE, OR WE WOULD HAVE NEVER GOTTEN A GROCERY STORE.

THANK YOU CITY. BUT I'M WORRIED AGAIN BECAUSE IF YOU UP ZONE IT AND REQUIRE NO PARKING, IS THE LANDLORD GOING TO FIND A MORE LUCRATIVE TENANT? WE IN NORTH REDONDO DO NOT WANT A LUCRATIVE TENANT.

WE WANT OUR GROCERY STORE. NOW, SINCE I'VE GOT 51 MORE SECONDS, I'M GOING TO MAKE SOME OTHER OBSERVATIONS.

THE OTHER PLACES I REALLY USE BESIDES GROCERY OUTLET ARE THE POST OFFICE AND THE LIBRARY.

BEFORE I CAME HERE TONIGHT, I WENT TO THE LIBRARY TO PRINT.

OKAY. WHEN I GOT THERE, I GUESS AROUND 4:00, THERE WAS ONLY ONE SPACE LEFT IN THE LIBRARY.

I TOOK IT AND THEN THE POST OFFICE. WELL, SOMETIMES IT'S FULL, SOMETIMES IT'S NOT.

BUT I ALSO WANT TO SAY WHAT LESLIE SAID ABOUT SAFETY.

IF I'M GOING HOME AND STOPPING AT GROCERY OUTLET, I'M VERY GLAD THAT THERE'S A CORNER LOT AND YOU CAN GO AND RIGHT OFF THE STREET INTO A WELL-LIT PARKING LOT AND STRAIGHT INTO THE STORE.

I DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO, YOU KNOW. BE IN SOME PLACE THAT WHERE I HAVE TO WALK FOUR BLOCKS.

[01:25:03]

EUGENE SOLOMON. REDONDO BEACH. JUST A QUICK QUESTION THAT I HAVEN'T HEARD ADDRESSED, BUT I'M SURE IT'S SOMETHING YOU ALL THOUGHT ABOUT WHEN IT COMES TO ADA STATE REQUIRED PARKING AVAILABILITY. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT IS PART OF THE ADR, THE ADDITIONAL DESIGN REVIEW? IS THAT SOMETHING WHEN IT'S GOING THROUGH PLAN CHECK OR DESIGN THAT? YES, WE KNOW THAT THIS TYPE OF BUSINESS OR THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT REQUIRES X NUMBER OF SPACES FOR HANDICAPPED ACCESS AND HOW THAT'S GOING TO INTERACT WITH OUR ORDINANCE OR CHANGES. SO THANK YOU.

HELLO JIM MUELLER AGAIN, DISTRICT 5. I'VE SPOKEN ABOUT THIS BEFORE ABOUT ARTESIA BOULEVARD.

THE WHOLE OBJECTIVE SHOULD BE TO GET PEOPLE ON THEIR FEET AND INTO THE COMMERCIAL AREA.

AND WHATEVER YOU HAVE TO DO, WHATEVER CODE CHANGE YOU PUT IN, YOU NEED TO ALLOW MAXIMUM ROOM ON THE FRONTAGES, SO THAT THERE IS SPACE FOR PEOPLE TO GATHER AND LINGER AND BROWSE THROUGH THE COMMERCIAL AREA.

RIGHT NOW, AS I POINTED OUT PREVIOUSLY, ARTESIA FEELS VERY CLOSED IN PARTS OF IT, LIKE A TUNNEL WITH THIS FAST MOVING TRAFFIC ON ONE SIDE AND A STOREFRONT ON THE OTHER, YOU FEEL LIKE YOU'RE VERY CLOSED IN, LIKE YOU'RE WALKING IN A TUNNEL.

OTHER PARTS OF IT, ALL YOU SEE IS A BIG PARKING LOT AND THEN A BUNCH OF FAIRLY UGLY STRIP MALL FRONTAGES WHICH IS NOT VERY GOOD. I THINK IT'S VERY INTERESTING THAT THE UTILIZATION OF THE PARKING LOTS WAS BARELY 50%.

IF I UNDERSTOOD THE STATISTICS RIGHT. SO THE EXAMPLE I WANT TO GIVE IS WHY MORE SPACE IS NEEDED ON THE FRONTAGE OF ARTESIA BOULEVARD, PARTICULARLY IS THE ART PROJECT THAT WE'VE GOT GOING ON WITH LA BASSE.

LA BASSE SAYS HE CAN ACT, HE DOES NOT, HE WILL NOT RECOMMEND ANY ART ON PRIVATE PROPERTY.

THAT MEANS ONLY ART CAN BE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY.

WELL, HOW MUCH PUBLIC PROPERTY IS THERE ON ARTESIA BOULEVARD? NOT MUCH. THE SIDEWALK IS FAIRLY NARROW. THERE'S REALLY, MAYBE YOU COULD PUT SOMETHING IN THE MEDIAN, BUT THE WHOLE OBJECTIVE OF HAVING ART IS TO HAVE PEOPLE GATHER AROUND IT FOR IT TO BE A POINT OF INTEREST FOR PEOPLE.

AND IF YOU DON'T HAVE SPACE FOR THAT, THEN YOU CANNOT, YOU MIGHT AS WELL NOT HAVE ANY ART.

IN FACT, IF YOU LOOK WHAT HE WAS PROPOSING, IT'S A BUNCH OF BENCHES AND BICYCLE RACKS.

I MEAN, REALLY, THAT'S NOT A CAUSE FOR PEOPLE TO GATHER AROUND.

SO I'M TELLING YOU, I THINK THAT YOU HAVE TO KEEP THE OBJECTIVE IN MIND OF PEOPLE.

YOU WANT PEOPLE IN THAT COMMERCIAL AREA AND WHATEVER IT TAKES, WHATEVER DESIGN OF THE BUILDINGS OR DEVELOPMENT THAT TAKES PLACE, YOU HAVE TO HAVE SPACE FOR PEOPLE TO BE IN THAT COMMERCIAL AREA, ON ARTESIA BOULEVARD.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

A COUPLE THINGS I MENTIONED THAT WAS INTERESTING.

OBVIOUSLY, THE PLAN IS QUITE, I THINK IT'S BEEN THOUGHT UP REALLY WELL.

AND WE'VE ACTUALLY APPLIED SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS IN THAT AND SOME OF THE PROJECTS WE'VE APPROVED IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

ONE IN PARTICULAR WAS A AUTOMOTIVE BUSINESS THAT BECAUSE OF THE CAP, WE WERE ACTUALLY ABLE TO ASK FOR A LOT MORE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY.

I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT REALLY IMPROVES THE AREA AND WILL MAKE A GOOD LONG TERM. ONE THING I WANTED TO MENTION, THOUGH, WITH REGARD TO THE PLAN, I KNOW WE'RE DOING TRAFFIC STUDIES AND SUCH, BUT THERE ARE SOME PROBLEMS IN SOME AREAS ON ARTESIA BOULEVARD WITH REGARD TO THE RESIDENTS HAVING PARKING NEARBY, AND I'VE TALKED TO A COUPLE OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS ABOUT IT. I KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE LIVE ON MATTHEWS IN THE 2400 BLOCK, FOR EXAMPLE, AND IF YOU DON'T KNOW THAT, THAT'S BETWEEN MACKAY AND PHELAN.

AND IN THAT AREA RIGHT NOW, THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH THE PEOPLE WHO ARE USING THE BUSINESSES PARKING ON RESIDENTIAL STREETS ON MATTHEWS RIGHT NOW.

AND THERE'S A PROBLEM, FOR EXAMPLE, WITH RESTAURANT AROUND THE CORNER, GREAT PLACE, PEOPLE PARK ON MATTHEWS AND WALK BACK OVER THERE.

SO YOU, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO BEST ADDRESS THAT.

THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING IN THE FUTURE AS PROJECTS COME UP, BUT JUST KNOW THAT THERE ARE SOME RESIDENTIAL AREAS THAT ARE BEING IMPACTED RIGHT NOW.

I KNOW ONE IDEA I TALKED TO ONE OF YOU ABOUT WITH REGARD TO MAYBE RESTRIPING OR PUTTING PARKING SPOTS, BUT THE PROBLEM WITH THAT IS THERE'S A MINIMUM REQUIREMENT.

SO IT WOULD MAKE IT BIGGER. SO IT WOULD ACTUALLY TAKE AWAY PARKING SPOTS ON MATTHEWS. SO AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW IF THE ULTIMATE SOLUTION IS BUT YOU ALREADY HAVE SOME EXISTING PROBLEM. SO JUST KNOW THAT THAT'S SOMETHING WE HAVE TO ADDRESS IN THE FUTURE WITH AS PROJECTS COME UP.

[01:30:05]

I'M IN FAVOR OF ELIMINATING PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR BUSINESSES ON ARTESIA AND AVIATION.

ALSO IN FAVOR OF BANNING FRONT PARKING. I THINK IT'LL DO A LOT TO REVITALIZE THE AREA AND MAKE IT A MORE WALKABLE AND ECONOMICALLY VITAL PLACE TO BE. I WOULD ALSO ENCOURAGE THE CITY COUNCIL TO CONSIDER INFRASTRUCTURE TO MAKE THE AREA MORE WALKABLE. LIKE OTHERS HAVE MENTIONED BEFORE, THINGS LIKE BIKE RACKS, BIKE LANES INCREASED SIDEWALK WIDTHS AND MORE PUBLIC SPACES MAYBE INCREASED BUS SERVICE AND BETTER BUS SERVICE DOWN THESE STREETS TO MAKE IT SO THAT PEOPLE DON'T HAVE TO DRIVE AND DON'T HAVE TO PARK NEAR THEIR PLACE OF BUSINESS FOR THEIR TRIPS. THIS WOULD ALSO HELP WITH TRAFFIC AND MAKE THE AREA JUST OVERALL A BETTER PLACE TO BE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? YES. GRACE PENG.

GOOD. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS.

I AM A DISTRICT 5, MY NAME IS GRACE PENG. I'M A DISTRICT 5 RESIDENT.

I LIVE JUST A FEW BLOCKS OFF OF ARTESIA, AND I'M THERE SEVERAL TIMES A WEEK ON FOOT OR BY BIKE.

AND I WANT TO MAKE A PLUG FOR WHAT I WANT TO TELL YOU THAT THE, RIGHT NOW, ARTESIA IS A VERY UNPLEASANT PLACE TO HANG OUT.

IN FACT, I RARELY, EXCEPT IF I'M GOING TO THE LIBRARY.

I RARELY HANG OUT BETWEEN BLOSSOM AND AVIATION BECAUSE THERE IS NO, WHEN I BIKE THERE AND I ALWAYS BIKE, I DON'T DRIVE TO ARTESIA CORRIDOR WHEN I BIKE THERE.

IT'S ALL IT'S JUST REALLY DANGEROUS TO BIKE ON ARTESIA AND I NORMALLY TAKE MATHEWS OR NELSON.

THE ONE WAY STREETS. BUT IT CAN'T, YOU CAN'T DO THAT BETWEEN BLOSSOM AND AVIATION.

YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO HAVE PROTECTED BIKE LANES, AT LEAST IN THAT AREA, BECAUSE OF THE STEEP TERRAIN, THE DISCONTINUOUS STREETS, WE NEED PROTECTED BIKE LANES.

AND I THINK ALSO WITH ALL THE TRAFFIC COLLISIONS WE'RE HAVING AT AVIATION AND ARTESIA, IF WE HAD PROTECTED BIKE LANES, THAT WOULD NARROW DOWN THE STREETS AND FORCE THE CARS TO THE MOTORISTS TO SLOW DOWN.

AND THAT'S ANOTHER THING I WANTED TO SAY, WHICH IS THAT THIS AREA IS REALLY HOT AND IT LACKS GREENERY.

HAVING FRONT PARKING LOTS IS JUST LIKE THIS BIG ASPHALT URBAN HEAT ISLAND, MAKING THINGS WORSE.

I REALLY LIKE THE IDEA OF MAKING IT MORE WALKABLE AND ATTRACTIVE.

WIDER SIDEWALK, MORE TREES, BIKE RACKS, A PROTECTED BIKE LANE.

AND THEN WE CAN, YOU KNOW, THE PROTECTED BIKE LANE CAN BE REALLY PRETTY.

WE CAN LANDSCAPE IT WITH FLOWERS OR PLANTS. WE CAN ACTUALLY ADD, WE CAN ADD SOME PUBLIC SCULPTURE TO THE LITTLE GREENERY STRIPS THAT PROTECT THE BIKE LANES. I THINK THIS WILL JUST, IN NEW YORK CITY, THEY FOUND THAT THE STREETS THAT GOT PROTECTED BIKE LANES GENERATE 49% MORE SALES TAX RECEIPTS IN THE STREETS THAT WERE SLATED TO GET BIKE LANES BUT TURNED THEM DOWN.

SO THAT SUCCESSFULLY FOUGHT OFF THE BIKE LANES THEY ACTUALLY SUCCESSFULLY MADE THEMSELVES POORER.

I THINK WE WANT ARTESIA TO BE ECONOMICALLY VIBRANT, SOCIALLY VIBRANT.

SO WE SHOULD HAVE PROTECTED BIKE LANES. AND THE OTHER THING IS ABOUT THE NOISE AND THE SPEEDING THAT'S HAPPENING, ESPECIALLY AFTER HOURS. NOW PROTECTED BIKE LANES FORCE CARS TO SLOW DOWN.

AND THEY MAKE THE AREA SAFER FOR PEOPLE ON ALL MODES, INCLUDING THE PEOPLE THAT WOULD BE CRASHING THE CARS.

AND NOISE. ROAD NOISE GOES DOWN AS WELL, IT GOES UP WITH SPEED.

AND SO IF YOU SLOW DOWN THE CARS, ARTESIA WILL BE A LOT LESS NOISY.

AND THE ROAD NOISE ALSO GOES DOWN WITH DISTANCE FROM THE.

OKAY. THANK YOU. YOUR TIME IS UP. OKAY. IF YOU HAD THE GREENERY.

OOPS. SO THAT CONCLUDES THE ZOOM. AND YOU HAVE THREE ECOMMENTS THAT SUPPORT THIS.

OKAY. SO I'M GOING TO CAUTION THE COUNCIL THAT THIS WAS ABOUT PARKING.

SO SOME OF THOSE COMMENTS WENT PRETTY FAR AFIELD.

AND I'D LIKE TO STICK TO WHAT WAS ON THE AGENDA.

SO WITH THAT, IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO RECONSIDER THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR BASED ON THE PUBLIC INPUT?

[01:35:05]

THANK YOU. OKAY. CITY MANAGER ITEMS. JUST A COUPLE THIS EVENING.

[O. CITY MANAGER ITEMS]

YOU MIGHT HAVE SEEN THE POLICE CHIEF'S POST TODAY ON SOCIAL MEDIA, BUT UCLA CAME TO VISIT THE DEPARTMENT, IN PARTICULAR, KYLE AND AND THANKING HIM FOR ALL OF THE DEPARTMENT'S WORK FOR OUR BLOOD DRIVE WHERE WE WERE ABLE TO PROCURE 84 PINTS OF BLOOD IN OUR MOST RECENT EFFORT. AND WE WERE, I BELIEVE, TABBED THE 2025 BRUIN BLOOD BOWL CHAMPION.

SO THAT'S VERY GOOD NEWS. FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVE WORKED WITH KYLE OVER THE YEARS, YOU KNOW, HE'S QUITE PERSISTENT AND DOGGED WITH THIS EFFORT.

AND I HAVE NO DOUBT THAT HIS EFFORT IS SAVING QUITE A FEW LIVES IN AND AROUND OUR COMMUNITY.

SO I THOUGHT THAT WAS SOMETHING WORTH NOTING.

AND THE OTHER THING YOU MIGHT ALSO HAVE OBSERVED, IF YOU'VE BEEN PAYING ATTENTION TO OUR WEBSITE, WE'VE UNDERGONE A BIT OF AN UPDATE. WE'VE ADDED A NEW FEATURE TO EACH OF OUR OPERATING DEPARTMENT'S WEB PAGES.

YOU MIGHT NOW SEE THAT THERE'S A ABOUT THE DIRECTOR SECTION ASSOCIATED WITH IT.

WE'RE TRYING TO HUMANIZE DEPARTMENT OPERATIONS A BIT, AND MUCH TO AT LEAST A COUPLE OF OUR DEPARTMENT HEADS CHAGRIN, WE NOW HAVE PHOTOGRAPHS AND A LITTLE BIT OF A BIO ON EACH OF OUR DEPARTMENT HEADS WHICH MAKE UP OUR EXECUTIVE FUNCTION HERE IN THE COMMUNITY.

SO THERE'S TWO STILL TWO PENDING PHOTOS FOR PUBLIC WORKS, AND IT, WE'LL HAVE THOSE SOON, BUT DO TAKE A TURN IF YOU'RE CURIOUS ABOUT OUR TEAM INFORMATION'S THERE ABOUT EACH OF OUR FOLKS. SO JUST AN EFFORT TO CONTINUE TO MODERNIZE AND UPDATE OUR WEBSITE.

THAT'S ALL I HAVE TONIGHT, MAYOR. OKAY. WELL, PLEASE PASS OUR ADMIRATION ONTO KYLE.

AND THANKS FOR DOING THAT. WE APPRECIATE IT. I ALSO WANTED TO NOTE, YOU KNOW, WE JUST THIS AFTERNOON IN OUR MAIL, GOT THE FIRST METRICS OUT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND PLANNING OUT OF THE NEW ONLINE SYSTEM.

AND I THINK THAT'S A GOOD STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

YEAH. WE'RE STARTING TO SEE SOME PERFORMANCE DATA THERE.

REALLY REALLY HAPPY ABOUT THAT. SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN A LONG TIME COMING.

AND I'LL BE QUITE PLEASED TO REPORT TO YOU ON A FULL YEAR OVER YEAR CYCLE WHEN WE'RE THERE, BUT WE ARE SLOWLY WORKING OUR WAY TOWARDS THAT GOAL.

OKAY. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISH TO COMMENT ON THE CITY MANAGER ITEMS? OKAY. JUMPING DOWN TO ITEM P.1 MAYOR AND COUNCIL ITEMS.

[P. MAYOR AND COUNCIL ITEMS]

AND THE ORDINANCES THAT GOT CHANGED AS A RESULT OF THAT, THAT PROCESS.

I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY NEW STAFF REPORT THAT YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING? NO. NO, MAYOR. WE'LL TURN IT OVER. I KNOW THAT THERE'S BEEN SOME ADDITIONAL WORK AS AS WAS STATED LAST, AT THE LAST MEETING, COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT AND OBAGI VOLUNTEERED TO DO SOME ADDITIONAL WORK.

I KNOW YOU WERE WORKING VERY CLOSELY WITH YOU.

I WILL SAY BEFORE YOU PROCEED, MAYOR. BIG THANK YOU TO ALL OF YOU.

I KNOW THERE WERE MULTIPLE HOURS OF TIME SPENT LOOKING AT THIS DOCUMENT, SEVERAL HOURS OF CONVERSATION.

I WITNESSED SOME OF IT OBSERVED, SOME OF IT HEARD ABOUT SOME OF IT.

SO BIG, BIG KUDOS TO ALL THREE OF YOU, PARTICULARLY COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT AND THE MAYOR.

FOR ALL THE HARD WORK AND ADVANCING THE DOCUMENT, I'M SURE THERE'LL BE A BIT OF A PRESENTATION FROM THE TWO OF YOU ON THE UPDATES, AND WE'LL WE'LL TURN IT BACK OVER TO YOU. OKAY.

THANKS. WELL, TO RECAP, WHICH YOU JUST SAID AFTER AT THE END OF OUR LAST MEETING, THE COUNCIL AGREED TO LET COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT OBAGI AND MYSELF GO THROUGH SOME, GO THROUGH A REWRITE, BUT INPUT RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON THEIR FIRST READ OF THE DOCUMENT.

AND I DO WANT TO THANK COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT FOR DOING THE LION'S SHARE OF THAT WORK.

I KNOW I WAS ON THE PHONE WITH THEM FOR NINE HOURS OVER THE PAST FEW DAYS, AND I KNOW HE PUT IN A LOT OF WORK ALL THE WAY UP TO JUST A FEW COUPLE HOURS BEFORE THIS MEETING. SO THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT, THANK YOU COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI.

AND I'M GOING TO TURN THE FLOOR OVER TO YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT. SINCE YOU WERE THE ONE DOCUMENTING THE CHANGES AS WE DISCUSSED.

WELL, THANK YOU, MAYOR, AND THANKS TO THE CITY MANAGER WHO ALSO PARTICIPATED TOGETHER WITH LUKE.

WE HAD INPUT FROM THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE, CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, AND I DO BELIEVE WE'VE ADVANCED THE BALL.

THERE'S MORE TO DO. AND WE'RE HERE TONIGHT TO DO IT.

BUT WE HAVE AT LEAST REACHED SOMETHING OF A CONSENSUS ON AT LEAST WHERE WE ARE FROM.

COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI, MYSELF AND THE MAYOR AND WHAT TO PRESENT FOR FURTHER INPUT AND RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE REST OF THE COUNCIL AND THE PUBLIC. AND YEAH. SO THE IT IS WE HAVE THE PROPOSED CITY COUNCIL AND COMMISSION RULES OF CONDUCT AND DECORUM,

[01:40:07]

WE HAVE SOME CHANGES TO THE PUBLIC WORKS SAFETY AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION, HARBOR COMMISSION, PLANNING COMMISSION, BUDGET AND FINANCE SOME NON-SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES TO A FEW OF THE OTHER COMMISSIONS AND ORDINANCES SO THAT THAT IS WHERE WE ARE. I THINK IT MAY MAKE SENSE, AS THE MAYOR POINTED OUT AND AS LUKE KNOWS ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER, ON THURSDAY, WE SUBMITTED INTO THE AGENDA A PACKET OF MATERIALS AND WHAT THAT PACKET REFLECTS OUR PROPOSED AMENDMENTS IN RED LINES TO THE EXISTING ORDINANCES.

OKAY. THE EXISTING CITY ORDINANCES WITH PROPOSED RED LINES.

THAT WAS THURSDAY. WE CONTINUE TO WORK THROUGH THESE SINCE THEN AND FOR AT LEAST TWO OF THE DOCUMENTS, WE HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL PROPOSED EDITS, AND THAT WOULD BE TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND COMMISSION, RULES OF DECORUM AND CONDUCT IN THE HARBOR COMMISSION ORDINANCE.

SO I THOUGHT MAYBE WE WOULD AT LEAST START WITH THOSE TWO, WALK THROUGH IT SO THAT WE CAN HAVE HIGHLIGHTED AND I'M GOING TO ACTUALLY EMAIL THIS TO THE CITY CLERK AND COPY ALL COUNCIL AS PART OF A BLUE FOLDER, IF I MAY.

SO I'LL GO AHEAD AND DO THAT AT THIS MOMENT. DO YOU NEED A MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILE A MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILE? SECOND, ALL FOR ANYONE OPPOSED.

OKAY. AND MADAM CLERK, IF YOU COULD LIGHT UP, I BELIEVE 3.A.

ALL RIGHT. SO I'LL WHAT I PUT UP ON THE SCREEN IS THE CITY COUNCIL RULES OF CONDUCT AND DECORUM.

IT'S A DRAFT. BUT WHAT WHAT WE HAVE IN HERE IS THE WORK PRODUCT THAT EXISTS IN THE AGENDA PACKET, AND I'LL JUST SCROLL THROUGH. THERE HAVE BEEN SOME ADDITIONAL PROPOSED CHANGES WHICH YOU'LL SEE IN RED, SOME OF THEM NON-SUBSTANTIVE. AND I'M JUST GOING TO SCROLL THROUGH QUICKLY.

I'LL STOP ON ANYTHING THAT AT LEAST AT THIS MOMENT, I THOUGHT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO DISCUSS.

YOU CAN SEE WE'VE TO AVOID DUPLICATION. WE'VE DEFINED WHO IS THE MAYOR EARLIER ON IN THE DOCUMENT, AND THAT ALLOWED US TO REMOVE THE REFERENCES TO THE MAYOR AND CHAIR, MAYOR OR CHAIR.

AND THERE NEEDED TO BE SOME DISTINCTION, AS WE DISCUSSED LAST TIME, BECAUSE A CHAIR IN A COMMISSION, FOR EXAMPLE, IS A VOTING MEMBER OF THE BODY, WHEREAS HERE, PURSUANT TO OUR CHARTER, THE MAYOR IS NOT.

SO THAT WAS WHY THAT DICHOTOMY WAS IN THE AGENDA PACKET FILED ON THURSDAY.

WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO DEFINE THOSE ROLES EARLIER IN THE DOCUMENT, WHICH ALLOWED US TO REMOVE WHAT IS ESSENTIALLY NOW SURPLUSAGE.

SO THAT HAS BEEN DONE. YOU KNOW, WE'VE ADDED A FEW QUALIFIERS.

YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY EACH AND EVERY MEMBER OF THE CITY COUNCIL SHALL HAVE THE RIGHT AND OPPORTUNITY, AT A MINIMUM, TO SPEAK ON AND ADDRESS EACH AND EVERY AGENDA ITEM, INCLUDING PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS AT SOME POINT DURING THE TIME THAT EACH ITEM IS CALLED BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL. AND IN THE EVENT OF MOTION OCCURS ON THAT ITEM, EVERY CITY COUNCIL MEMBER WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK BEFORE IT'S WRAPPED UP AND DONE. AND SO WE'VE JUST ADDED IN HERE TO THE EXTENT NOT PROHIBITED BY THE BROWN ACT.

RIGHT. I MEAN, IF YOU'RE GOING TO SPEAK, IT'S CIRCUMSCRIBED BY THE BROWN ACT.

THIS IS JUST AN EXAMPLE. I SEE THE CITY ATTORNEY'S HERE, AND I KNOW THAT HER AND HER OFFICE HAVE COMMITTED TO HELPING US SCRUB THIS.

AND AS WE MOVE FORWARD. DO YOU WANT COMMENT AS YOU GO THROUGH EACH AREA? SURE. IF SOMETHING JUMPS OUT, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR.

IF YOU GO BACK TO PAGE TEN RIGHT THERE, ACTUALLY A LITTLE BIT FURTHER.

THE BOTTOM PART OF PAGE TEN WHERE YOU'VE GOT A LITTLE BIT ABOUT AT LEAST I'M ASSUMING THAT'S THE SECTION TALKING ABOUT MEMBERS MAKING COMMENTS ON NON AGENDA ITEMS. OKAY. WAS IT THAT ONE OR IS IT THE PAGE BEFORE? I DON'T REMEMBER. YEAH. I DON'T KNOW. PAGE NINE AND TEN SOMEWHERE IN THAT AREA.

OKAY. YOUR PAGE NUMBERS CHANGED A LITTLE. THEY CHANGED A LITTLE. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WHAT'S IN THERE IS INDEED ACCURATE TO WHAT THE BROWN ACT HAS TO SAY. RIGHT THERE. THAT IT'S ONLY, LET'S SAY MAYBE YOU DID CHANGE IT THERE ABOUT ONLY CLARIFICATION QUESTIONS AND NOT.

[01:45:10]

WELL IT'S IT'S IN HERE. YOU COULD SEE IT WHERE I'VE HIGHLIGHTED RIGHT HERE.

WITH RESPECT TO PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON AGENDA ITEMS THE GOVERNMENT CODE OF THE BROWN ACT PROVIDES, YOU MAY BRIEFLY RESPOND TO STATEMENTS YOU MAY SPEAK TO ON YOUR OWN INITIATIVE, OR IN RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS POSED BY THE PUBLIC, BY ASKING A QUESTION FOR CLARIFICATION, MAKING A BRIEF ANNOUNCEMENT, ETC.

SO THAT IS INCLUDED IN HERE. SO I GUESS THE ONLY QUESTION WOULD BE MAKE SURE THE CITY ATTORNEY APPROVES OF WHATEVER WE HAVE THERE, BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO GET IN TROUBLE WITH VIOLATING THE BROWN ACT BECAUSE.

WE DON'T WANT TO DO. A GOOD THING. YEAH. AND I'LL JUST MENTION AND I THINK IT WAS BROUGHT UP BY A COUNCIL MEMBER LAST TIME.

AND THESE ARE RULES OF CONDUCT AND PROTOCOL. IT'S A PARLIAMENTARY DOCUMENT.

IT'S NOT INTENDED TO CREATE NEW RIGHTS OR TAKE AWAY RIGHTS.

IT'S THE PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURES. HOW DO WE IMPLEMENT THOSE RIGHTS WITH THE MAYOR AS THE PRESIDING OFFICER OF THE THE MEETINGS, AND CERTAINLY WITH RESPECT TO EVERYTHING IN HERE, TO THE EXTENT IT IS INCONSISTENT OR AS COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI MENTIONED, COULD BECOME INCONSISTENT WITH ANY LAW CHARTER ORDINANCE.

THE LAW CHARTER ORDINANCE WILL PREVAIL. SO I'LL JUST KEEP GOING ALONG HERE, JUST TO HIGHLIGHT WHAT WE'VE CHANGED SINCE THURSDAY. AGAIN, SELF-EXPLANATORY.

THINGS WE NEED NOT DO ON THE FLY HERE, BUT CITY CLERK MENTIONED IN THE, FOR EXAMPLE, THE COMMISSION MEETINGS THERE ARE NO, AB1234 ANNOUNCEMENTS, ETC.. BUT I'M JUST GOING TO GO THROUGH AND SEE IF WE HAD ANY SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES IN THERE.

WE DID MAKE CLEAR AND I FEEL IT'S APPROPRIATE.

ULTIMATELY, COUNCIL WILL HAVE THE DECISION TO MAKE THAT THE MAYOR SHOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE A BRR AS SOMEBODY WHO DOES HAVE SOME PARTICIPATION IN OUR BUDGET, I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR THE COUNCIL TO HAVE THE MAYOR INVOLVED IN THAT.

AND SO I'VE JUST MADE IT CLEAR THAT I PROPOSED THAT MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OR MAYOR MAY ASK FOR BRR.

AND, YOU KNOW, I'VE ALSO ADDED IN HERE YOU KNOW, WITH RESPECT TO BRR'S, MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND MAYOR, WE YOU KNOW, WE SHOULD STRIVE TO BE JUDICIOUS WITH RESPECT TO BRR'S AND COGNIZANT OF THE TIME REQUIRED FOR CITY STAFF TO PREPARE THEM.

DOESN'T MEAN WE CAN'T ASK FOR THEM, BUT IT'S JUST SORT OF A REMINDER, YOU KNOW, BRR'S REQUIRE REQUIRE WORK AND EFFORT.

SO NOTHING SUBSTANTIVE, MORE OF A KIND OF A TIP OF THE HAT.

AND I WILL JUST CONTINUE THROUGH HERE. YOU KNOW, THERE'S A FEW ITEMS THAT ARE GOING TO NEED FURTHER REVIEW.

AND THIS IS ACTUALLY FROM THE THURSDAY AGENDA PACKAGE.

YOU KNOW WHAT, CITY ATTORNEY, IT'S AN ITEM THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED WE'LL WORK ON.

YOU KNOW WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE MAYOR VETOES A VOTE DENYING AN APPEAL? WHAT HAPPENS IF THE MAYOR VETOES A VOTE APPROVING AN APPEAL? YOU KNOW, SO WE HAVE TO WORK THROUGH THAT AND FIGURE OUT, YOU KNOW, HOW THOSE RULES SHOULD WORK THEMSELVES OUT.

I'M JUST GOING TO CONTINUE TO SCROLL THROUGH FOR SUBSTANTIVE NEW CHANGES FROM THURSDAY.

YOU KNOW, WHEN I DID PUT IN HERE AND I THOUGHT THE MAYOR HAD MADE A GOOD POINT, WHICH IS WHEN THE MAYOR AND THE CHAIR WHERE IS THE AT LEAST WITH RESPECT TO, YOU KNOW, IF WE HAVE TO CLEAR THE ROOM, IF THE CHAIR PRESIDING OFFICER HAS TO CLEAR THE ROOM IN AN EMERGENCY SITUATION OR OTHERWISE, THE CHAIR IS ABLE TO DO THAT.

AND THE BODY, THE COUNCIL SHOULDN'T SAY, WAIT.

HOLD ON. TIME OUT. I'M NOT SURE WE SHOULD CLEAR IT.

WE HAVE THE CHIEF OF POLICE HERE, OR HIS OR HER DESIGNEE AS THE SERGEANT AT ARMS. SO IN THAT KIND OF EMERGENCY SITUATION, WE WOULD CLEAR THE ROOM RATHER THAN CALLING A VOTE.

THAT'S A RECOMMENDATION. ULTIMATELY, THE COUNCIL WILL DECIDE ABOUT THAT.

AND JUST A QUICK QUESTION. ACCORDING TO ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER OR ROSENBERG'S HOW WHAT'S THE PROCEDURE? AND THOSE, DO, YOU KNOW, OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD FOR CLEARING A ROOM? DOES IT REQUIRE A VOTE OR. I THINK TYPICALLY IT'S THE PRESIDING OFFICER.

[01:50:02]

YEAH, RIGHT. GENERALLY, THE PRESIDING OFFICER RUNS THE MEETING.

RIGHT. AND CAN CLEAR THE ROOM. RIGHT. OKAY. YEAH.

ROBERT'S ACTUALLY CAN ALLOW THE PRESIDING OFFICER TO DECLARE A RECESS WITHOUT A VOTE CAN REQUIRE.

YEAH, BUT WE'RE NOT ROBERT'S. WE'RE ROSENBERG'S. BUT ROBERT'S EVEN ALLOWS CERTAIN BODIES TO NOT EVEN HAVE A MOTION TO VOTE TO END THE MEETING.

IT'S LIKE JUST DECLARED. SO WE HAVE OUR OWN RULES.

OKAY. NOW WHAT I DID INCLUDE IS THE ABILITY IF I'M NOT ACTING AND SOMEBODY IS ACTING UP, YOU GUYS CAN VOTE TO FORCE ME TO ACT OR FORCE THE MAYOR [LAUGHS] MAYOR. YEAH, YEAH.

SO THOSE WERE THE MAIN CHANGES, AS YOU CAN SEE IN RED.

AND WE'LL SEE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S STILL WORK TO BE DONE HERE, BUT WE WANTED TO GET SOME WORK PRODUCT BACK BEFORE THE COUNCIL TO DISCUSS.

AND AND SO THAT'S WHERE WE ARE WITH AT LEAST WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPOSED RULES.

BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE NEXT DOCUMENT IF ANYBODY HAS QUESTIONS, COMMENTS OR THOUGHTS ON WHAT YOU SAW IN THE AGENDA PACKET OR WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT HERE. WE COULD FIELD THOSE.

OTHERWISE WE'LL CONTINUE TO TO WORK WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND WHAT HAVE YOU. SO, YEAH, I SEE COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI. I'LL SEE. THANK YOU.

MAYOR PRO TEM. THANK YOU. BOTH OF YOU. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT.

MAYOR PRO TEM BEHRENDT FOR YOUR HARD WORK ON THIS.

YOU DEFINITELY DID THE LION'S WORK, AND I APPRECIATE IT GREATLY.

YOUR ATTENTION TO DETAIL AND YOUR CONSTANT CONFERRAL ABOUT THESE SUBJECTS.

IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT PAGE FOUR I THINK AT LEAST WHAT'S ENUMERATED PAGE.

OH, YEAH. UP THERE. OKAY. CITY CALIFORNIA FEDERAL LAW.

OKAY. SO WHAT I WAS GOING TO RECOMMEND IS THAT CHANGE, TO THE EXTENT ANY OF THESE RULES ARE OR BECOME INCONSISTENT WITH, I WANTED TO SAY, SUPERSEDING CALIFORNIA OR FEDERAL LAW, BECAUSE I RECALL FROM WEBB'S TIME THAT SOME CALIFORNIA LAWS THAT APPLY TO CITIES ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO A CHARTER CITY, AND SO IT ONLY SUPERSEDED ONLY SUPERSEDING CALIFORNIA LAWS.

SO THAT IN, AND THEN AND THEN IT WOULD BECOME ANY SUCH STATE OR FEDERAL LAW SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE.

THAT'S A REALLY GOOD POINT. THAT'S ALL. I MEAN THAT'S JUST FOR MY MEANING.

SURE. THANKS. OKAY. JUST A I THINK A GLOBAL CHANGE WHEN YOU DO YOUR REVIEW JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL OF THESE CHANGES WERE PROTECTED BECAUSE I THINK, YOU KNOW, THERE WERE SOME IN PARTICULAR FREEDOM OF SPEECH ISSUES WITH THE RIGHTS OF COMMISSIONERS TO EXPRESS THEMSELVES PRIVATELY WHEN THEY'RE NOT, YOU KNOW, ON THE DAIS THAT I THINK COULD POTENTIALLY GET THE CITY INTO ISSUES WITH FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND POTENTIAL LAWSUITS. SO BASICALLY, ALL OF THESE WILL APPLY TO, YOU KNOW, PREVAILING LAW, FEDERAL, STATE, OR WHATEVER. ARE YOU REFERRING TO THE BEHAVIOR AS A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CITY BUT YOU'RE FREE, RIGHT? YOU'RE YOU'RE YOU'RE RIGHT FOR FREE SPEECH.

EXACTLY. WHEN YOU'RE, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE IT GETS REALLY MURKY BECAUSE YOU'RE.

YES, YOU ARE A COMMISSIONER, FOR EXAMPLE. BUT IF YOU SAY SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, ON A FRIDAY NIGHT OR SAY SOMETHING ONLINE, IT GETS INTO FREEDOM OF SPEECH. AND SO THAT COULD BE A TRICKY AREA FOR US.

AND I KNOW JUST IN GENERAL THAT'S A HOT TOPIC FOR CITY GOVERNMENTS.

AND IT'S COME UP IN A LOT OF OUR CONFERENCES AND THINGS LIKE THAT WITH REGARD TO, YOU KNOW, THE PUBLIC. BUT, YOU KNOW, IT COULD BE AN ISSUE AS WELL FOR COMMISSIONERS IF YOU NOTICE.

SO THAT LANGUAGE CHANGES WHEN YOU GET BACK TO THOSE, HOW YOU SHOULD ACT RIGHT TO MUCH MORE OPEN ENDED.

IT'S NOT LIKE YOU'RE FIRED, RIGHT? LIKE REMEMBER YOUR REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CITY AND BEHAVE AS SUCH, RIGHT? EXACTLY. SO BUT I MEAN, AGAIN, YOU KNOW TO CITY MANAGER WITZANSKY'S POINT, YOU KNOW, THE LAST TIME THESE WERE REVIEWED WAS 40 YEARS AGO.

SO IF WE'RE IN 2065, WILL THE MAYOR OR COUNCIL OR HOW MANY.

48 YEARS OLD? [LAUGHS] YOU KNOW, SO I'M JUST THINKING AHEAD TO, YOU KNOW, A DIFFERENT COUNCIL, DIFFERENT MAYORS, YOU KNOW, SOME SORT OF CRAZY SCENARIO COMES UP.

WOULD THESE RULES APPLY? AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, ULTIMATELY IT'S GOING TO BE FREEDOM OF SPEECH THAT WOULD PREVAIL.

AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE PROTECTED. THE CITY IS PROTECTED FOR SURE.

YEAH. YEAH. I'M GLAD YOU MENTIONED THAT. AND I'M GLAD WE HAVE OUR CITY ATTORNEY HERE TAKING NOTES, LISTENING. AND I THINK THAT'S GOING TO BE PART OF THE REVIEW. DID YOU SEE ANY ISSUES WITH ANY OF THE LANGUAGE THAT HE'S REFERENCING THAT WOULD GET US IN A SITUATION LIKE THAT?

[01:55:02]

WE WILL ADD SOME LANGUAGE REGARDING TO A FREEDOM OF SPEECH ISSUE.

YES, PLEASE. YEAH, I HAD A FEW THINGS. A LOT OF THEM ARE RELATIVELY MINOR.

THE. I'M SORT OF GOING IN ORDER OF PAGE NUMBERS, AND OBVIOUSLY THEY MAY HAVE CHANGED A LITTLE SUBSTANTIVE? OR ARE THEY LIKE WORDING CHANGES? OR. WELL, THE ONES I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU ARE THE SUBSTANTIVE ONES.

BECAUSE THE OTHER ONE CAN JUST SUBMIT AND WELL, DO I HAVE A CHANCE TO SPEAK OR.

I'M SORRY? ARE YOU GIVING ME A CHANCE TO SPEAK? HERE I AM, I'M JUST I'M JUST ASKING IF THEY'RE SUBSTANTIVE OR IF THEY JUST PEN AND INK.

YOU KNOW, I'M NOT GOING TO GIVE YOU MY TYPOS.

NO. I'M NOT. SO ON THE PAGE, PAGE 12 OF THE ORIGINAL ONE NUMBER SIX WAS TALKING ABOUT NON-AGENDA ITEMS AND THAT'S WHERE THE MARKETING SPEECH COMES IN. AND I'D LIKE TO PROPOSE THAT WE CREATE A COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS SECTION. I'VE GOT WORDING THAT IF I BOOT UP MY COMPUTER, I CAN SHOW YOU IF YOU WANT TO DO THAT NOW, OR YOU CAN DO THAT LATER. I WAS GOING TO GO THROUGH EVERYTHING FIRST, AND THEN WE CAN GO BACK TO THAT ONE.

ON PAGE 22, TALKING ABOUT CALL THE QUESTION. I THINK IT NEEDS TO HAVE SOMETHING ADDED THAT IS SUBJECT TO THE EARLIER THING THAT YOU HAD IN SECTION 3.2, WHERE EACH AND EVERY MEMBER HAS THE RIGHT AND OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM.

BECAUSE I DON'T WANT SOMEBODY CALLING THE QUESTION I'VE SPOKEN, AND NOW I'M GOING TO CALL THE QUESTION AND NOBODY ELSE GETS TO SPEAK.

SO WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL THE COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY BEFORE A QUESTION COULD BE CALLED.

I AGREE WITH THAT. AND LET'S SEE, MORE OF A SMALLER ONE. BUT WE SOMETIMES REFER TO ZOOM IN THE RULES AND IN THE DOCUMENTS, AND I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE MORE GENERIC.

TELECONFERENCE ELECTRONIC MEANS, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

AND THEN MY LAST COMMENT WAS THE ONE ABOUT THE NON-AGENDA ITEMS THAT I ALREADY BROUGHT UP.

OKAY, SO SOMEBODY ELSE WANTS TO TALK WHILE I BOOT MY COMPUTER, AND I CAN SHOW YOU THE LANGUAGE THAT I HAD FOR THAT SECTION THAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT, JUST ANOTHER GLOBAL CHANGE.

I KNOW WE MADE THE CORRECTION TO CHAIR AND MAYOR BECAUSE THAT ACTUALLY EMPOWERED THE CHAIR OF ANY COMMISSION AND THE MAYOR IN ANY COMMISSION.

I ALSO HAD AN ISSUE WHERE IN TERMS OF THE CITY COUNCIL COMING UP WITH OUR PLANS, DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THOSE PLANS AND WORKING WITH STAFF AND GOING OUT TO COMMISSIONS.

IN HERE WE ADDED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY MANAGER AND STAFF CAN DIRECT COMMISSIONS.

THAT WAS INCLUDED IN SEVERAL PARAGRAPHS WHERE, YOU KNOW, I THINK IN TERMS OF SORT OF THE ORDER OF COMMAND STRUCTURE.

I MEAN, THE CITY MANAGER IS ACTING AT OUR DIRECTION AND DIRECTS HIS STAFF WHERE THEY'RE NOT ALL IN THE SAME LEVEL.

SO I THINK HOWEVER WE WANT TO CORRECT THAT, THAT WAS ANOTHER ISSUE THAT I BECAUSE EFFECTIVELY IT GAVE THEM ALL SORT OF EQUAL STANDING, SORT OF LIKE CHAIR AND MAYOR DID. SO HOW WOULD YOU WORD IT? BASICALLY JUST AT THE DIRECTION OF CITY COUNCIL.

AND I DON'T THINK THAT HAS VERY SPECIFIC MEANING THAT WE'D HAVE TO FOR EACH OF THOSE CASES, WE'D HAVE TO DIRECT. RIGHT. WELL, I MEAN, MOST OF THE AGENDAS ARE MADE UP ACTUALLY BY THE LIAISONS, RIGHT? BUT THEY ARE, THEY'RE WORKING SO. BUT WE DON'T DIRECT EACH AGENDA ITEM.

BUT THE AGENDA ITEMS ARE AT THE DIRECTION OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING THAT WE HAVE A STRATEGIC PLAN THAT WE'RE TRYING TO EXECUTE.

RIGHT. WE WORK WITH THE CITY MANAGER AND THEN HIS STAFF GOES OUT, THAT'S THE ORDER, NOT IN ON THE SAME LEVEL.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M SAYING? I DO AND DO YOU HAVE, DID YOU SEE IT IN THE RULES OF CONDUCT IN PARTICULAR, OR WAS THAT IN THE ORDINANCES? I THINK THAT WAS IN THE, IT WAS PROBABLY IN THE ORDINANCES.

OKAY. OKAY. YEAH. I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT THAT WHEN WE GET TO THE ORDINANCES.

OKAY. THERE WAS ONE MORE. IF YOU'RE READY, YOU CAN GO AHEAD.

ALL RIGHT. ONE A IF YOU COULD TURN ON 1.A. SO WHAT I'M

[02:00:05]

AND THE WORDING I'VE GOT HERE, YOU CAN READ IT.

I DON'T NEED TO READ IT FOR YOU, AND THE IDEA WOULD BE TO PLACE THIS IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS. BRIEFLY. IT'S ONE MINUTE PER PERSON TOTAL OF TEN MINUTES.

FOR CIVIC GROUPS, SCHOOLS, NON-PROFITS TO LET US KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON.

YEAH. COULD YOU EMAIL THAT TO THE CITY CLERK? I CAN DO THAT. YES. I LIKE THE CONCEPT. THE ONLY CONCERN THAT COMES TO MIND FOR ME IS IT'S AN EXTRA TEN MINUTES ON TOP OF A POTENTIAL EXTRA 30 MINUTES ON. TYPICALLY WE HEAR THESE AS PART OF THE PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS. WE SEEM TO BE GETTING ALL OF THAT IN RIGHT NOW.

AND SO. THAT'S MY I LOVE THE CONCEPT AND THE IDEA, MY ONLY HESITATION IS IT MAY JUST ADD MORE TIME.

AND AS WE KNOW, EACH SPEAKER MAY BE LIMITED TO ONE MINUTE, BUT THERE'S THE TIME OF COMING AND GOING WHICH ADDS MORE TIME.

SO IT MAY BE MORE LIKE 15 MINUTES OR SO. THOSE ARE JUST MY INITIAL THOUGHTS.

I'D LIKE TO RUMINATE ON THAT A LITTLE BIT AND CONSIDER WHETHER THAT SHOULD BE INCLUDED, AS I THINK IT CURRENTLY IS IN OUR PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS. THE REASON WHY THIS WAS ORIGINALLY CAME UP WAS BECAUSE WE HAVE THE NEW RULE THAT TALKS ABOUT MARKETING, AND THIS THE CURRENT RULE WOULD PROHIBIT PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS FOR THESE SPECIFIC TYPES OF ANNOUNCEMENTS.

IF A HIGH SCHOOL WANTS TO LET PEOPLE KNOW ABOUT A PRODUCTION COMING UP, A NONPROFIT WANTS TO KNOW PEOPLE ABOUT SOMETHING COMING UP.

NRBBA WANTS TO TELL US ABOUT SOMETHING. THE ADVANTAGE OF HAVING A SEPARATE SECTION HERE IS IT IS LIMITING THEM TO ONE MINUTE.

AND SO WE DON'T HAVE SOMEBODY WHO'S GOING TO RAMBLE FOR THREE MINUTES IN A PUBLIC COMMENT. SO YEAH, I DO UNDERSTAND IT CAN EXTEND THE MEETING. YEAH.

BUT IF WE'RE GOING TO PROHIBIT THEM FROM SPEAKING AT ONE PART, I HAVE DIFFERENT LANGUAGE THAT I WROTE.

IF WE WANTED TO NOT DO THIS AND ALLOW THIS KIND OF COMMENT AS PART OF PUBLIC COMMENT THAT I COULD ALSO PRESENT.

YEAH, IF YOU'D LIKE TO SEE THAT. ARE WE AND I'M JUST TRYING TO RECOLLECT, ARE WE HAVING AN ISSUE RIGHT NOW WITH A LOT OF MARKETING MATERIAL AND WHAT HAVE YOU DURING PUBLIC COMMENT? I MEAN, WE HAVEN'T RECENTLY, BUT WE DO HAVE SOME REPEAT, YOU KNOW, ALMOST EVERY MEETING AND WE HAVE HAD A NUMBER OF PEOPLE COME UP IN ONE MEETING. AND THE PROBLEM IS IF THEY TAKE THEIR THREE MINUTES AND AND SOME REGULARLY DO, THAT'S 10% OF THE TIME WE'VE ALLOTTED FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

AND IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE ON ITEMS WITHIN OUR JURISDICTION, WHICH, YOU KNOW, MARKETING THIS STUFF IS NOT IN OUR JURISDICTION IN GENERAL GENERALLY.

COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI. WHAT ABOUT WHEN THE NRBBA COMES UP IN THEIR ADVERTISING DINE AROUND ARTESIA OR SPRINGFEST? THEY'RE MARKETING, THOSE EVENTS, BUT THEY NEAR TO THE BENEFIT OF THE CITY AND ECONOMIC ACTIVITY IN THE CITY.

SO THOSE ARE I MEAN THAT'S IS THAT IS THAT PROHIBITED TO CONDUCT? I THINK THEN ANY BUSINESS WOULD BENEFIT THE CITY, RIGHT? LIKE ANY CAR WASH. YEAH. SO THEN ANYONE COULD ADVERTISE.

IF A BUSINESS OPENS ON ARTESIA BOULEVARD, GRUB HAUS WERE TO OPEN AND SAY, HEY, GRUB HAUS OPEN.

ARTESIA AND MCKAY. IT'S HERE. THAT'S AWESOME.

YOU KNOW, GO. IT'S A NEIGHBORHOOD SERVING AMENITY THAT WOULD BE PROHIBITED NOW.

WELL, WE CAN SAY IT AND WE OFTEN DO WHEN THERE'S NEW BUSINESSES IN OUR AREA.

BUT WHAT YOU DON'T WANT IS ALL 30 MINUTES TAKEN UP BY.

ONCE YOU OPEN A FLOODGATE, EVERY BUSINESS IN TOWN IS COMING DOWN AND GOING, HEY, WE HAVE A SPECIAL ON PIZZA TONIGHT.

SO YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO PROHIBIT THAT? YEAH.

BECAUSE NOW YOU'RE REGULATING SPEECH BASED ON THE CONTENT. BUT I GUESS COMMERCIAL SPEECH. I MEAN, IT'S SUBJECT TO SOMEONE CHALLENGING IT, RIGHT? SO IT'S BASED ON YOUR SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION.

WELL, I WOULD ALMOST ARGUE TO TAKE THAT LINE OUT ABOUT THE MARKET JUST BECAUSE IT HASN'T RECENTLY BEEN AN ISSUE.

AND WE ALL DO. NOT AN ISSUE. RIGHT. WE'VE ALL WE ALL REALLY LIKE THE COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS.

I MEAN, I THINK WE'RE ALL IN AGREEMENT. WE, ALL OF THE ORGANIZATIONS THAT COME UP AND, YOU KNOW, WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY STRICT COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES.

I MEAN, I MEAN, RECENTLY I DON'T AND I THINK YOU PUT YOUR FINGER ON THE SOLUTION TOGETHER WITH THE MAYOR, WHICH IS IF YOU KNOW, IF IT COMES TO IT, WE AS PART OF THE ANNOUNCEMENTS COUNCIL MEMBER ANNOUNCEMENTS, I WANT TO ANNOUNCE THE NRBBA. I WANT TO ANNOUNCE, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER IT MAY BE.

SO WE'RE ABLE TO AMPLIFY THAT OURSELVES, YOU KNOW, AS REPRESENTATIVES OF THE COMMUNITY.

AND THAT IS AN ADDITIONAL OUTLET FOR THOSE ORGANIZATIONS THAT MAY WANT TO SPEAK TO EVENTS THAT,

[02:05:06]

SO, I MEAN, THE CITY MANAGERS HERE HAS BEEN HERE A LONG TIME.

ANY THOUGHTS ON THIS? DO YOU FEEL LIKE THIS IS MY INITIAL THOUGHT IS WE'RE WE'VE GOT A SOLUTION IN SEARCH OF A PROBLEM, CANDIDLY [LAUGHS] I MEAN, YOU KNOW, I KNOW IF YOU LOOK AT IT AND I KNOW THE GENESIS OF THIS CHANGE, THE CONVERSATION OF MARKET POTENTIAL, MARKETING, DIFFERENT TYPES OF COMMUNITY GROUPS, WE REALLY HAVEN'T STRUGGLED WITH THIS.

WE'VE SAT THROUGH A LOT OF PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS. SOMETIMES THOSE THINGS HAVE STRAYED OUT OF OUR JURISDICTION. THERE'S NO QUESTION.

BUT IT HASN'T BEEN EXCESSIVE. THE COUNCIL, THIS MAYOR, HAVE DONE A GOOD JOB REGULATING THIS PARTICULAR PERIOD OF TIME TO 30 MINUTES.

THERE WAS A TIME WHEN WE DID WE WEREN'T SO PERFUNCTORY ON THAT.

THEY WOULD SLIP TO THE 45 60 MINUTE TYPE OF COMMENTARY.

YOU HAVEN'T REALLY HAD TO DEAL WITH THIS IN A NEGATIVE WAY.

IF WE CREATE A NEW SECTION ON AN ANNOUNCEMENT BASIS, I THINK WE'RE JUST ADDING TO THE CONVERSATION.

I THINK WE'RE BETTER OFF TO JUST CONTINUE TO KEEP IT INSIDE OF THE INITIAL 30 MINUTES AND TO PROVIDE THE FLEXIBILITY THAT WE'VE PROVIDED IN THE PAST.

I DON'T KNOW HOW. I DON'T KNOW HOW WE WOULD IMMEDIATELY REGULATE MARKETING VERSUS A CIVIC GROUP, OR HOW WOULD WE IMMEDIATELY UNDERSTAND WHETHER A GROUP IS A 501 C3 OR A BUSINESS.

IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT FOR US TO, I THINK, TO DIFFERENTIATE IN THE MOMENT.

AND SO WE EFFECTIVELY WOULD END UP ALLOWING ALL COMMENTS REALLY, OR NONE OR NONE AT ALL.

AND SO IT'S I THINK THIS GROUP WANTS TO PROBABLY ALLOW SOME COMMENTS, NOT NONE.

BUT I MEAN, BASED ON WHAT I'M HEARING, LET'S JUST TAKE MARKETING OUT OF THE PROHIBITED THINGS AND NON-AGENDA ITEMS AND NOT MAKE THIS DIFFICULT. YEAH I DO. I DO QUESTION. MARKETING.

YEAH. YOU KNOW, WE ARE DOING GOOD AT CUTTING OFF AT 30 MINUTES AND WE HAVE CUT OFF AT 30 MINUTES.

NOT IN THE LAST COUPLE MEETINGS BUT PREVIOUS MEETINGS WE HAVE CUT OFF.

OH, IT WAS NECESSARY. SO YOU WONDER WHAT VALID JURISDICTIONAL COMMENT DID WE CUT OFF BY ALLOWING MARKETING THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE CITY, BUT I'M WILLING TO LET GO THE POINT. SO AND SO LET'S JUST.

ALTERNATIVE IS TO ALLOW TWO MINUTE PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON AGENDIZED ITEMS TALKING ABOUT THIS. AND ONCE YOU GET REALLY BELOW THREE MINUTES IT STARTS TO CUT INTO IT.

TORRANCE ONLY ALLOWS ONE MINUTE. YOU CAN BARELY GET A CONCEPT I KNOW I THINK JUST ELIMINATE THE LINE AND OKAY.

YEAH, WITH THE LINE JUST STICK WITH IT AS IT IS.

IF YOU GUYS ARE OKAY I WOULD WITHDRAW THIS ENTIRELY.

AND THEN THE ONLY COMMENT I WOULD HAVE WOULD BE TO MOVE UP PUBLIC COMMENT AFTER THE MAYOR'S PROCLAMATIONS, COMMENDATIONS, ETCETERA. SO THE PUBLIC COMMENT IS EARLIER IN THE MEETING.

I LIKE THAT IDEA, IF I MAY, MAYOR. MY ONLY CONCERN IS FOR THE, YOU'RE.

TALKING ABOUT MOVING IT BEFORE CONSENT COUNT. MY ONLY CONCERN WITH THAT IS ON CONSENT CALENDAR.

WE OFTEN HAVE A LOT OF CITY STAFF HERE READY AND PREPPED TO GO ON THEIR CONSENT COUNT.

YOU KNOW, WE HAVE WHOLE GROUPS OF THE WHOLE LEFT SIDE OF THE AUDITORIUM IS USUALLY FILLED.

AND IF WE MOVE THE PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS IN FRONT OF THAT, THEN WE HAVE ALL THESE STAFF FOLKS WHO ARE DEMANDING TO BE BACK HERE FIRST THING IN THE MORNING WAITING. AND THEY'RE HAPPY TO WAIT. THEY WILL WAIT.

I'M JUST CONCERNED ABOUT THE EFFICIENCIES AND MAKING SURE THIS OPERATIONAL TEAM IS MOST EFFICIENTLY DEPLOYED.

AND IT'S THE VERY NEXT ITEM WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT PUTTING.

THERE'S A LIMIT TO IT AND THERE'S A LIMIT TO IT.

AND WE OFTEN MOVE THROUGH QUICKLY. LIKE TONIGHT. I THINK IT WAS JUST BAM.

15 MINUTES. YEAH. SO I WROTE IT DOWN. I LIKE THE IDEA.

JUST IN PRACTICE. I'M CONCERNED THAT MAKING THAT CHANGE WILL HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON OUR OPERATIONAL STAFF.

AND IT'S JUST ONE ITEM TO WAIT. SO I'D PREFER TO KEEP IT HOW IT IS FOR THOSE REASONS.

THOSE ARE JUST MY THOUGHTS. COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI HOW DO YOU FEEL? MAYBE WE COULD CAP THE NUMBER OF MAYORAL PROCLAMATIONS TO, LIKE, TEN PER MONTH [LAUGHS] WOW, YOU DON'T LIKE CELEBRATING? [LAUGHS] I'M KIDDING. IT'S A JOKE.

BUT PLEASE DON'T. I ONLY HAVE ONE FEELING THAT YOU JUST HURT IT.

WOW. HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT MOVING IT UP? NO. DON'T.

I AGREE WITH THAT. JUST ONLY HAVE COMPLAINTS IN THE CHAMBER.

THIS IS JUST A COMPLAINING ZONE, NOT A CELEBRATION ZONE.

COUNCIL MEMBER KALUDEROVIC. WHERE DO YOU STAND ON THIS? ABOUT HAVING CELEBRATIONS, MOVING UP THE PUBLIC COMMENT FOR CONSENT CALENDAR.

I MEAN, I SEE BOTH SIDES OF IT. I, I THINK IT'S BEEN WORKING WELL WITH OUR LIMIT TO PUBLIC COMMENT.

[02:10:05]

BUT I THINK WE'RE DOING PRETTY WELL. AND THAT'S ALSO SOMETHING FOR US TO CONSIDER AS WE'RE PULLING ITEMS THAT WE DO HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT RIGHT AFTER.

SO PEOPLE ARE WAITING. AND SO WE SHOULD BE COGNIZANT OF THE DISCUSSION AND MAYBE HAVE SOME OF THAT AHEAD OF TIME IF, IF POSSIBLE, YOU KNOW, WITH STAFF. SO. GOOD POINT.

COUNCIL MEMBER CASTLE. I, TO COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT'S POINT I THINK AS IT'S CURRENTLY ARRANGED IS PROBABLY THE BEST JUST GIVEN AGAIN, THE AMOUNT OF STAFF TIME THAT'S WAITING TO SPEAK ON THEIR ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR.

I KNOW SOMETIMES THOSE THAT CAN BE A LONG PERIOD OF TIME, DEPENDING ON WHAT'S IN THAT CONSENT CALENDAR AND WHAT GET WHAT GETS PULLED.

BUT I THINK RECENTLY WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO PRETTY EFFICIENTLY MOVE THROUGH IT QUICKLY SO THAT WE CAN GET TO THE PUBLIC COMMENT.

SO I'M FINE WITH WHERE IT IS RIGHT NOW. AND I THINK YOU KNOW, APPROVE THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA.

IF WE SEE THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT PULLED IN THE CONSENT CALENDAR, WE COULD MOVE TO MOVE.

RIGHT. TO MOVE THE. OR IF WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THE PUBLIC HERE.

YOU KNOW, WE MAY JUST AS WELL. SO I TEND TO, I THINK.

SURE. SEEMS TO ME LIKE THE CONSENSUS. CONSENSUS IS SPOKEN, I GET IT.

TO KEEP IT WHERE IT'S AT. YOU DON'T NEED MY PRESENTATION UP ANYMORE EITHER.

THANK YOU. THAT'S IT ON THE RULES OF CONDUCT.

IF THERE'S ANY OTHER ITEMS, AND WE'LL BE BACK.

DID YOU HAVE MORE? NOPE. I JUST HAD, YOU KNOW, LITTLE TYPOS AND SPELLING THINGS, BUT THAT'S IT.

AND AND HOW SHOULD WE GET OUR COMMENTS LIKE THE SMALL COMMENTS TO YOU OR HOW WILL THAT WORK? SO THERE'S A YOU KNOW, ONE OPTION IS WE'RE GOING TO BE BACK.

WE'RE GOING TO MAKE SOME MORE CHANGES AFTER TONIGHT BASED ON WHAT WE'VE JUST DISCUSSED.

AND THE NEXT TIME THIS IS IN, YOU'LL GET IT LIKELY ON A THURSDAY AGAIN.

AND YOU'LL HAVE THAT FOUR DAYS OR SO TO PROVIDE THOSE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS IN ADVANCE OF THAT, IF NOT TONIGHT. AND CITY MANAGER, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL OR DIFFERENT THOUGHTS ON THAT PROCEDURE. NO, I THINK WE'LL WE'LL EVALUATE WHERE WE'RE AT AFTER WE HAVE THE COMMISSIONS, I THINK DISCUSSION.

BUT WE'RE PROBABLY BRINGING THIS BACK. I'M THINKING OCTOBER 7TH AS THE NEXT CONVERSATION AS OPPOSED TO NEXT WEEK.

I DON'T THINK WE WANT TO KEEP THE, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF HARD WORK DONE OVER THE LAST WEEK.

I THINK WE WANT TO PROBABLY GIVE OUR EDITORS HERE A LITTLE BIT OF A BREAK. BUT I WILL SAY IF THERE ARE, IF THERE ARE SUBSTANTIVE SUBSTANTIVE POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS YOU WANT TO MAKE, WE SHOULD PROBABLY PUT THOSE OUT IN THE RECORD, YOU KNOW, PUBLICLY RATHER THAN TO PROVIDE THOSE EDITS SERIALLY THROUGH EMAIL.

SO I THINK TYPOS, TYPOGRAPHICAL CHANGES, ETC.

I THINK THOSE ARE COMMENTS THAT YOU CAN SHARE. PER THE BROWN ACT, YOU CAN SHARE THOSE DIRECTLY WITH.

WELL, NO, THAT'S MY CONCERN. I DON'T REALLY LIKE. MY RECOMMENDATION IS FOR THOSE KIND OF THINGS SEND THEM TO ME AND LUKE AND WE'LL INCORPORATE THEM AS THEY COME FORWARD.

IF THERE ARE POLICY ISSUES, I THINK YOU WANT TO GET THEM ON THE RECORD PUBLICLY.

YEAH, YEAH. OKAY. IF YOU'RE OKAY WITH THAT COUNCIL MEMBER.

YEAH. THAT'S FINE. COUNCIL MEMBER KALUDEROVIC ANYTHING.

OKAY. THANK YOU. AND COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI YOU LEFT US. SO WE'RE ASSUMING HE HAS NONE. SO LET'S MOVE ON.

AND IF HE HAS ANY, LET ME KNOW. ALL RIGHT, WELL, LET'S MOVE TO THE HARBOR COMMISSION ORDINANCE.

I'LL GET THAT UP ON THE SCREEN. YEAH. THAT WOULD BE A, YEP.

OKAY, SO IN THE AGENDA PACKET. YOU SAW THE BLUE LINES FOR THE HARBOR COMMISSION ORDINANCE.

THAT WAS THURSDAY. BETWEEN THEN AND NOW THE MAYOR AND I TOOK A CLOSER LOOK AT THIS AND ARE RECOMMENDING SOME ADDITIONAL CHANGES. SOME OF THEM ARE NON-SUBSTANTIVE. FOR EXAMPLE, ALL COMMISSIONERS NEED TO BE RESIDENTS, AND WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT'S CLEAR IN THE UNIFORM ORDINANCE REGARDING COMMISSIONS.

A FEW THINGS THAT WERE AND AGAIN, SO WE'VE REMOVED THE REFERENCE TO, YOU KNOW, A QUALIFIED PERSON IS A RESIDENT THAT WILL BE PART OF THE OVERARCHING UNIFORM. WE'RE PROPOSING, IN ADDITION TO THESE CATEGORIES, SOME OF THESE NEW CATEGORIES YOU SAW FOR QUALIFICATIONS THAT WOULD ALLOW SOMEBODY TO BE ON THE HARBOR COMMISSION.

WE'RE PROPOSING TO ADD BACK IN A FEW THAT WERE TAKEN OUT LAST TIME.

SO YOU'LL SEE HERE IN RED THESE ARE QUALIFICATIONS FROM THE EXISTING ORDINANCE THAT WOULD ALLOW SOMEBODY TO BE ELIGIBLE TO SERVE ON THE HARBOR COMMISSION, DOESN'T GUARANTEE THEM A SEAT, DOESN'T REQUIRE THE MAYOR TO SELECT HIM IN THE FIRST PLACE, OR CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE THEM. SO WE FIGURED ADD THOSE BACK IN, PROVIDE MORE FLEXIBILITY.

[02:15:03]

UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD SOMEBODY WITH THIS QUALIFICATION BE PROHIBITED.

SO WE'VE ADDED THEM BACK IN. IF I MAY JUMP IN HERE, THERE'S ONE CHANGE THAT I WAS NOT.

I'M GOING TO GET TO THAT AT THE END. ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THIS.

THIS ONE, THIS ONE. THIS ONE. OH, YEAH. PLEASE.

THERE'S ONE CHANGE THAT I WAS PARTY TO WITH THE DISCUSSION WITH COUNCIL MEMBER CASTLE, BUT I COULDN'T REVEAL TO YOU. OH YEAH. PLEASE. AND THAT IS WHERE YOU MOVED THE DISTRICT TO OR LIVES ADJACENT TO THE HARBOR. YES. DOWN TO THE LIST OF OTHERS THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED WHERE BEFORE IT WAS UP IN THE TOP FOUR, AND I WAS OKAY WITH THAT.

BUT I THINK COUNCIL MEMBER CASTLE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT.

AND MAYBE I'M SPEAKING FOR YOU NOW THAT YOU CAN READ IT.

SO I'M SORRY. SO YOU'RE SAYING WHAT YOU JUST SAID AGAIN? SO ORIGINALLY, IF YOU LOOK AT THE ONE THAT THAT WAS BEFORE US LAST TIME I SAID RESIDENT IN DISTRICT 2 THAT'S BEEN CHANGED TO SOMEONE WHO LIVES IN CLOSE VICINITY, BUT IT'S BEEN MOVED FROM THE TOP FOUR, WHICH ARE THESE ARE THE FOUR, YOU KNOW, THESE YOU SHALL HAVE DOWN TO.

HERE'S A LIST OF THINGS FOR THE REMAINDER. AND YOU HAD EXPRESSED TO ME THAT YOU WANTED THAT AS ONE OF THE TOP THINGS.

SO THAT'S WHAT I'M POINTING OUT TO YOU SINCE YOU DIDN'T HAVE TIME TO READ THIS.

RIGHT. SO, YES. SO THAT WE HAVE SOMEONE, YOU KNOW, FROM THE LAND SIDE OF THE HARBOR.

AND AGAIN, TO THOSE WHO AREN'T FAMILIAR WITH THIS DOWN AT THE HARBOR, THERE ARE LOTS OF DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES ON THE WATER, LOTS OF THE, YOU KNOW, LAWS AND THINGS THAT WE PASS HERE IMPACT THE HARBOR DIFFERENT WAYS DEPENDING ON IF YOU'RE ON THE LAND OR IF YOU'RE ON THE WATER.

SO I THINK HAVING THAT PERSPECTIVE IS VERY IMPORTANT ON HERE AND THEN ALSO I THINK THAT WAS THE ONLY GEOGRAPHIC REQUIREMENT THAT I WANTED TO HAVE AS SOMEONE WHO LIVES ADJACENT TO THE HARBOR I KNOW IN THE PAST WE'VE HAD DIFFICULTY FILLING THE SLOTS JUST BASED ON EXPERIENCE, AND NOW WE'RE SORT OF ALLOWING SOMEONE TO SORT OF SWITCH THEIR BUCKET OR THEIR CATEGORY OF POSITION THAT THEY'RE FILLING.

WE'RE IN THE PAST, YOU WEREN'T ABLE TO DO THAT. IF YOU WERE THE BOATER, YOU WERE ALWAYS THE BOATER AS LONG AS YOU WERE ON THE COMMISSION.

BUT IN A PREVIOUS DRAFT, IT ALSO LAYERED ON THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU HAD TO BE FROM EVERY DISTRICT IN THE CITY.

AND I THINK THAT THAT WOULD JUST BE REALLY ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE.

THAT'S IN HERE. IT'S A VERY LAST SENTENCE, IS WHAT PRACTICAL EACH CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT SHOULD BE REPRESENTED BY AT LEAST ONE HARBOR COMMISSIONER WITH QUALIFICATIONS PRIORITIZED OVER DISTRICT RESIDENTS. AND WE DO HAVE CURRENT HARBOR COMMISSIONERS FROM VARIOUS PARTS OF THE CITY AND A LOT OF THE BOATERS AND TENANTS DOWN AT THE WATERFRONT ARE NOT EVEN NON REDONDO RESIDENTS.

BUT I THINK, YOU KNOW, PUTTING THAT IN JUST RESTRICTS US EVEN MORE.

I MEAN, WITH THESE EXPERIENCE CATEGORIES, I THINK JUST FINDING THE BEST PERSON.

YEAH. YOU KNOW IN DISTRICT 2 OR WORKS IN CONSTRUCTION, I THINK THAT'S THE PRIORITY, BUT OKAY, IT'S NUMBER SEVEN IS THE ADJACENT. SO IS IT. WHERE DOES THAT GET MOVED TO? WELL, I MAY BE ABLE TO ANSWER THE QUESTION. SO ON YOUR, THEY'RE GOOD POINTS.

SO ON YOUR OBSERVATION ABOUT QUALIFICATIONS SHOULD BE PRIORITIZED AMONG RESIDENCY, AND EFFORTS SHOULD BE MADE TO FIND SOMEBODY FROM EACH DISTRICT WHERE PRACTICAL.

FOR EXAMPLE, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S SOMEONE FROM DISTRICT 5 WHO'S APPLIED OR SO WE'VE INCLUDED THAT HERE WHERE PRACTICAL, EACH CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT SHOULD BE REPRESENTED BY AT LEAST ONE HARBOR COMMISSIONER WITH QUALIFICATIONS PRIORITIZED OVER DISTRICT RESIDENCY.

SO IF YOU HAVE SOMEBODY FROM DISTRICT 5 WHO MAYBE DOESN'T SEEM THAT QUALIFIED, EVEN THOUGH THEY FALL INTO ONE OF THESE CATEGORIES, HEY, I'M AN ACCOUNTANT. OKAY. IT WOULD BE WITHIN THE DISCRETION OF A MAYOR TO APPOINT THAT PERSON OR NOT.

ALMOST IN A RUBRIC. ALMOST. IT'S LIKE A RUBRIC.

YEAH. SO THAT FLEXIBILITY IS IN THERE, NOT MANDATING ONE FROM EACH DISTRICT.

OKAY. CAN CAN I MAYBE INTERRUPT ON THIS NOTION OF AN ADJACENCY? I WAS JUST CONFERRING WITH THE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HERE.

ONE THING WE WANT TO BE AND THIS LANGUAGE STRUCK ME WHEN WE TALK ABOUT MOST DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY AND BENEFITED FROM, WE DO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT ADJACENCY DOESN'T INCLUDE SOMEBODY INSIDE OF 1000FT OF THE WATERFRONT BECAUSE OF POTENTIAL CONFLICT ISSUES, AND THEY MIGHT THEN HAVE TO ABSTAIN FROM PARTICIPATING IN A, YOU KNOW, TYPE OF ACTION.

SO THAT'S, YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND THE INTENT OF THIS.

OBVIOUSLY, IT MAKES SENSE. THEY'RE IMPACTED. WE WANT THEM TO BE MINDFUL AND HAVE A EFFECTIVELY A STAKE IN THIS.

BUT WE WOULDN'T WANT TO IMMEDIATELY CREATE A CONFLICT FOR SOMEBODY WHEN THEY CONSIDER MATTERS BEFORE THE HARBOR COMMISSION WHERE THEY WOULD HAVE TO RECUSE THEMSELVES.

[02:20:02]

IT'S A GREAT IDEA. UNFORTUNATELY, IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE IT'S GOING TO WORK BECAUSE IT CREATES AN INHERENT CONFLICT THAT COULD COME FROM DISTRICT 2, BUT THEY JUST COULDN'T BE. THEY WANT TO KEEP THEM OUTSIDE OF 1000FT, PREFERABLY.

I HAVE A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE ON THAT. I MEAN, THAT ONE PERSON MAY HAVE TO RECUSE THEMSELVES, BUT THERE'S STILL SIX OTHER COMMISSIONERS.

THAT'S TRUE. AND IT'S ONLY ON ACTIONS THAT ARE IT WOULD BE ONLY ON QUASI ADJUDICATIVE ACTIONS, QUASI JUDICIAL, WHERE THEY WOULD POTENTIALLY IMPACT POTENTIAL RESIDENTS.

RESIDENTS, RESIDENTIAL VALUE. CORRECT. PRETTY SLIM.

COULD BE. I MEAN, BUT IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT AN LCP AMENDMENT TO THE ENTIRE.

IF IT WAS LIKE THE WATERFRONT AGAIN, THEN YEAH, THEY'D HAVE TO RECUSE THEMSELVES.

ONE OUT OF SIX. IT'D JUST BE SOMETHING PROBABLY YOU, AS THE AUTHORITY WOULD WANT TO THINK ABOUT.

YEAH. RIGHT. AND ONE POTENTIAL FIX WOULD BE A PERSON WHO LIVES ADJACENT TO THE HARBOR.

YET OUTSIDE OF 1000FT FROM THE JURISDICTION OF THE COMMISSION.

IS IT 1000 OR 500? WELL, I THINK MAYBE CHERYL CAN SPEAK TO IT, BUT I THINK AT 500 OR LESS, IT'S YOU, YOU'RE IMMEDIATELY CONFLICTED. I THINK IT BECOMES AN ARGUABLE SCENARIO BETWEEN 500 AND 1000.

SO TYPICALLY WE WOULD ADVISE THAT THEY RECUSE IF THERE'S A DIRECT IMPACT OR BENEFIT TO THEIR PROPERTY.

SO THAT'S JUST ADVICE. THEY DON'T. YEAH. BETWEEN 500 AND I THINK BETWEEN 500 AND 1000.

IT WOULD BE ADVISORY, BUT IT DOES CREATE LIABILITY FOR THE CITY POTENTIALLY. AND I THINK THAT'S THE ISSUE BECAUSE THEN WE'RE WE'RE DEPENDING ON A COMMISSIONER TO DO THE RIGHT THING. RIGHT THEN, RIGHT IN THAT SITUATION. IF THEY DON'T WE HAVE LIABILITY.

RIGHT. AND I AGREE AND I KNOW THE MAYOR'S TAKING NOTES.

SO BY ADDING IN THE QUALIFIER ADJACENT TO YET OUTSIDE FROM 1000FT OF POTENTIAL CONFLICT ZONES OR HOWEVER YOU WANT TO PHRASE IT, COULD WE INCLUDE A MAP WITH THIS SO THAT, YEAH, WE GOT TO MAP IT.

I MEAN, WHEN IT GOES OUT SO THAT PEOPLE SEE WHERE THAT EXCLUSION ZONE WOULD BE.

OH, THE EXCLUSION ZONE MAP. YEAH, WE COULD DO THAT AS A YEAH.

WE GOT THE JURISDICTION OF THE HARBOR COMMISSION.

THEN WE HAVE THE EXCLUSION ZONE. I THINK THAT COULD BE PUT TOGETHER. AND I DO LIKE THE IDEA OF HAVING SOMEBODY WHO'S IN THAT AREA, THE LAND SIDE, AS YOU SAY TO AT LEAST BE AN OPTION FOR MAYOR TO APPOINT NOMINATED FOR A COUNCIL TO SELECT. MY ONLY CONCERN ABOUT HAVING THEM IS A, THAT PERSON IS A FIXED REQUIREMENT THAT IT'S LOCKED IN.

IT'S LIKE YOU HAVE TO HAVE SOMEBODY WITHIN 1000FT.

I THINK A MAYOR, IN CONSULTATION WITH DISTRICT 2 AND DISTRICT 1 WOULD FIND SOMEBODY.

IT'S JUST I THINK THAT THAT'S IMPORTANT. I MEAN JUST YEAH I THINK IT'S, IS IT MARINA DEL REY? THAT, ONE OF THE MARINAS DOESN'T HAVE ANY BOATERS ON THEIR COMMISSION.

YEAH. AND THAT'S OBVIOUSLY A PROBLEM. OKAY. THIS WOULD BE THE OPPOSITE.

I THINK WE ALWAYS NEED A BOATER. WE ALWAYS NEED SOMEONE ON THE LAND SIDE.

OKAY. SO I AND SO THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN RIGHT NOW, AND YOU MAY HAVE SEEN IT, ONE MAYOR SHALL BE A SAILBOAT OR POWERBOAT.

THAT'S THE BOATER. ONE IS A NAME SELECTED FROM A LIST OF NAMES FROM ANY COMMERCIAL, HARBOR OR PIER ASSOCIATION.

IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A LANDSLIDE. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE ALL OF THESE OTHER POTENTIAL DESIGNATIONS AND QUALIFICATIONS THAT WOULD ALLOW SOMEONE TO BE APPOINTED.

IT SOUNDS LIKE WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR IS IT'S MANDATORY THAT ONE OF THE SEVEN SEATS BE FILLED BY THIS PERSON FOR THE.

YES. YES. OKAY. FROM THE LAND SIDE. ALL RIGHT.

AND THE HARBOR AND PIER ASSOCIATION. SO THOSE WOULD ARE MOSTLY BUSINESSES.

SO THAT'S NOT A RESIDENT, LIKE, NOT A HOMEOWNER, NOT SOMEONE DEALING WITH TRAFFIC COMING IN AND OUT OF THE WATERFRONT, THINGS LIKE THAT. OKAY. SO THAT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE THAN A PIER ASSOCIATION KING HARBOR PERSON WOULD BRING VERSUS, YOU KNOW, SOMEONE WHO LIVES ON BERYL AND PCH.

WOULD AND WOULD YOU WANT THAT? AND THAT WOULD BE THEIR QUALIFICATION.

IT WOULD BE THE ADJACENCY TO THE HARBOR OUTSIDE THE CONFLICT ZONE, AND NOT ANY OF THESE OTHER ITEMS. SO THEY COULD THEY, YOU KNOW, THEY MAY NOT BE A CPA OR AN OCEANOGRAPHER, THEY MAY JUST BE A RESIDENT.

IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY, I WOULD WANT SOMEONE WHO HAS AN INTEREST IN THE HARBOR AND WORKING WITH THE HARBOR, BUT I THINK WE DO NEED THAT PERSON WHO IS A RESIDENT WHO'S ON THE HARBOR.

OKAY. AND THAT COULD COME FROM DISTRICT 1 OR 2, SINCE THEY'RE BOTH ADJACENT TO AND 1000FT FROM DISTRICT 1.

[02:25:01]

WELL, I MEAN, I'M JUST, YOU KNOW, THINKING OUT LOUD.

IS THERE SOME DOWNSIDE TO THAT? DO WE THEN CREATE AND THEN HOW DO WE DEFINE LIKE LANDSIDE.

CAN WE GO LIKE. I'M THINKING. YEAH. NO. THEN IT'S ANITA AND PROSPECT. YEAH. OR ANITA AND PCH. LIKE, WHERE'S WHERE'S OUR LANDSLIDE BOUNDARY? HOW FAR OUT? WHAT IS IT, ADJACENTN? I MEAN, THAT'S WHY I MEAN DISTRICT 2.

AND TO GET 1000FT OUT, YOU'RE PROBABLY, WHAT, AT PCH? NO. NOT QUITE. HOW FAR? PROBABLY. YEAH. ABOUT BROADWAY.

COULD BE 900FT, BUT I'VE BEEN LOOKING AT IT FROM THE EDGE OF THE ZONE.

SO THINK ABOUT REDONDO BEACH HOTEL. SO, LIKE, ROUGHLY BROADWAY BETWEEN BROADWAY AND COULD.

I MEAN, 1000FT? YEAH. YEAH. PCH, PROBABLY. YEAH.

IT'S BASICALLY BEYOND THAT. LIKE COZY CAFE IS A LITTLE OVER 1000FT.

YEAH THAT'S PCH. BUT YOU KNOW, JUST FOR EXAMPLE, LIKE IF YOU'RE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT COASTAL COMMISSION THINGS LIKE BOAT RAMPS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. HOW DO THOSE BOATS GET INTO THAT AREA? WHAT'S THAT GOING TO DO TO TRAFFIC ON SURFACE STREETS? THAT'S WHERE THE RESIDENT BOAT ROUTES, TRUCK ROUTES YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT, RIGHT? I MEAN, THOSE ARE THE SORTS OF THINGS THAT HAVING THAT LAND PERSON WHERE THE PEOPLE ON THE WATER WOULD JUST LIKE, OH YEAH, WE WANT TO WHAT MAY MAKE THE DIFFERENCE IF I COULD, MAYOR, IS IF WE'RE ABLE TO, AS A PRACTICAL MATTER, PRESCRIBE THIS, DEFINE IT LIKE WHAT IS REALLY ADJACENT YET OUTSIDE 1000FT.

DOES IT END AT ANITA OR 190TH? AND IF WE CAN'T DO IT GEOGRAPHICALLY, IS THERE SOME OTHER WAY TO GET SOMEBODY WHO'S LAND SIDE, NOT WATER SIDE? AND YET COMES IN KIND OF A STILL MAINTAINS THEIR OBJECTIVITY AND DOESN'T FEEL LIKE, WELL, I'M ON HERE TO SHUT DOWN EVERYTHING IN THE HARBOR OR SOMETHING LIKE, YOU KNOW, IT GETS A LITTLE DICEY.

I DON'T KNOW, MR. CITY MANAGER. YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTS? I THINK I LIKE I THINK MAYBE WE DROPPED THE WORD ADJACENT, AND WE, AND WE USED THE WORD, WE LEAD WITH CLOSE PROXIMITY TO US AND MAYBE MOST REGULARLY AND DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY OPERATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT AT HARBOR WITHOUT BEING IN CONFLICT.

YOU KNOW, WE DO THE DISCLAIMER AND THEN THAT'S PROBABLY ENOUGH.

OKAY. AND THEN AND I THINK THE MAYOR OBVIOUSLY KNOWS, YOU KNOW, AS THE APPOINTING REC, YOU KNOW, PERSON RECOMMENDING THERE'S A COMMITMENT TO TRY TO FIND SOMEBODY IN DISTRICT 1 OR 2 THAT MEETS THAT CALL AND IS SENSITIVE TO THE IMPACT.

RIGHT. I DON'T THINK WE HAVE TO OVER DESCRIBE IT. I THINK MAYBE MAYBE LESS IS MORE HERE BECAUSE I THINK WE KNOW WHAT THE INTENT IS.

THAT'S THE INTENT. ANY THOUGHTS ON POTENTIAL UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF DOING THIS? EITHER MAKING IT A MUST HAVE POSITION VERSUS.

I MEAN, I LOOK AT THIS. I MEAN, I THINK WHAT YOU'RE ALL DOING GLOBALLY HERE IS EXPANDING THE SET OF PREQUELS RATHER THAN CONTRACTING.

OUR ISSUE HAS HISTORICALLY BEEN A VERY LIMITED, LIMITED OPTION.

YOU'VE GOT PLENTY OF OPTIONS HERE. YOU'VE GOT YOUR OUT CLAUSE WITH, TO THE EXTENT PRACTICAL, SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO NECESSARILY MEET EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THESE EVERY SINGLE TIME.

I THINK THE INTENTION OF MAKING SURE THAT YOU'VE GOT SOMEBODY THAT THAT EXPERIENCES THE IMPACTS OF THE WATERFRONT, WHO FROM A RESIDENT'S PERSPECTIVE, RATHER THAN A BOATER'S PERSPECTIVE.

I THINK THAT'S KIND OF WHAT THIS IS MEANT TO DO.

MAKE SOME SENSE. BUT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHAT THE ROLE OF THE COMMISSION IS IN GENERAL, IS EVERYBODY ON THE COMMISSION IS MEANT TO REALLY LOOK AT IT THAT WAY.

YOU KNOW, IDEALLY OR AT LEAST CONSIDER THAT SO I THINK YOU'RE OKAY WITH THIS AS LONG AS YOU MAKE IT A LITTLE MORE GENERIC AND THEN YOU HAVE THE OUT IF NEEDED, AND IN THE OUT WOULD HAVE TO BE ADDED TO THIS FIRST PART.

IS THIS. SO THIS IS STILL VERY PRESCRIPTIVE. THEN APPOINTMENTS TO THE COMMISSION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING.

ONE MEMBER SHALL BE A SAILBOAT POWERBOAT. ONE MEMBER MAY BE SELECTED FROM A LIST OF NAMES, AND THIS WOULD BE ONE MEMBER SHALL BE IN CLOSE PROXIMITY.

SO TO, I GUESS WE COULD SAY TO THE EXTENT PRACTICABLE.

IT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, IF WE WERE TO PUT THE PERSON OF CLOSE PROXIMITY AS A REQUIRED SEAT, WE MAY, AT LEAST FOR THIS ONE, WANT TO SAY TO THE EXTENT PRACTICABLE OR WITHIN DISCRETION OR SOMETHING, BECAUSE YOUR POINT'S WELL TAKEN, EVERYBODY ON THIS COMMISSION I KNOW THE MAYOR'S BEEN SENSITIVE TO IT SHOULD HAVE THE INTEREST OF RESIDENTS WHO LIVE THERE IN MIND.

[02:30:03]

I MEAN, THERE COULD BE CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE, YOU KNOW, YOU'VE TRIED AND THERE ISN'T SOMEBODY THAT MEETS THOSE CALLS.

I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT WOULD. SO IT LOOKS LIKE THE TWO WOULD BE PERFUNCTORY, AND THEN THE REST OF THESE WOULD BE, YEAH, YOU KNOW, PRIORITY. SO. I MEAN, I IMAGINE IT WOULD BE EASY TO FIND SOMEBODY THAT MEETS ONE AND TWO.

SO PRACTICAL WOULD PROBABLY BE ALWAYS. BUT I MEAN, TO DATE, IT'S NOT BEEN A PROBLEM GETTING DISTRICTS ONE AND TWO REPRESENTED. PEOPLE. I MEAN, THERE'S NOBODY FROM ANY OTHER DISTRICT DOWN THERE RIGHT NOW.

AND THAT'S NOT FROM TRYING. I HAVE DISTRICT 3.

MARCY, THERE'S A DISTRICT FOUR RESIDENT WHO'S THE ATTORNEY.

BUT IT'S NEVER BEEN A PROBLEM GETTING ONE IN 1 OR 2.

BUT THERE COULD BE A PROBLEM GETTING A OR B IN ANY GIVEN TIME.

DO THEY HAVE TO BE AN OWNER OR A REGULAR USER? REGULAR USER. BECAUSE OWNER. OH, I'M NOT SURE.

I CAN THINK BACK. I'M NOT SURE EVERY COMMISSION WE'VE HAD OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS HAS HAD AN OWNER.

OH, I THINK WE HAVE. YES, WE HAVE. AN OWNER? THAT'S NOT BEEN A PROBLEM.

IN FACT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A LOT OF OWNERS. NOW B WE RECENTLY HAD TROUBLE WITH.

BUT THIS I THINK EXTENDS. THIS ALREADY HAS ITS OUT CLAUSE. IT SAYS OR SELECT A MEMBER AT LARGE SO THAT ONE HAS AN OUT.

ORIGINALLY I HAD FOUR PRESCRIBED, THIS IS DOWN TO TWO.

AND IF WE ADDED A DISTRICT 2 AND THAT WOULD BRING IT BACK UP TO THREE, BUT YOU'LL MAKE, YOU'LL HAVE NO TROUBLE GETTING THAT, I THINK. I THINK YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TROUBLE BECAUSE THERE ARE LOTS OF BOATERS IN DISTRICT 2 AND WHO ALSO LIVE THERE, SO I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT.

WELL, SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT. IS THERE A CONSENSUS ON THIS OR.

I'M ALL RIGHT WITH THAT. I'M SORRY. I'M OKAY WITH IT.

WITH WHAT? WITH WHAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT HERE.

WITH MANDATING DISTRICT. NEARBY. PROXIMITY.

WITH THE BUFFER ZONE? YEAH. YEAH. AND YOU'RE OBVIOUSLY THERE.

YEAH. COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI. NO PROBLEM WITH WHAT WE GOT GOING HERE.

WHAT WE'RE TALKING? COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT. I MEAN, I'VE EXPRESSED SOME CONCERNS THAT WE'VE TALKED THROUGH.

MAYBE WE COULD. YEAH. BUT THE BROADER CONSENSUS SEEMS TO BE TO PUT IT BACK IN.

YEAH. AND WE CAN PUT IT IN MANDATORY. DEBATE IT AGAIN.

ALL RIGHT. BUT I DON'T WANT TO SPEND TOO MUCH. LET'S NOT SPEND TOO MUCH TIME. THANKS FOR BRINGING IT TO AHEAD. THINK ABOUT WHAT IT COULD BE ALTERED.

HOW YOU MIGHT ALTER IT TO MAKE IT PALATABLE. YOU GUYS HAVE IDEAS.

YOU CAN SEND THEM TO ME AND I CAN, BUT I HAVE SOME IDEAS TOO.

SO. ALL RIGHT. OKAY. I'M JUST GOING TO. THANKS FOR.

[INAUDIBLE] THE DRAFT IS FROM HERE, GOING FORWARD? IT'S GOING TO STAY THE SAME WAY.

[LAUGHS] WELL, I THINK TO THE EXTENT THAT PEOPLE ARE MAILING STUFF, IT HAS TO BE ME OR LUKE.

YEAH. YEAH. IT HAS TO BE DONE IN THIS MEETING IF OTHERWISE.

YEAH. SO BETWEEN YOU TWO, I. WE'RE GETTING OUT IN THE MEETING, THE THINGS.

NOW, IF THERE ARE SMALL TYPOS OR WHAT HAVE YOU, SEND THEM TO THE MAYOR OR AND OR LUKE.

BIG SUBSTANTIVE THINGS WE'LL TALK THROUGH NOW AND THEN WE'LL BE BACK OCTOBER 7TH.

CORRECT. SO THAT WILL THAT WOULD HELP TO KEEP IT.

AND YOU COULD SEND YOUR WRITE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE BIG STUFF TO ME OR WE CAN TALK THEM AND YEAH WE'LL GET TO IT AT THE END.

MY PREFERENCE IS TO KEEP THE STRUCTURE WE HAVE.

I THINK IT'S BEEN VERY PRODUCTIVE. I JUST WE JUST CAN'T GET THE PEN AND INK STUFF.

WE CAN'T DIRECTLY TO YOU. WE'RE GETTING IT TONIGHT.

FORTUNATELY, NO, THERE'S. I THINK THERE'S OTHER STUFF WE'LL BE GETTING.

YEAH. IF WE. AND IF WE CAN GET A DRAFT OF REVISED DRAFT BEFORE THURSDAY NIGHT, THAT WOULD BE EVEN BETTER.

I'LL TRY TO GET IT BEFORE THURSDAY. YEAH. COULD WE PUT SOMETHING ON THE AGENDA? JUST. IF YOU WANT TO CONTINUE THIS DISCUSSION, BUT JUST.

NO, NO, WE PUT IT OUT TO THE PUBLIC SO THAT THEN WE CAN MOVE FORWARD.

SURE. WE CAN HAVE THIS EXACT SAME ITEM NEXT WEEK TEED UP FOR YOU IF YOU'D LIKE.

OKAY. I JUST DON'T WANT TO KEEP PUTTING PRESSURE ON THE TWO OF YOU. THAT'S FINE. LET'S DO THAT. YOU'VE SEEN IT COME BACK. GET A FEW MORE COMMENTS. GO FROM THERE.

ALL RIGHT. I'M GOING TO KEEP. AND THAT MAKES SENSE.

I'M GOING TO KEEP SCROLLING ALONG. OKAY. SO HERE YOU KNOW, THESE ARE THINGS THE HARBOR COMMISSION'S DOING, DOING WELL, ADVISING THE COUNCIL ON COMMERCIAL AND RECREATIONAL DEVELOPMENT.

AFTER SPEAKING WITH THE MAYOR, I AGREE. YOU KNOW, LET'S TAKE OUT THE "WHEN SO REQUESTED BY COUNCIL", LET'S JUST HAVE THEM DO IT. THEY'VE CAUGHT A LOT OF REALLY GOOD THINGS IN THE HARBOR.

THEY'VE BEEN AN ASSET AND HELPED CAPTAIN MAHONEY, WHO WAS HERE THE OTHER NIGHT WITH THE HARBOR COMMISSION,

[02:35:06]

SO I PROPOSE WE TAKE OUT "WHEN SO REQUESTED" AND LET THE COMMISSION DO WHAT THEY'VE BEEN DOING.

WITH RESPECT TO GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS, REZONING AND LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAMS THE COMMISSION SHOULD BE INFORMED.

THIS IS SOMETHING THEY DIG INTO AND MAY HAVE GOOD IDEAS.

AND IN FACT I AGREE THEY SHOULD REVIEW IN THE COUNT AND ADVISE THE COUNCIL, UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY THE COUNCIL OR CITY MANAGER OR STAFF.

AND THERE'S REASONS FOR THAT. ONE ITEM I DO WANT TO PROPOSE CHANGING AFTER SPEAKING WITH THE MAYOR A LITTLE FURTHER IS RIGHT HERE.

AND THIS HAS TO DO WITH THE COMMISSION REVIEWING AND ADVISING ON VACANCIES AND LEASING OR SUBLEASING TRENDS IN THE HARBOR.

SINCE WE, THEY ARE CURRENTLY DOING THE BEING ADVISED ON NEW AND ASSIGNED LEASES AND THEY MAY RECOMMEND ON NEW AND ASSIGNED LEASES AND SUBLEASE ARRANGEMENTS WITH THE CITY RELATING TO HARBOR LANDS, FACILITIES AND IMPROVEMENTS IN THEIR JURISDICTION, WE MIGHT AS WELL HAVE THEM ALSO REVIEW AND ADVISE THE COUNCIL CONCERNING THEIR FINDINGS.

OTHERWISE, THEY'RE JUST KIND OF BOTTLED UP IN THE COMMISSION.

WE'LL NEVER HEAR ABOUT IT. SO. AND. SO YOU DELETE AT THE REQUEST OF THE.

YEAH. I'LL SWITCH. I'M GOOD WITH THAT. YEAH, THAT WAS MY ONE BONUS, REMAINING BONUS.

I'LL WORK IT. I'LL, YOU KNOW, CHANGE IT TO, YOU KNOW, PERIODICALLY THEY SHALL REVIEW AND ADVISE THE COUNCIL.

CERTAINLY I'LL TAKE OUT I THINK. I THINK MAY ADVISE IS FINE.

IT'S JUST. ALL RIGHT. SO I'LL MAKE THE CHANGE ALONG THE LINES WE JUST DISCUSSED.

YOU'RE WELCOME. SAME HERE. THIS IS A CHANGE FROM THE THURSDAY NIGHT AGENDA PACKET.

SO INSTEAD OF AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCIL, WE'LL HAVE THE COMMISSION ADVISE US ON THEIR CONCERNS AND RECOMMENDATION REGARDING THE LAND SIDE AND WATER SIDE OPERATIONS WITHIN THEIR JURISDICTION. AND AFTER CONFERRING WITH THOSE INVOLVED IT MAKES SENSE, INCLUDING THE MAYOR, FOR THE COMMISSION TO CONTINUE TO RECEIVE THOSE PERIODIC REPORTS FROM THE HARBOR MASTER OR HARBOR PATROL AND POLICE ON INCIDENTS, RESPONSES AND CRIME IN THE AREA OF THE COMMISSION'S JURISDICTION.

AND THE SAME WITH RESPECT TO THEY MAY MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO US BASED ON WHAT THEY HEAR.

SO I THOUGHT THAT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO PROPOSE THAT.

AND THAT'S IT FOR THE HARBOR COMMISSION. SO ANYONE ELSE HAVE.

I'M SORRY. NO, PLEASE GO AHEAD. ANYONE ELSE HAVE CHANGES YOU'D LIKE TO RECOMMEND? I HAVE A COMMENT.

I'D LOVE TO HEAR FEEDBACK. ONE OF THE QUALIFICATIONS WAS ABOUT A BOATER PADDLE BOARDER AS A QUALIFICATION.

WE ARE INTRODUCING NEW USES IN THE HARBOR. IT'S NEW UNCHARTED AT THIS POINT, SO MAYBE A LITTLE PREMATURE, BUT WE'RE INTRODUCING WATER POLO AS A USE IN THE HARBOR.

AND WHAT? AND DUFFY BOATING. WHAT? WHAT IS THAT? DUFFY BOATING. IT'S AN ELECTRIC BOAT. ELECTRIC BOAT.

OH. YOU KNOW, AND AND I BRING THIS UP ONLY BECAUSE.

PADDLER OR WATER POLO. YEAH. NO. GO AHEAD. SO I.

THIS IS SOMETHING NEW THAT'S EVOLVING. AND WHO KNOWS THAT IT MAY BECOME SOMETHING THAT IS, YOU KNOW, SEASONAL, FOUR MONTHS OUT OF THE YEAR, BUT SIGNIFICANT USE OF OUR HARBOR.

SHOULD THAT BE CONSIDERED AS A QUALIFICATION IN THE FUTURE.

HOW ABOUT IF WE TAKE A CUT AT REWRITING SIX TO TO ALLOW THAT FREQUENT, WATERFRONT RECREATOR.

FREQUENT. FREQUENT REDONDO BEACH WATERFRONT RECREATOR OR I GUESS HARBOR.

NON BOATER. HARBOR RECREATOR. FREQUENT AND REGULAR RECREATOR OF THE HARBOR AND SURROUNDING HARBORS, INCLUDING, WE DON'T HAVE TO SAY INCLUDING, BUT THE IDEA WOULD BE INCLUDING HAND PADDLED WATERCRAFT.

DUFFY BOATS WOULD REGULARLY QUALIFY THAT THEY HAVE TO DO IT THROUGHOUT THE YEAR OR REGULARLY? I THINK WE'RE OVERTHINKING THIS. WITHIN THE SEASON.

I MEAN, AND ARE YOU GOING TO LEAD WITH A PERSON? RIGHT, BECAUSE YOU'VE DEFINED PERSON? SURE. GOOD POINT.

A PERSON WHO IS A FREQUENT AND REGULAR RECREATOR.

WELL, AND ONE OF MY ISSUES WITH, YOU KNOW, GETTING TOO SPECIFIC ABOUT WHAT TYPE OF RECREATION PART OF WHAT'S COMING OUT OF LIKE THESE EVENT COMMITTEES, WE HAVE WATER POLO NOW. WE HAVE SOME POTENTIAL OTHER EVENTS THAT MIGHT COME UP.

SO, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE OTHER USES THAT COULD BE COMING TO THE HARBOR AREA.

[02:40:01]

IT'S IMPORTANT, IF I MAY, THE INTENT HERE WAS TO GET THE NON BOATER ASPECT OF PEOPLE WHO USE THE WATER, NOT BOATING, RECREATION, USE OF THE HARBOR. YEAH, I THINK THAT'S ALSO SHOULD COUNT HERE.

WELL IF THEY'RE IN A BOAT THEY'RE THEY'RE ALREADY COUNTED RIGHT.

YEAH. RECREATIONAL USE NON BOATING IS JUST. WE'LL TAKE A CUT AT THAT, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

AND WE CAN SPEND THE NEXT WEEK THINKING ABOUT THE RIGHT WORDS.

BUT. OKAY. I THINK THAT'S A GOOD CONCEPT. YEAH.

BUT IF YOU REGULARLY SKATE AT THE SKATE PARK? [LAUGHS] WATER RELATED. OKAY. WATER RELATED. SKATEBOARDING IS NOT A CRIME [LAUGHS] BUT IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE REPRESENTED. IT ACTUALLY WAS A STUDENT THAT CAME DOWN HERE THAT STARTED THAT WHOLE THING.

2011. OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE? NO, I THINK THAT'S IT FOR NOW.

COUNCIL MEMBER WALLER, COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI? NO, I JUST WOULDN'T USE THE PHRASE FREQUENT AND REGULAR BECAUSE IT'S SEASONAL.

IT'S NOT GOING TO BE THAT FREQUENT. A SEASON.

WE'LL COME UP WITH LANGUAGE. YEAH. GOOD POINT.

OKAY, LET'S FACE IT. MOST PEOPLE USE THE HARBOR DURING THE SUMMER.

IT DROPS A LOT DURING THE WINTER. WAS THERE ANYTHING IN THE THE OVERARCHING ORDINANCE THAT YOU WANTED? YEAH, WELL, I'M GOING TO. I PULLED THAT UP RIGHT NOW, MAYOR, THE UNIFORM REGULATIONS.

SO EVERYTHING IN HERE IS IN THE AGENDA PACKET.

WHERE DID WE END UP ON MONTHLY? YEAH. SO THE ISSUE THAT CAME UP IN OUR DISCUSSIONS IS RIGHT NOW THE ORDINANCE, THE OVERARCHING ORDINANCE REQUIRES COMMISSION MEETINGS TO BE HELD MONTHLY.

THOSE MONTHLY MEETINGS MAY BE CANCELED, BUT ONLY AT THE MEETING IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING AND ONLY UPON A VOTE OF THE COMMISSIONERS.

AN ISSUE THAT'S COME UP, IT'S COME UP ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION I THINK I'VE SEEN IT BEFORE IS, THE LIAISON FOR THE COMMISSION SAYS HEY, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A MEETING IN 30 DAYS, I GOT SOME GREAT STUFF COMING OR WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A WE HAVE AN APPLICANT.

WHAT HAVE YOU. SO THERE'S NO NEED TO CANCEL ANYTHING.

BUT LO AND BEHOLD, A WEEK BEFORE THAT MEETING, THE APPLICANT SAYS, HEY, OUR REPRESENTATIVE CAN'T MAKE IT.

AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THE COMMISSION DOESN'T HAVE REGULAR BUSINESS OR TO CALL THE MEETING.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD SEEM TO MAKE SENSE HEY, GIVE THE STAFF LIAISON FLEXIBILITY TO CANCEL A MEETING LATER IF THE DIRECTION AND WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE CITY MANAGER. THE RUB, IF YOU WILL, THE FRICTION IS WELL, COULD THERE BE A SITUATION AND I DON'T THINK, YOU KNOW, THE STAFF WE HAVE NOW WOULD DO IT. BUT COULD THERE BE A SITUATION, MAYBE IT'S HAPPENED IN PAST YEARS WHERE STAFF LIAISON JUST STARTS CANCELING MEETINGS BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO COME IN, OR THERE COULD BE A PROBLEM OR YOU END UP WITH SOMEBODY WHO'S, YOU KNOW, RUNNING THE CITY AND NOT GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY FOR COMMISSIONERS TO MEET AT ALL.

AND WE'VE HEARD FROM THE PUBLIC ON THAT. WE HAD, I THINK, MR. MOROCCO. THAT WAS ONE OF HIS ISSUES POTENTIALLY.

SO THAT'S THAT'S SORT OF THE DICHOTOMY THERE.

THAT'S THE DECISION POINT. SO THAT'S KIND OF WHAT WE'VE BEEN GRAPPLING WITH.

I DON'T HAVE A RECOMMENDATION ON THAT. I KNOW COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI HAS BEEN LOOKING AT IT. I, CITY MANAGER MAY HAVE THOUGHTS. SO I WELL, I AND I'VE SPOKEN TO A COUPLE OF YOU ABOUT THIS I ACTUALLY THINK THIS ISSUE HAS SUBSIDED TREMENDOUSLY WITH THE COUNCIL'S CONSOLIDATION OF COMMISSIONS, THE EFFICIENCY NOW WITHIN THE STRUCTURE WE HAVE TODAY, AND THE FACT THAT WE HAVE COMMISSIONS THAT NOW HAVE A SUBSTANTIVE WORKLOAD AND THEY ACTUALLY DO NEED TO MEET REGULARLY AND VIRTUALLY EVERY MONTH.

SO THERE IS, THERE ARE RARE OCCASIONS NOW WHERE WE WOULD NEED A COUNCIL, A MEETING FOR LACK OF BUSINESS.

IN AN IDEAL WORLD, THAT DISCUSSION OR CANCELLATION OR OF THE NEXT MEETING WOULD OCCUR THE NIGHT OF THE EXISTING MEETING.

RIGHT? LIKE AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE MEETING. HEY, WE THOUGHT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE SOMETHING GOING NEXT MONTH.

UNFORTUNATELY, APPLICANTS NOT AVAILABLE. WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO PUSH THAT OFF, YOU KNOW, 60 DAYS.

SO MY RECOMMENDATION IS LIAISON WOULD BE THAT WE NOT MEET NEXT MONTH AND WE COME BACK TOGETHER THE FOLLOWING MONTH.

YOU KNOW, THAT, I THINK IS ALLOWED FOR IN THE CURRENT CONVERSATION.

EFFECTIVELY, THE COMMISSION THEN COULD SAY WE'RE GOING TO CANCEL, ALTHOUGH IT'S NOT EXPRESSLY WRITTEN THAT WAY,

[02:45:04]

I HAVE NO, I'M NOT PUSHING THIS. BUT JUST TO PROVIDE THIS THERE IS A SCENARIO, LET'S USE THE PLANNING COMMISSION WHERE WE HAVE EVERY INTENTION OF THE NEXT MEETING OCCURRING. THERE'S BEEN A NOTICE HEARING, WHAT HAVE YOU, AND PERHAPS THE APPLICANT AFTER THE MEETING HAS CONCLUDED, A COUPLE WEEKS LATER, MAYBE TWO WEEKS BEFORE THE ACTUAL SCHEDULED DATE SAYS, I GOT A, I GOT TO PUSH THIS OFF A MONTH, MY PRESENTER'S NOT GOING TO BE AVAILABLE. PLEASE RESCHEDULE AND RENOTICE THE HEARING FOR THE FOLLOWING MONTH.

WELL, AS IT AS IT OCCURS TODAY, OUR LIAISON WOULD CALL THE COMMISSIONERS AND SAY, HEY, APPLICANTS REQUESTED A RESCHEDULING.

WE OUGHT TO PUSH THE ITEM. WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO POST A NOTICE OF TERMINATION.

WE DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY OTHER REASON TO MEET.

YOU KNOW, IF I ASSUME YOU DON'T WANT TO COME IF THERE ISN'T BUSINESS OR ARE YOU GOING TO COME OR YOU'RE NOT, SO EFFECTIVELY YOU WORK IT DOWN TO WHERE THE COMMISSIONERS SAY, HEY, I'M NOT GOING TO BE THERE.

SO NOW YOU CANCEL DUE TO LACK OF QUORUM. WHEN IN REALITY YOU'RE YOU'RE EFFECTIVELY NEEDING TO CANCEL DUE TO LACK OF BUSINESS.

SO THERE ISN'T REALLY AN EXPRESS OUT IN THE LANGUAGE FOR THAT CIRCUMSTANCE.

CURRENTLY. THERE'S A, THERE'S A BIT OF A WORKAROUND THAT I THINK IS IN CONSULTATION WITH THE COMMISSION, WHICH MAY BE THE PREFERENCE BECAUSE IT REQUIRES EFFECTIVE LIAISON TO DIALOG ON A CALENDAR BASIS WITH THE REST OF THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.

BUT IT ISN'T VERY CLEAN IN THAT SENSE. I CERTAINLY, YOU KNOW, WE CERTAINLY VALUE THE COMMISSION'S INPUT AND OUR, OUR CURRENT STAFF ARE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT REGULAR OCCURRENCE.

I DON'T SEE US HAVING THIS RISK, BUT I UNDERSTAND, GIVEN THE PAST, YOU KNOW, PAST, THERE COULD BE CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE YOU'D HAVE DIFFERENT LIAISON, DIFFERENT CITY MANAGERS WHO MIGHT VIEW THINGS DIFFERENTLY. SO I THINK YOU'RE WISE TO MAINTAIN SOME CONTROL AND SOME SPECIFICITY TO THIS, BUT YOU MAY WANT TO AT LEAST CONTEMPLATE HOW YOU HOW WE WOULD DEAL WITH SUCH AN OCCURRENCE AND WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S EXPRESSLY PERMITTED HERE.

COUNCIL MEMBER KALUDEROVIC. I WOULD JUST SUGGEST THAT, I DON'T THINK WE'RE HAVING AN ISSUE NOW WITH BUSINESS FOR COMMISSIONS NOW THAT WE'VE CONSOLIDATED, AS YOU MENTIONED.

BUT FOR US TO KIND OF KEEP TABS ON THINGS, MAKING SURE THAT COMMISSIONERS ARE HAVING YOU KNOW, OPPORTUNITIES TO MAKE AN IMPACT IN THE COMMUNITY IF I THINK IT WOULD BE FINE IF WE WERE NOTICED FOR ANY CANCELLATION. I MEAN, AS A COUNCIL, IF WE WERE NOTICED FOR, YOU KNOW, IF IT WAS LACK OF QUORUM OR IF IT WAS LACK OF BUSINESS, JUST SO WE'RE AWARE OF WHAT'S HAPPENING ON THE COMMISSION.

SO, YOU KNOW, DO WE NEED TO PRIORITIZE SOME WORK FOR THAT COMMISSION AND MAYBE SUGGEST THINGS THAT THEY SHOULD BE TALKING ABOUT? I THINK THAT COULD BE A WORKAROUND OF OF MAYBE THE DANGER YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT WHERE, YOU KNOW, WE WE DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT LIAISON AND THINGS AREN'T WORKING.

WELL, THEN WE'RE AWARE OF IT ANYWAY, RIGHT? SO.

YEAH, WE CERTAINLY COULD MAKE YOU ALL AWARE OF THOSE CANCELLATIONS AS THEY OCCUR.

IF YOU WERE TO GIVE THE LIAISON THAT KIND OF DISCRETION.

BUT AGAIN, I, WE HAVE FOUND A WAY TO MAKE THIS WORK.

I THINK WE'RE, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE THE ISSUE THAT WE ONCE HAD AND NOW STREAMLINING DOWN TO THE 7 OR 8 ACTIVE COMMISSIONS THAT WE NOW HAVE TODAY, WE DO HAVE SUBSTANTIVE WORK. SO I DON'T SEE A LOT OF CANCELLATIONS THESE DAYS.

RIGHT. SO LET ME, WELL THERE HAVE BEEN, THERE HAVE BEEN CANCELED FOR LACK OF QUORUM.

THERE'S SEVERAL THAT OCCURRED IN THE LAST YEAR.

AND LET ME, LET ME JUST GIVE A PREFACE. SO FROM 2009, I THINK IT WAS TILL 2017, ALL COMMISSIONS EXCEPT PLANNING AND HARBOR WENT TO EVERY OTHER MONTH. AND THERE WAS A LOT OF COMPLAINTS ABOUT THAT.

AND THEN, AND WHAT ARE YOU DOING, EUGENE? [INAUDIBLE] EVERY MONTH.

YEAH. THERE WERE A COUPLE OF EXCEPTIONS TO THE ORDINANCE.

THE ORDINANCE ONLY GAVE TWO EXCEPTIONS, BUT THE ORDINANCE CHANGES.

BUT ANYWAY FROM 2009 TO 2017. YOU KNOW, THEY WENT TO EVERY OTHER MONTH AND THERE WAS A LOT OF COMPLAINTS ABOUT THAT.

AND I KNOW ONE OF MAYOR BRAND'S PRIORITIES WAS TO TAKE THAT POWER AWAY AND MAKE IT, YOU KNOW, MAKE PUT THE COMMISSION IN THE DRIVER'S SEAT.

THEN WE CAME UP WITH, YOU KNOW, WENT SO FAR THAT YOU COULDN'T THERE WAS NO WAY TO CANCEL A MEETING.

AND SO THAT'S WHEN JUST LAST YEAR, WE ADDED THE ORDINANCE THAT SAID THE COMMISSION VOTES THE MONTH BEFORE ON, YOU KNOW, WHETHER THEY WANT TO AND THAT CAN BE FOR LACK OF QUORUM OR THAT COULD BE FOR LACK OF WORK. AND HAVING EXPERIENCED THAT ON HARBOR COMMISSION,

[02:50:06]

WOULD YOU LIKE TO CANCEL? OR, I'VE ALREADY GOT TWO OF YOU, THREE OF YOU HAVE SAID YOU'RE GOING ON VACATION THIS MONTH.

IS ANYBODY ELSE PLANNING OR SHOULD WE CANCEL FOR LACK OF QUORUM? AND THAT WORKED VERY WELL. I SEE IT VERY RARE UNDER THE CURRENT WORKLOAD THAT WE'VE PUT ON THE COMMISSIONS THAT YOU ONLY HAVE ONE ISSUE, AND THAT ISSUE WILL SUDDENLY HAVE WHOEVER WAS THERE DISSOLVE AND YOU CAN STILL TALK ABOUT REFERRALS TO STAFF AND THE REPORT FROM THE LIAISON, WHICH A LOT OF TIMES IS, YOU KNOW, NEW DATA THAT THE COMMISSION WOULDN'T OTHERWISE GET.

THEY'D HAVE TO WAIT A COUPLE OF MONTHS. SO I'M ACTUALLY IN FAVOR OF KEEPING IT THE WAY IT IS.

THE ONE QUESTION I DO HAVE, THE CHANGE THAT I MADE SUBSTANTIVELY IN THE INITIAL ONE WAS I PUT THE CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION TO MONTHLY AND DIDN'T INCLUDE, THERE USED TO BE AN EXCLUSION FOR THE MONTHLY MEETINGS FOR THE YOUTH COMMISSION AND FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS, NOW CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION WITH THE YOUTH COMMISSION.

WE TOOK THAT AWAY BECAUSE THEY ARE GOING TO MEET ALL SUMMER, AND I FIGURED WITH THE NEW WORKLOAD AND WHAT SOME OF THE TESTIMONY FROM THE CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSIONERS DURING OUR DEBATE ON THAT WAS, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TOO MUCH WORK IF YOU ADD EXPAND US TO CULTURAL ARTS, WE'D HAVE TO MEET EVERY MONTH. SO I JUST WROTE IT AS EVERY MONTH. BUT I'M OKAY WITH LEAVING THAT ONE EVERY OTHER MONTH.

SO. SO TWO QUESTIONS AT ISSUE IS ONE, YOU KNOW, DO YOU WANT TO CHANGE THE HOW WE CANCEL MEETINGS.

AND TWO, WHAT DO YOU WANT TO DO WITH THE CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION? SO TO ANSWER THIS QUESTION, I THINK YOU LEAVE IT MONTHLY AND YOU LEAVE IT TO THE COMMISSION THAT, YOU KNOW, LIKE YOU SAID, IF EVERYONE'S ON VACATION IN AUGUST EVERYBODY'S PLANNING TO MISS THE NEXT MEETING.

SHOULD WE CANCEL? YOU KNOW, THE AUGUST MEETING ON BUDGET AND FINANCE THAT'S HOW WE DID IT.

AND I THINK THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN ONLY, I CAN THINK OF MAYBE ONE MEETING WHERE WE ONLY HAD 1 OR 2 SHORT ITEMS ON THE AGENDA, BUT WE STILL CAME WENT THROUGH IT, WE WERE IN AND OUT AND PROBABLY 45 MINUTES, BUT BUT MOST OF THE TIME WE HAD, YOU KNOW, A SUBSTANTIAL AGENDA TO GO THROUGH.

AND I THINK IT WAS JUST EASIER FOR US TO STAY ON OUR TIMELINE OF WHEN THINGS WERE SUPPOSED TO COME TO US FOR APPROVAL SO THAT THEY COULD MAKE IT TO THE COUNCIL ON TIME BY DEADLINE.

THERE AT ONE POINT THERE WAS, I THINK, FROM STAFF RAISED THE QUESTION OF MEETING QUARTERLY AND NONE OF US ON THE COMMISSION WANTED TO DO THAT JUST BECAUSE WE, YOU KNOW, OUR NORMAL MEETINGS WERE AT LEAST PROBABLY TWO HOURS ON AVERAGE, I WOULD SAY MAYBE THREE. AND GOING QUARTERLY, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD HAVE TEN HOUR MEETINGS AND WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO RESPOND TO YOU KNOW, RESPOND TO CITY COUNCIL REQUESTS ON TIME. SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, JUST HAVING THOSE REGULAR MONTHLY MEETINGS ARE GREAT AND THEN GIVING THE COMMISSION THE OPPORTUNITY TO CANCEL IF, YOU KNOW, IF THEY HAVE NOTHING ON THE AGENDA OR IF THEY ONLY HAVE ONE ITEM ON THE NEXT AGENDA YOU KNOW, THEY CAN PUSH IT OUT A MONTH OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. SO I THINK LEAVING IT TO THE COMMISSION IS OKAY.

LET'S SEE. COUNCIL MEMBER WALLER. WITH REGARDS TO THE CANCELLATIONS OR MONTHLY MEETINGS, YEAH, I THINK EVERYTHING EVERYTHING SHOULD BE SET UP AS MONTHLY, JUST MAKE THAT THE BASELINE.

AND THEN WITH THE CANCELLATIONS, ALLOWING THEM TO CANCEL IT AS WRITTEN, I LIKE, BUT I ALSO DO SEE THE ABILITY FOR THE RARE OCCASION IF THE LIAISON LOOKS AT THAT, AND LIKE THE CITY MANAGER SAID, IF THERE'S A LACK OF BUSINESS, ALLOW THEM TO DO THAT AGAIN. IT'S GOING TO BE WITH NOTICE TO THE THE CITY MANAGER AND AS COUNCIL MEMBER KALUDEROVIC SUGGESTED, WITH ALSO LETTING THE COUNCIL KNOW WHY ANY MEETING WAS CANCELED.

BECAUSE IF WE SEE THAT THERE'S A TREND OF, HEY, THIS THIS ONE LIAISON IS CANCELING MEETINGS, THERE'S A WHOLE LOT OF OVERSIGHT THERE FOR IT TO BE A PROBLEM, THAT MEANS THE LIAISON AND THE CITY MANAGER ARE BOTH NOT DOING THEIR JOBS, AND WE WOULD HEAR ABOUT THAT. SO I DON'T THINK I'M WORRIED THAT MEETINGS ARE GOING TO GET CANCELLED WILLY NILLY FOR, YOU KNOW, JUST BECAUSE THEY JUST DON'T WANT TO DO THE WORK. SO I LIKE GIVING THEM THAT FLEXIBILITY AND THE ABILITY TO DO THAT.

SO THAT WOULD BE THE ONLY CHANGE I'D MAKE TO THIS, WOULD BE TO ALLOW THE STAFF LIAISON WITH NOTICE TO THE CITY MANAGER AND.

CITY COUNCIL WITH CITY MANAGER APPROVAL AND COORDINATION.

JUST NOTICE TO. NOTICING AND NOTICING COUNCIL.

YEAH. OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE? NOPE. COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI.

ALL RIGHT. SO I WANTED TO TAKE THIS ON BECAUSE WE HAVE EVERY COMMISSION SET UP FOR 12 MEETINGS.

AND IF YOU TALK TO LIAISONS OR COMMISSIONS, THEY'LL SAY THAT THEY MEET 9 TO 10 TIMES A YEAR.

AND THAT'S, YOU KNOW, 2 OR 3 MEETINGS THAT ARE NOT GOING TO OCCUR IN A GIVEN YEAR.

[02:55:03]

SO WHAT I PROPOSE IS THAT YOU HAVE A REQUIREMENT THAT THE LIAISON TELEGRAPH OR PROJECT, WHAT'S COMING UP FOR THE NEXT MEETING DURING A MEETING UNDER THE LIAISON REPORT.

IF THE LIAISON HAS NO BUSINESS FOR THE NEXT MEETING WE ALSO PUT IN THERE THAT THE COMMISSION AT THAT TIME CAN MAKE A MOTION TO OR VOTE ON A MOTION, MAKE A MOTION AND VOTE ON IT TO CANCEL THEIR NEXT MEETING.

AND THAT WAY, IT'S CANCELLED. AND THE COMMISSION KNOWS THAT IT HAS THE ABILITY TO DO THAT BASED ON GOOD INFORMATION.

AND OBVIOUSLY, THEY SHOULD ONLY CANCEL ONE MEETING AT A TIME AND THE NEXT MEETING SHOULD BE ON.

SO I THINK THAT ALSO PREVENTS ABUSE WHERE THE POWERS IN THE COMMISSION'S HANDS TO DECIDE WHETHER WHETHER OR NOT THEY NEED TO CONVENE THE NEXT TIME. NOW, IF INFORMATION FALLS, IF INFORMATION CHANGES, AND SOMETHING THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE ON AGENDA FOR THE NEXT MEETING IS NO LONGER COMING UP AND LIAISON CAN'T GET IT THERE, RATHER THAN JUST FILL A MEETING WITH CRAP, I THINK THERE SHOULD BE A MEANS BY WHICH THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY MANAGER SHOULD BE ABLE TO DIRECT LIAISON TO CANCEL THE MEETING.

AND I'D WELCOME THE NOTICE TO COUNCIL AS WELL.

THANK YOU. I ASSUMED AND I HAVEN'T WATCHED TO THE END OF EVERY ACTUALLY MOST COUNCIL AND COMMISSION MEETINGS I DON'T WATCH THE END, I WATCH WHAT I'M INTERESTED IN AND THEN I BAIL OUT.

BUT FROM MY PRACTICE, I'M USED TO TO YOU KNOW, DIRECTOR KAPOVICH TELLING US WHAT'S COMING UP IN THE NEXT MEETING.

DOES THAT NOT HAPPEN AT EVERY? THAT'S NOT, THAT'S BECOMING MORE PREVALENT AGAIN, WITH A MORE EFFICIENT STRUCTURE AND AND THE GREATER WORKLOAD.

I WOULD SAY THAT'S HAPPENING AT A MUCH HIGHER VOLUME THAN IT DID PREVIOUSLY WHEN WE HAD 13-14 COMMISSIONS TO LIAISON ON TO.

BUT IT DOESN'T, WE HAVEN'T QUITE IMPLEMENTED THAT ACROSS THE BOARD.

I DO LIKE THAT PRACTICE. I THINK THAT IS A BEST PRACTICE.

YOU WOULDN'T TAKE A HEART, WOULD YOU TAKE HEARTBURN WITH US MEMORIALIZING THAT IN THE ORDINANCE? NO, I DON'T I MEAN TO THE EXTENT AGAIN TO THE EXTENT PRACTICAL.

RIGHT AT THAT. AT ANY GIVEN TIME, THEY MAY NOT BE FULLY AWARE OF WHAT'S READY OR GOING TO BE PLANNED FOR THAT IN THE NEXT FOUR WEEKS.

SOMETIMES THINGS HAVE TO MARINATE OR COME TOGETHER IN A TIMELY MANNER.

BUT YEAH, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH US, INCLUDING CANDIDLY, EVEN INCLUDING IN THE COMMISSION AGENDA STRUCTURE, THE TEMPLATE THAT THERE'S A, YOU KNOW, DISCUSSION, YOU KNOW, A CALENDARING OR A FORESHADOWING OF UPCOMING BUSINESS TYPE TOPIC.

WE COULD DO IT UNDER THEIR THEY HAVE, SOME NOT ALL OF THEM DO DIRECTORS REPORTS.

THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY COMMON ACROSS ALL COMMISSIONS EITHER SO, AND THEN THAT ONE HAS TO WE ALWAYS HAVE TO BE A LITTLE CAREFUL WITH THE DIRECTORS REPORT SOMETIMES GETS US. IT RUNS INTO CONVERSATION AND Q&A THAT PERHAPS WASN'T AGENDIZED.

SO I DON'T, THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT I'M ALWAYS A LITTLE WARY OF.

SO. BUT IF THERE'S A CALENDARING DISCUSSION, THAT'S PERFECTLY ALLOWED.

I ACTUALLY THOUGHT WE HAD, I PUT AS AN AGENDA ITEM ON EACH OF THE COMMISSIONS THAT FINAL VOTE ON WHETHER TO HAVE A MEETING, THE NEXT COMMISSION, BUT I CHECKED SOME OF THE RECENT ONES.

I DON'T SEE IT IN THERE. I MEAN, THE ACTION IS REALLY IN THE ADJOURNMENT.

HONESTLY, THAT'S WHERE, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE ACTION IS WHEN YOU ADJOURN, IT'S WHEN DO YOU ADJOURN.

SO THE COMMISSION ALWAYS HAS THE RIGHT TO ADJOURN TO A DIFFERENT TIME.

MAYBE YOU JUST MAKE THAT EXPLICIT THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU NEED TO DECIDE AT THAT TIME OR IN A, SEEING THE CITY ATTORNEY FORD'S EXPRESSION, AS IF.

I WOULDN'T PUT IT IN THE ORDINANCE, BECAUSE IF IT DOESN'T HAPPEN, I WOULDN'T WANT TO HAVE TO PROSECUTE SOMEONE WHO DOESN'T DO IT [LAUGHS] I THINK THE DISCUSSION CAN LEND ITSELF TO THE LIAISON TRYING TO PUT THAT INTO PRACTICE AND ITS OPERATIONS.

BUT I WOULDN'T PUT THAT IN THE IN THE ORDINANCE ITSELF.

OKAY. SO YOU WOULDN'T PUT IN THE ORDINANCE THAT LIAISON SHALL GIVE A REPORT REGARDING FUTURE ITEMS. I WOULDN'T RECOMMEND THAT. OKAY. SO HOW ABOUT WE PUT IT EXPRESS IN THE ORDINANCE THAT THE COMMISSION SHALL HAVE THE OPTION UNDER ADJOURNMENT TO CANCEL THEIR FUTURE MEETING ON THE MOTION OF ONE AND VOTE A MAJORITY VOTE OR JUST KEEP IT AS ADJOURN.

I MEAN, BECAUSE I THINK YOU MIGHT ACTUALLY HAVE THAT NOW.

THAT YOU'RE TURNING TO THE NEXT MEETING. YEAH, WE HAVE WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF THAT NOW.

YEAH. WHICH IS WE COULD MAKE A MAJORITY VOTE OF THE COMMISSIONERS RIGHT.

[03:00:01]

YEAH. AND JUST A QUICK QUESTION ON THIS FOR THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY.

COULD, FOR EXAMPLE, IN YOUR EXAMPLE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS EXPECTING SOMEONE TO APPEAR FOR A HEARING AT THEIR NEXT MEETING.

COULD THEY ADJOURN, SUBJECT TO, YOU KNOW, THAT PERSON COMING? I THINK WE STILL WOULD HAVE TO DO NOTICING OF THE CANCELLATION, I THINK IF WE WERE.

I MEAN, SO BECAUSE REALLY, WHAT IT IS, IT'S ABOUT WHAT THE EXPECTATION IS AND THEN ONCE YOU SET THE MEETING, YOU'VE GOT TO. DO A NOTICE. NOTICE OF CANCELLATION TO TERMINATE THE MEETING OR CANCELLATION.

OKAY. HOW ABOUT IF WE PUT IN THIS SUBSECTION C AFTER ADJOURNMENT ITEM ON THE COMMISSION AGENDA, THE COMMISSION MAY INQUIRE WITH LIAISON AS TO NEXT MEETING WHETHER THERE ARE ITEMS FOR THE NEXT MEETING.

THAT WAY THERE'S NO OBLIGATION FOR THE LIAISON TO ANSWER.

IT'S JUST A RIGHT THAT THE COMMISSION HAS. AND KIND OF LIKE A REMINDER THAT THAT'S AN OPTION THAT THEY HAVE.

THAT'S A GOOD IDEA. IS IT SOMEWHAT IMPLIED IN HERE? IT DOES SEEM LIKE THERE'S A BIT OF A CONVERSATION HERE.

I MEAN, YEAH, HOW DOES THAT PLAY OUT? WE'RE GOING TO, THE CONVERSATION MAY HAPPEN ALREADY OR NOT, I'M NOT SURE. I MEAN, I MEAN, YOU COULD SAY. DURING THE ADJOURNMENT, I MEAN, THERE MAY BE A CONVERSATION ABOUT FUTURE BUSINESS.

THE COMMISSION MAY CONSIDER THAT WHEN DECIDING WHEN WHETHER OR NOT TO TO CANCEL A MEETING.

I DON'T, I MEAN, YOU COULD PROBABLY ELABORATE ON THAT A LITTLE BIT. IT COULD BE PUT IN THE RULES OF CONDUCT.

YEAH, EXACTLY. THAT'S. YEAH, THAT MIGHT BE A BETTER PLACE.

YEAH. WHEN WE DISCUSS ADJOURNMENT, WE COULD ADD THAT TEXT.

OKAY. BUT I, AND I DON'T, I HAVE NO PROBLEM. I WILL I WILL ENCOURAGE THIS, YOU KNOW, EVEN IN OUR DEPARTMENT MEETING TOMORROW, I DO LIKE THE PRACTICE OF THAT FORESHADOWING OF BUSINESS.

SO I WILL WORK WITH THE LIAISONS TO MAKE THAT MORE, YOU KNOW, ROUTINE.

OKAY. DO WE HAVE CONSENSUS? SO IS EVERYBODY OKAY WITH CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION GOING MONTHLY? ANYBODY DOESN'T LIKE THAT? WELL I'M OKAY AS LONG AS WE'VE GOT THE CANCELLATION OUT.

I'M FINE WITH IT. YEAH. YEAH, THEY CAN CANCEL IT AND TURN IT INTO BIMONTHLY.

AND THERE'S ENOUGH PUBLIC ARTWORK COMING, I THINK, WHERE THEY'LL BE BUSY FOR THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE.

YEAH. PUT THEM IN THE DRIVER'S SEAT. YEAH YEAH.

AND THEN FROM WHAT I'M HEARING WE WANT TO WRITE IN THAT THE CITY MANAGER CAN APPROVE CANCELLATION BUT MUST INFORM THE COUNCIL. YEAH. AND FOR LACK OF BUSINESS OR QUORUM, REALLY.

IT'S EITHER. YEAH. ON ANY CANCELLATION, BASICALLY.

AND THEN WE'LL ADD SOME TEXT TO THE ADJOURNMENT SECTION THAT ALLOWS THE COMMISSION TO ASK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S IN OUR ITEMS. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

ANYTHING ELSE IN THE? WE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT STRIKING MARKETING FROM THE THE NON AGENDA ITEM STUFF. RIGHT.

WE JUST SO IT'S ON THE UNIFORM ORDINANCES. JUST TO HIGHLIGHT A COUPLE THINGS. ONE IS CONCERNS PARTIAL TERMS. IF YOU SERVE A PARTIAL TERM, IT DOESN'T COUNT AS A FULL TERM AGAINST YOUR TWO TERM LIMITS.

HOWEVER, IF YOU SERVE MULTIPLE PARTIAL TERMS THEN WHEN? RIGHT. SO IT COULD HAPPEN. YOU HAVE SOMEBODY WHO SERVES TWO TIMES LESS THAN TWO YEARS.

RIGHT. AND THE INTENT IS, WELL, IN THAT SCENARIO, THAT SHOULD COUNT AS A FULL TERM.

WE'RE GOING TO REFINE THIS LANGUAGE LIKELY WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY TO MAKE SURE THAT'S CAPTURED HERE.

CAN YOU GIVE ME AN EXAMPLE OF THAT SCENARIO WHERE SOMEONE SERVES TWO PARTIAL TERMS BACK TO BACK? WELL, WOULD IT BE BACK TO BACK? IT COULD BE SEPARATED BY A PERIOD OF TIME.

OKAY. AND WE KNOW SOME FOLKS HAVE BEEN ON COMMISSIONERS BACK AND FORTH OVER THE YEARS BEFORE OR AFTER ELECTED OFFICE.

SO IT'S A BIT OF HOUSEKEEPING. SO IT CAN BE. YEAH.

[03:05:01]

AND SO LET ME GIVE YOU A REAL WORLD EXAMPLE. SO I GOT, I GOT AND THIS MAY NOT BE PRECISE, BUT I SERVED FOR A YEAR ON THE HARBOR COMMISSION, YOU KNOW, AS AN APPOINTEE.

THEN I SERVED ONE TERM. AND LET'S SAY I ONLY SERVED A DAY LESS THAN TWO YEARS.

SO I DIDN'T SERVE A SECOND FULL TERM BECAUSE I WAS APPOINTED TO BE MAYOR.

AND THEN AFTERWARDS I SAID, WELL, I'D LIKE TO BE A HARBOR COMMISSIONER.

WELL, WHEN YOU ADD IT UP, YOU ADD UP THE TWO PARTIALS, I WOULD HAVE EXCEEDED TWO TERMS. OKAY. SO THAT'S A REAL, I'M NOT SAYING THAT I WAS UNDER TWO YEARS.

I'M JUST SAYING THAT'S SOMETHING THAT COULD OCCUR.

AND WE HAVE APPOINTED, NOT THIS COMMISSION, NOT THIS COUNCIL, BUT OTHER COUNCILS HAVE APPOINTED FORMER COUNCIL MEMBERS TO COMMISSIONS.

I THINK COUNCIL MEMBER KILROY WAS JUST ABOUT ON EVERY COMMISSION.

PARSONS, COUNCIL MEMBER PARSONS. PARSONS WAS ON.

YEAH. AND RIGHT NOW. AND RIGHT NOW, WE'RE LIMITED TO TWO FULL TERMS IN ANY COMMISSION.

COMMISSION OR SAME BOARD. SAME COMMISSION. PER COMMISSION.

OKAY. PER COMMISSION. OKAY. OKAY. COMMISSION.

SO THE IDEA WOULD BE IF SOMEBODY HAS ALREADY SERVED SEVEN YEARS ON A PARTICULAR COMMISSION, THEY'VE DONE TWO FULL TERMS. EFFECTIVE. TWO FULL EFFECTIVE.

YEAH. OKAY. OKAY. BUT YOU'RE GOING TO COME UP WITH MORE PRECISE BECAUSE WE DISCUSSED THE POTENTIAL MISREADING.

YEAH. WE'LL MAKE IT CLEAR AS TO THE INTENTION THAT WE JUST DISCUSSED.

UNLESS ANY. OKAY. WHEN WE WERE HERE LAST, WE TALKED ABOUT HOW MANY ABSENCES WILL TRIGGER SOMEBODY BEING REMOVED FROM A COMMISSION, AND THE CONSENSUS WAS THREE.

WE'VE INCLUDED THAT HERE. I JUST A BULLET. TWO FOR THE NEW BOARD MEMBERS.

YEAH, THAT JUST SEEMS REDUNDANT TO, IF YOU'RE ON A COMMISSION, YOU CAN BE ABSENT THREE TIMES.

AND THEN WE HAVE A PARAGRAPH THAT SAYS NEW BOARD MEMBERS. WELL, THAT WAS RECOMMENDATION FROM CITY ATTORNEY, CITY ATTORNEY STAFF THAT SAID, WHAT IF IT'S YOUR FIRST TERM AND YOU GO BACK, IF YOU GO BACK 12 MONTHS, LIKE WE'RE SAYING, YOU WOULD NOT HAVE SERVED ALL THOSE TIMES UNTIL YOU GOT APPOINTED.

AND SO THIS WAS MEANT. BUT NOT APPOINTED. YEAH, BUT IT SAYS LOOK BACK 12 MONTHS AND DURING THE PREVIOUS 12 MONTHS I SEE.

YEAH. SO THE INTENTION WAS TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE BOTH PROSPECTIVELY AND GOING FORWARD.

SO AN EXISTING BOARD OR AN EXISTING BORDER COMMISSIONER WHO IS ABSENT FROM THREE REGULAR MEETINGS OF SUCH BOARD OR COMMISSION DURING THE PREVIOUS 12 MONTHS. CHERYL, DO YOU WANT TO ADDRESS THIS? I THINK YOU'RE THE RECOMMENDATION OF B SECTION.

YOUR MIC'S NOT ON. BECAUSE I GUESS MY POSITION IS IF YOU HAVEN'T JOINED A COMMISSION, YOU'RE NOT PRESENT OR ABSENT.

AND THEN ONCE YOU JOIN, THAT'S WHEN THE CLOCK STARTS.

AND IF YOU'RE ABSENT THREE TIMES WITHIN, YOU KNOW, WITHIN 12 MONTHS, OR EVEN IF IT'S SIX MONTHS, YOU WOULD BE OFF THE COMMISSION AND THAT'S WHETHER YOU'VE BEEN THERE OR NOT.

SO THAT'S I DON'T MIND HAVING IT. IT MAKES IT VERY CLEAR.

I MEAN, IT JUST SEEMS REDUNDANT TO ME. LIKE EVERY, YOU KNOW, IF YOU WENT BACK 12 MONTHS AND THEY'VE ONLY BEEN THREE MONTHS ON THE COMMISSION AND THEY DIDN'T AND THEY AND THEY. THEY WEREN'T, THEY'VE ONLY BEEN THERE THREE.

ARE YOU GOING TO START THAT CLOCK UPON IMPLEMENTATION OR ARE YOU GOING TO, OR IS THERE GOING TO BE A? YEAH. WELL THAT AND SO THAT'S THE SECOND ISSUE IS WHEN DO WE KICK THIS IN? DO WE WANT IT, A, FROM THIS DAY FORWARD THE NEW RULES MAYOR SHAKING HIS HEAD NO.

YOU WANT YOU WANT TO GO BACK? I THINK WE SHOULD GO BACK.

WE'VE BEEN GIVING THEM A SLIDE BECAUSE WE WEREN'T ENFORCING THE TWO.

THE TWO. THE TWO MEETING MISSES. ISN'T THAT A VIOLATION OF THE EX POST FACTO LAW OR PROHIBITION? WELL, EXCEPT THEY SERVE AT OUR. ALL RIGHT. SO THAT.

SO IT SOUNDS LIKE THE DECISION POINT IS. SO ITEM TWO HERE, A NEW BOARD OR COMMISSION MEMBER, IF YOU'RE ABSENT FROM THREE REGULAR MEETINGS DURING YOUR FIRST YEAR OF YOUR APPOINTMENT, THEN YOUR SEATS DECLARED VACANT. I DID THINK THAT IT WAS REDUNDANT WHEN I READ IT ACTUALLY BEFORE.

SO WE'RE TALKING THROUGH IT.

YEAH. SO REMEMBER. SO I DEFER TO THE CITY ATTORNEY BECAUSE THAT WAS ADDED.

OKAY. WELL, SO LET'S START WITH THIS ONE RIGHT HERE.

IF YOU'RE ABSENT FOR THREE REGULAR MEETINGS OF THE BOARD OR COMMISSION DURING THE FIRST YEAR, YOU'RE VACANT.

YEAH. AND THAT WOULD HAVE ALSO BEEN WITHIN THE PREVIOUS 12 MONTHS.

AN EXISTING BOARD COMMISSION MEMBER IS ABSENT FROM THREE REGULAR MEETINGS DURING THE PREVIOUS.

A BOARD OR COMMISSION MEMBER. NOT EXISTING, NOT NEW, OKAY, GOING FORWARD OR PROSPECTIVELY AS WELL DURING

[03:10:06]

IT'S YOUR RETROSPECTIVE LANGUAGE THAT REQUIRES THE DUPLICATE STANDARD.

AND IF WE GO RETROSPECTIVE, THERE'S PROBABLY A WHOLE SLATE OF PEOPLE WHO AUTOMATICALLY ARE VACATED.

RIGHT. AND POTENTIALLY THAT WASN'T THE RULE. WELL, TWO WAS THE RULE.

WE JUST DIDN'T ENFORCE IT. THEY SHOULD ALREADY BE.

RIGHT. THEY MAY BE CONDITIONED. NOW WE'RE REALLY SERIOUS.

YEAH, WELL, WE STILL HAVE THE LEEWAY WE CAN PULL THEM FOR ANY YOU KNOW, AT OUR JUST THEY SERVE AT OUR WILL AND WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A REASON FOR PULLING THEM.

SO SHOULD WE HAVE A STANDARD NOW? WE CAN JUDGE AGAIN.

WE DO HAVE A STANDARD I, DO KIND OF LIKE THE IDEA OF DOING THE.

YOU MAY NOT BE ABSENT FROM THREE MEETINGS STARTING NOW.

GOING FORWARD, YOU'RE ON NOTICE. IT'S IN THE CODE.

NO MORE SLIDING. YOU'RE OKAY WITH IT? AND THAT WOULD ALSO TO THE POINTS OF COUNCIL MEMBER CASTLE, OBAGI GET RID OF THE REDUNDANCY. YEAH. YEP. ALL RIGHT.

OKAY. I WOULD ADVISE YOU, AND I'LL SEND OUT THE LINK, BUT THERE'S A NEW BI TOOL.

IT MAKES IT VERY EASY TO GO BACK AND SEE HOW MANY PEOPLE HAVE MISSED.

THERE'S ONE. THERE'S ONE DEFINITION WE HAVE TO NAIL DOWN.

AND THAT'S IF IN THE MEETINGS CANCELED, EVERYBODY JUST SHOWS CANCELED.

WE HAVE TO SEE WHO WOULD CAUSE THE CANCELLATION.

AND THAT'S NOT, NOT IN THERE TODAY. I'M NOT SURE IF WE'RE GOING TO WHERE IT IS IN HERE, BUT I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY ABOUT YOU WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE COUNCIL HAS A RIGHT TO ESSENTIALLY END A COMMISSIONERS TIME ON A COMMISSION.

SHOULD THAT BE SOMETHING THAT'S VOTED ON AND DISCUSSED IN CLOSED SESSION V.

OPEN SESSION? THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN NOW, IT'S AN OPEN SESSION.

RIGHT. BUT IS. THERE'S NO EXCEPTION TO, THERE'S NO CATEGORY FOR CLOSED SESSION.

TO CLOSED SESSION SPECIFICALLY LIMITED TO NEGOTIATIONS OR LITIGATION.

I CAN'T SEE A CATEGORY THAT THAT WOULD FIT UNDER.

OKAY. I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. WHAT ABOUT PERSONAL PERFORMANCE? WE CAN'T DO THAT IN THE PUBLIC. WELL, THAT'S NOT THAT'S NOT AN EMPLOYEE.

IT'S A COMMISSIONER. RIGHT? JUST SOME OF THE STUFF YOU MIGHT WANT TO LET THEM GO WITHOUT IT BEING KNOWN. WHY? I MEAN, YOU CAN DO THAT BEHIND THE SCENES, BUT NOT IN CLOSED SESSION.

OKAY. BECAUSE THAT'S LIMITED TO VERY. YEAH, VERY SPECIFIC CRITERIA.

ONLY TWO OF THE COUNCIL CAN KNOW. BECAUSE WE CAN'T DISCUSS.

I CAN'T DISCUSS IT WITH. ALL RIGHT, I GUESS I CAN DISCUSS IT WITH.

I CAN'T TELL WHAT EACH OTHER SAYS, RIGHT? YES.

WE HAVE TO DO IT. OKAY. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

I YEAH, I WAS GOING TO SAY I THINK THAT WAS IT ON THE UNIFORM CODE.

SO I'LL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM. ACTUALLY, ONE QUICK QUESTION.

SINCE YOU ARE PAUSED OVER, THE NOTICE HAS TO BE PUT INTO A NEWSPAPER, LOCAL NEWSPAPER, IF WE WANT TO BE LOOKING FORWARD.

YEAH. THERE MAY NOT BE A LOCAL NEWSPAPER IN 20 YEARS.

WE DON'T KNOW. I THOUGHT WE TOOK CARE OF THAT PUBLICATION.

THE DEFINITION OF PUBLICATION, WE CHANGED. RIGHT? IT SAYS OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER, THE CHARTER. WE CHANGED PUBLICATION. RIGHT? RIGHT HERE. WE'VE GOT OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER. SO WE COULD CHANGE THAT TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE CHARTER.

DOESN'T REQUIRE NEWSPAPER. OKAY. I JUST THOUGHT OF IT.

THANKS FOR THINKING OF IT. I'VE HIGHLIGHTED IT.

GET ON YOUR HORSE? YEAH, I GUESS, ARE WE EVEN OBLIGATED TO HAVE THAT IN THE ORDINANCE ITSELF? IF IT'S ALREADY ENSHRINED IN OUR. WELL, WE GOT ORDINANCE FOR THAT CHARTER.

ORDINANCES GOT TO BE PUBLISHED UNDER THE CHARTER REQUIREMENTS CURRENTLY.

RIGHT. DOES THAT HAVE TO BE RESTATED IN THE ORDINANCE ITSELF? MAYBE WE CAN DELETE IT. I MEAN, I'M WONDERING IF WE EVEN NEED THAT.

OKAY, I DON'T KNOW. I'D HAVE TO LOOK. I MEAN, THE CHARTER SPEAKS TO THE PUBLISHING REQUIREMENTS.

CORRECT? NOBODY'S JUMPING UP AND DOWN. I MEAN, DO WE ALWAYS HAVE THAT IN OUR LANGUAGE? WELL, THAT'S NOT PART OF THE PASSAGE, THOUGH.

WE NEED THE LAST LINE. PART OF THE RESOLUTION.

OKAY, WE WE RESTATE THAT IN THERE. WHEN THE TIME.

YEAH. WELL, THAT'LL BE A FINAL FORMATTING THING.

WE'LL COVER THAT. YEP. OKAY. MOVING ON. PUBLIC WORKS AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION.

ONE QUESTION WE HAD AND MAYBE WE COULD REVISIT IT ANOTHER TIME.

CONCERNS. YOU KNOW THIS LANGUAGE HERE, AND I THINK DIRECTOR WINJE TOOK A LOOK AT IT.

[03:15:04]

I THOUGHT THE RESPONSE WAS THIS WAS REQUIRED BY THE ADA STUFF WE IMPLEMENTED INTO THIS COMMISSION.

AND I THINK WE'RE RELYING ON THE PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY STANDARD THERE TO COVER.

YEAH, IT SEEMED LIKE IT MAY HAVE BEEN A COMBINATION OF TWO DIFFERENT REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE CODE.

AND IT WASN'T CLEAR IF THIS NECESSARILY A, IF WE'RE STILL DOING THOSE ADA APPEALS OR NOT.

I JUST FLAGGED THAT ISSUE OF DOES THIS STILL APPLY TO OUR COMMISSION? ARE WE DOING THE APPEALS TO WHICH THE STATE REQUIRES? YOU HAVE THESE QUALIFICATIONS. IN OTHER WORDS, ADA APPEALS.

I THINK LUKE DID A LITTLE BIT OF RESEARCH ON THAT EARLY ON, AND AS WE WERE CREATING THE SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION, AND THIS WAS A CONSTRUCT OF THE MERGER, I THINK.

LUKE. YEAH, IT WAS THIS WAS TAKING THAT HANDICAPPED ACCESS APPEALS BOARD THAT HAD PREVIOUSLY EXISTED AS A STANDALONE, BUT HADN'T BEEN STOOD UP IN MULTIPLE DECADES.

THERE WAS NO MEMORY OF IT BEING NECESSARY. AND SO IN TALKING WITH DIRECTOR WINJE, AS WE CONTEMPLATED THESE CHANGES AND ADDING IT IN A YEAR AGO, YEAR AND A HALF AGO WHEN WHEN WE DID CONSOLIDATE, THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE NOT SEEING A LOT OF, BUT WE DID WANT TO HAVE THE THE ABILITY TO STAND UP THAT APPEALS BOARD IF IT WAS NECESSARY.

AND INSTEAD OF HAVING THAT STANDALONE AD HOC, WE HAVE IT HERE.

AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS ATTACHED TO THAT, TO THAT HANDICAPPED ACCESS APPEALS BOARD, A LEGACY LEGACY REQUIREMENT THERE. BUT THAT PRACTICAL HARDSHIP STANDARD DOES, YOU KNOW, IF WE DON'T HAVE PEOPLE THAT FIT THESE CRITERIA THAT ARE APPLYING THE INTERPRETATION WHEN I WAS WORKING WITH ALEENA WAS THAT THAT WOULD COVER US IN THOSE CASES.

ALEENA FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, CORRECT? YES. OKAY.

I'LL TELL YOU, I WOULD LOVE FOR PEOPLE TO APPLY NOT JUST TO THIS ONE, BUT ALL COMMISSIONS.

SO I THINK OUR OUR SHORT ANSWER HERE IS, I THINK WE'RE OKAY WITH THIS CONTINUING.

AND TO ANSWER YOUR FIRST PART OF THAT QUESTION, WE HAVE, WE HAVE NOT HAD THE NEED TO MEET THANKFULLY FOR STILL FOR MANY DECADES.

SO OKAY, ALTHOUGH YOU DID, THE ONE THING YOU MAY WANT TO COVER AT THE TOP IS THE TITLE OF THE COMMISSION.

THANK YOU. SO PUBLIC WORKS SAFETY AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION.

AND WE'LL GET TO THAT IN HERE IN A MOMENT. WELL, THAT WAS A CHANGE FROM LAST TIME BECAUSE WE SAID SAFETY, TRAFFIC AND. RIGHT. I THINK IT WAS COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI SAID THEY ALREADY DO TRAFFIC IN THE OTHER ONE.

SO SUBSTANTIAL WORKLOAD. SO WE DON'T NEED TO ADD IT IN.

OKAY. SO, YOU KNOW, WHAT DO THEY DO, THIS IS THEIR POWERS AND DUTIES ADVISING THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

IT'S FAIRLY PRESCRIBED. THERE'S SOME FLEXIBILITY TO DO MORE, BUT ONLY IF THE DIRECTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OR CITY MANAGER OR STAFF LIAISON WITH THE APPROVAL AND OR DIRECTION OF THE CITY MANAGER.

WE'VE ADDED IN, PROPOSED ADDING A FEW OTHER THINGS SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES RELATED TO PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, OPERATIONAL ACTIVITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE, ETC.

AS DIRECTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY MANAGER, STAFF LIAISON.

I THINK THIS IS AN ITEM, MAYOR, THAT YOU HAD PUT INTO YOUR RECOMMENDED AMENDMENT.

THIS WAS MOVING FROM, YOU KNOW, THE FROM THE DEBATE ON SHUTTING DOWN THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION, YOU KNOW, PICKING UP THE ONE THING THAT I THOUGHT PEOPLE KIND OF GELLED ON THAT WAS A VALID FUNCTION THAT WE'D HAVE TO CARRY ON.

I WROTE THAT UP AND PUT IT IN HERE. OKAY. AND THAT WAS LOOKING AT THE CRIME STATS AND THE AND THE FIRST RESPONDERS.

SHOULD WE MAKE THAT LIKE ONCE A YEAR RATHER THAN THEM THINKING IF THEY'RE GOING TO GET IT ALL THE TIME, EVERY EVERY MONTH? THAT'S THE ANNUAL BASIS. OKAY.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO THIS PARAGRAPH HERE HAS TO DO WITH WHAT WAS AT ONE POINT PROPOSED AS THE A SEPARATE STANDALONE POLICE, FIRE AND HOMELESS SERVICES COMMISSION. WE FOLDED THOSE IN HERE, FOLDED THOSE ITEMS IN HERE INSTEAD, MEANING WHAT OTHERWISE WOULD HAVE GONE TO. THAT POTENTIAL NEW COMMISSION WILL BE PART OF THE PUBLIC WORKS SAFETY AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION, AND WE HAD THIS CONVERSATION LAST TIME, SO I WON'T GO THROUGH IT, REPEAT IT AGAIN.

SO NOTHING NEW ON THAT. AND THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT.

[03:20:03]

OH, MAYBE THIS. YEAH. WE SHOULD RESOLVE THAT AND IMPLEMENT THAT ACROSS ALL ORDINANCES.

SO. BUT I'M. I DON'T AGREE WITH WHAT YOU WERE, I DON'T AGREE WITH THE WORDING.

AT LEAST IT SOUNDED LIKE YOU WERE PROPOSING, BECAUSE WE'RE NOT GOING TO DIRECT EVERYTHING.

AND IF WE PUT THE COUNT, YOU KNOW, PER COUNCIL DIRECTION, THAT'S PRETTY SPECIFIC.

MAYBE I'LL ADD SOMETHING HERE. I, I ACTUALLY THINK THE WAY THIS IS WRITTEN CONSISTENTLY REALLY DOES WORK.

AND IT IS CONSISTENT WITH HOW WE'VE OPERATED WITH THE COMMISSIONS, WHETHER IT BE BUDGET, FINANCE OR PLANNING AND THE LIAISON, I THINK, TO BE IN ITS IDEAL FORM, THE LIAISON IS WORKING PROACTIVELY WITH THE COMMISSION TO ADDRESS ISSUES, BRING THEM TO THEIR ATTENTION FOR REVIEW, AND TO HELP VET THINGS BEFORE THEY COME TO THE COUNCIL THAT ARE WITHIN OUR BROADER WORK PROGRAM, STRATEGIC PLAN, BUDGET, ETC.. SO IN AN IDEAL WORLD, LIAISONS ARE BEATING THE COUNCIL TO THE PUNCH EFFECTIVELY, RIGHT? AND ANTICIPATING YOUR NEEDS. THIS AT LEAST GIVES US THAT ABILITY TO DO THAT.

AND IT STILL GIVES YOU THE ABILITY TO THEN DIRECT DOWNWARD IN CASE THOSE ITEMS HAVE BEEN MISSED.

SO I LIKE THIS SHARED RESPONSIBILITY. I DON'T THINK IT NECESSARILY MEANS THAT A LIAISON GETS TO LEAD THE COMMISSION AROUND BY THEIR NOSE, SO TO SPEAK. I THINK IT JUST ALLOWS THEM TO WORK COOPERATIVELY WITH THE COMMISSION RATHER THAN WAIT FOR DIRECTION FROM YOU ALL OR ME.

OKAY. AND I'LL TELL YOU, WHEN I WROTE THIS, IT, YOU KNOW, I WANTED TO I WANTED TO REFLECT PRACTICE THAT SEEMS TO BE WORKING.

AND I WOULD SAY 90% OF THE TIME IT IS THE LIAISONS CREATING THE AGENDA, THE INITIATIVE.

YEAH, IT'S THEIR INITIATIVE TYPICALLY. AND THAT'S WHAT I'M EXPECTING OF THEM CANDIDLY.

AND AND WE'VE NOT HAD A PROBLEM. WE CAN ALWAYS COURSE CORRECT THEM.

AND WE'VE DEFINED THE JURISDICTIONS. THEY CAN'T DIG IT OUT OF THE JURISDICTION.

RIGHT. OKAY. OKAY. GREAT. SO IF I READ THIS CORRECTLY, THIS MEANS THAT DURING REFERRALS TO STAFF ON COUNCIL, WE CAN MAKE A REFERRAL TO A LIAISON TO A COMMISSION.

RIGHT. WE'VE DONE THAT. AND WE HAVE IN THE PAST WE HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO DO THAT.

NO, WE'VE DONE IT. I FEEL LIKE IN THE PAST AS A REFERRAL DEFINITELY GONE TO I'VE ASKED BEFORE.

MAYBE IT WAS WHEN IT WAS WEBB WAS CITY ATTORNEY.

CAN WE CAN WE CAN WE PUT SOMETHING ON THE AGENDA OF A COMMISSION? HE SAID NO. RIGHT. IS THAT RIGHT? WELL, WHAT WHAT YOU'RE EFFECTIVELY DOING IS YOU'RE REFERRING TO ME, RIGHT? THAT. HEY, WE'D LIKE THE COMMISSION TO LOOK AT THIS.

AND THEN BY WAY OF PRACTICE, THE LIAISON THEN WOULD PUT IT ON THEIR AGENDA AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME, YOU KNOW, DEPENDING ON THE TIMELINESS OF THE, OF THE, OF THE ITEM.

SO BUT THIS DEFINITELY WOULD ALLOW THIS DEFINITELY MAKES THAT CLEAR THAT THAT IS AN OPPORTUNITY.

WELL AND THE THE THE NEW AGENDA THAT WE THAT WE PROPOSED, WHICH I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU'VE DONE ANYTHING WITH THAT THAT DRAFTED PROPOSED AGENDA, THAT ITEM HAS BEEN CHANGED TO REFERRALS TO TO CITY MANAGER, TO COMMISSIONS AND TO SUBCOMMITTEES.

BECAUSE WE HAVE REFERRED TO THE DIFFERENT SUBCOMMITTEES WE'VE REFERRED. I REFERRED ONE TO COUNSEL. WELL, I ASKED THE COUNCIL TO AND YOU GUYS APPROVED IT.

SO WE HAVE DONE IT IN THIS IN THIS FORUM. WHAT WHAT SITUATION WOULD THIS COUNCIL NOT BE ABLE TO ASK THE COMMISSION TO LOOK AT SOMETHING.

I MEAN, JUST IT'S JUST I'VE GOTTEN THAT RESPONSE BEFORE.

YEARS AGO WHEN I ASKED IF WE COULD MAKE LIKE GET SOMETHING ON THE AGENDA.

THE GOOD NEWS IS IT'S CRYSTAL CLEAR NOW, RIGHT? YEAH. OKAY. THANK. MARK IT OFF. YEAH. OKAY. WHAT DO YOU CALL IT? A DIFFERENCE WITHOUT A DIFFERENCE. DIFFERENTIATION. DIFFERENCE WITHOUT A DISTINCTION. DIFFERENCE WITHOUT A DISTINCTION. ALL RIGHT. BECAUSE I KNOW THE I MEAN, THE COUNCIL BASICALLY DIRECTED THE AMENITIES PLAN TO THE HARBOR COMMISSION.

YEAH. AND THERE HAVE BEEN MANY TIMES WHEN THE COUNCIL HAS REFERRED A MATTER THAT'S BEEN REVIEWED BY, BY COMMISSIONS. THERE COULD HAVE BEEN CIRCUMSTANCES IF THE QUESTION WAS POSED, YOU KNOW, WHERE, HEY, CAN A CAN A COMMISSION, CAN THE COUNCIL DIRECTLY PLACE THE ITEM ON THE AGENDA OR.

YEAH. I MEAN, YOU KNOW, IT COULD HAVE JUST BEEN IN THE PHRASING BUT YEAH, WHEN THINGS ARE WORKING PROPERLY, THE LIAISON IS WORKING COLLABORATIVELY WITH THE COMMISSION.

COUNCIL IS DIRECTING POLICY ISSUES THAT WE'RE ALL, YOU KNOW, MAY OR MAY NOT BE ANTICIPATING AND GIVING THE COMMISSION A CHANCE TO OPINE.

AND I KNOW WE'VE SAID WE'D LIKE THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S, YOU KNOW, OPINION OF THIS AND HARBOR CANNABIS YOU SENT TO MULTIPLE BODIES.

I MEAN, WE'VE DONE IT. WE'VE DONE MANY, MANY THINGS. YEAH.

SO I JUST I JUST TRIED TO DOCUMENT WHAT WE REALLY DO UNDER THAT SECTION.

ALL RIGHT. PLANNING COMMISSION ORDINANCES. DID YOU.

I'M SORRY. AND GO FOR. NO, PLEASE. NO, I JUST HAVE AN OVERARCHING QUESTION.

[03:25:01]

NO. SUBSEQUENT TO THIS CONVERSATION THAT YOU HAVEN'T ARTICULATED IN THE MEETING, DO YOU THINK THAT YOU'RE GOING TO WANT TO HAVE CHANGES? I JUST DON'T WANT US TO GO THROUGH ANOTHER TWO, THREE HOUR MEETING, YOU KNOW, NITPICKING AND MAKING THESE CHANGES WHERE THE MAYOR COULD KIND OF QUARTERBACK IT AND INCORPORATE YOUR CHANGES GOING FORWARD.

AFTER, FOR EXAMPLE, MAYBE YOU SENT HIM YOUR FINAL DRAFT.

THEN HE QUARTERBACKS IT FROM THERE. MAYBE. I MEAN, THE PLAN WE HAVE IN PLACE IS IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THIS SORT OF SHORT MEETING ON OCTOBER 7TH WHERE IT'S PUT IN THE PUBLIC RECORD AND WE'RE GOOD.

THEY SAID THEY WANT TO COME BACK NEXT WEEK. YEAH.

YEAH. YOU I THINK YOU STEPPED OUT AT THE TIME.

YEAH. THERE WAS YEAH. WE'RE GOING TO WE'RE GOING TO BRING THIS SAME ITEM BACK NEXT WEEK. AND THEN THERE'S ONE MORE CHANCE FOR A DATA DUMP.

AND THEN WE'LL FINALIZE ON THE SEVENTH. AND THEN WE'RE GOOD.

BUT I THINK WE'RE GETTING TOWARDS THE END HERE. I'M GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE CITY ATTORNEY ONCE WE MAKE ALL OUR CHANGES. WE'VE GOT IT BECAUSE THEY SCRUBBED IT ON THE FIRST ROUND. I DON'T WANT THEM TO SCRUB EACH INTERIM. THEY WON'T. I'M GOING TO WORK CLOSELY WITH THEM ON THAT. ALL RIGHT.

PLANNING COMMISSION? YES. CONTINUE. OH, YEAH.

SO THIS IS THIS IS THE HARBOR COMMISSION, TOO, RIGHT? OH, NO, WE ALREADY DID THAT. THAT WAS LIKE TWO COMMISSIONERS COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT COMMISSION.

SO, YEAH. SO ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION THIS IS WHAT WAS IN THE AGENDA PACKET.

POWERS AND DUTIES DON'T CHANGE. WHAT'S BEEN INCLUDED HERE IS LISTING OUT IN ONE ORDINANCE THE POWERS OF THIS PLANNING COMMISSION THAT ARE FOUND IN OTHER PARTS OF THE THE CODE.

SO JUST LISTING THEM HERE. SO WE HAVE PARENTHETICAL A AND THEN A PERIOD.

YEAH. GOOD POINT. THIS COULD GO TO ROMANETTE ONE.

WHATEVER. LET'S GO FOR SUBSTANCE. WE CAN GET THE FORMATTING.

I'M GLAD YOU SPOTTED I DIDN'T SEE IT. SO YEAH BUT I'M GOING TO FLAG IT.

SO AGAIN, FROM WHAT THE ORDINANCES TODAY TO HERE.

THERE WAS NO THERE WAS LIKE TWO, TWO LITTLE BLURBS THAT SAID, FOLLOW THE STATE LAWS AND FOLLOW THE ORDINANCES AND CHARTER OF REDONDO BEACH THAT WOULD REQUIRE THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO ALL RESEARCH ALL THE REGS OR ORDINANCES.

I WENT THROUGH AND COMBED THEM FOR EVERY REFERENCE AND JUST LISTED IT HERE SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO DO WHAT I DID.

JUST AND I DID LEARN. I DIDN'T KNOW SOME OF THIS STUFF WAS IN THEIR PURVIEW.

I'M NOT SURE THEY DO. RIGHT. YOU'RE GOING TO GET A THANK YOU CARD.

THANK YOU CARD. SO SO SO THAT'S SORT OF THE SUM AND SUBSTANCE OF THESE REVISIONS.

NOT A LOT ON SUBSTANCE, BUT AS FAR AS CONVENIENCE AND PUTTING IT IN THERE.

THAT'S BEEN DONE. ANYBODY ANYTHING ON THAT PLANNING COMMISSION ORDINANCE.

NO. HEARING NONE. BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMISSION.

THE I DO HAVE ONE. AND THIS IS JUST ONE OF THE GLOBAL.

YEAH. CLARIFICATIONS. WE NEED TO. SOME OF THE COMMISSIONERS ARE APPOINTED BY THE MAYOR.

SOME I THINK THIS WAS THE ONE THAT SAID APPOINTED BY EACH COUNCIL OR WAS EACH COUNCIL DISTRICT.

BUT IT WAS LIKE SOME ARE COUNCIL MEMBERS. SOME ARE THE MAYOR AND JUST HOWEVER WE WERE GOING TO DEFINE THAT.

SO ALL OF THEM IT'S A GOOD QUESTION. ALL COMMISSIONERS ARE APPOINTED BY THE MAYOR, SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY COUNCIL.

AND WHAT'S INTENDED HERE IS ONE MAYOR SHALL BE APPOINTED, FROM EACH COUNCIL DISTRICT, NOT BY EACH COUNCIL MEMBER.

OKAY. THE YEAH. ALL THE TRACK CHANGES. IT GETS A LITTLE BLURRY AT TIMES.

RIGHT. AND IN SOME PLACES IT SAID RESIDENT VERSUS REGISTERED VOTER.

THAT WAS ANOTHER THING THAT'S JUST GLOBALLY. OKAY.

THE DOCUMENT JUST TO BE CLEAR ON WHICHEVER WAY WE WANT TO GO.

YEAH. OKAY. I WOULD THINK IT REALLY DOESN'T MATTER BECAUSE THAT'S COVERED UNDER THE UNIFORM.

IT SAYS QUALIFICATIONS. YOU HAVE TO BE A RESIDENT AND A VOTER.

RIGHT? WELL, I MEAN, JUST WE SAY IN DIFFERENT WAYS, IN DIFFERENT PLACES.

SO JUST WHATEVER. WE SHOULD BE CONSISTENT. BE CONSISTENT.

OKAY. CONSISTENCY. I HAVE YEAH. GO AHEAD. ANOTHER ONE ON THIS.

I THINK IT WAS IN SECTION C WHERE WAS I? C. DO YOU HAVE A PAGE NUMBER, RIGHT? SO I THINK. HOLD ON. SO MAINTAIN CONTINUOUS STUDY OF SOURCES OF MUNICIPAL REVENUE AND METHODS OF PROPER SPENDING OF PUBLIC MONIES.

I THINK THAT SHOULD JUST SAY TALK ABOUT THE CITY'S FINANCES INSTEAD OF JUST REVENUE AND EXPENSES.

[03:30:01]

WE TALK ABOUT DEBT. THOSE AREN'T REVENUE OR EXPENSES.

SO I WOULD JUST CHANGE UPDATE THAT TO SAY RESERVES.

RESERVES. WE TALK ABOUT RESERVES YOU KNOW, MAINTAIN CONTINUOUS STUDY OF THE CITY'S FINANCES AND ASSIST THE CITY MANAGER AND COUNCIL IN FINANCIAL PLANNING. FINANCES BEING A GLOBAL FOR REVENUE RESERVES ET CETERA ET CETERA.

ASSETS, LIABILITIES, EVERYTHING. IF YOU HAVE SUGGESTED WORDING.

YEAH. AND PUT IT IN RIGHT HERE. YEAH. JUST CITY.

I THINK THE CITY'S FINANCES STUDY OF THE CITY'S FINANCES AND THEN ASSIST THE CITY MANAGER, INCLUDING PLANNING. YEAH. INCLUDING I MEAN, IF YOU WANT, YOU COULD SAY INCLUDED BUT NOT LIMITED TO REVENUES, EXPENSES. OKAY. ASSETS, RESERVES, ETCETERA. I MEAN, IS THERE ANY DOWNSIDE TO DOING THAT FROM A OPERATION.

YEAH. I MEAN, BUT THAT WOULD BE COVERED UNDER FINANCES.

YEAH. UNDER FINANCES. I THINK THAT'S WHERE IT MAYBE JUST YOU LEAVE IT AT FINANCES AND THEN YOU DON'T HAVE YOU DON'T HAVE TO LIST.

YOU REALLY DON'T HAVE A LIMIT. TREASURER, DO YOU WANT TO COME UP AND SAY SOMETHING? I WAS TRYING TO LOOK AT EUGENE HE LOOKS LIKE HE WANTS TO SAY SOMETHING AND HE'S INVOLVED WITH THIS. I DON'T WANT TO PRECLUDE MYSELF FROM SAYING SOMETHING LATER, BUT WHEN I FIRST GOT ON THE BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMISSION, ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS WE ADDRESSED WAS SOME OF THE CHARTER BIDDING PROCESSES IN SECTION 19 THAT ENDED UP ON THE CITY CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE AND ENDED UP BEING A CHARTER AMENDMENT. SO SOME OF THOSE OPERATIONAL FUNCTIONS WITH REGARD TO THE CITY WERE PART OF DISCUSSIONS THAT I THOUGHT WERE VALUABLE.

AND I DON'T KNOW, THAT WOULD BE ENCOMPASSED BY ANY OTHER COMMISSION THAT WE HAVE.

MAYBE, BIDDING WOULD BE COVERED BY PUBLIC WORKS.

BUT SOME OF THOSE, SOME OF THOSE THINGS RELATED TO FINANCES BUT WEREN'T SPECIFICALLY, PERHAPS CONSIDERED FINANCES.

FINANCIAL OPERATIONS. I WOULD JUST SAY CITY FINANCES, FINANCES OKAY. YES. THAT COVERS EVERYTHING. THAT'S GOOD.

YOU LIKE THE BROADER TERM? YEAH. OKAY. YEAH. CITY'S FINANCES.

OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE? NOPE. ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT.

OKAY. CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION. I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT MAKING THE CHANGE TO ONCE A MONTH MEETINGS.

YEAH. I'M NOT. WAS THAT FOR THE CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION OR WAS THAT. YES, YES.

AND SO WE'RE JUST TRYING TO RECALL WHERE IN HERE.

WE MENTIONED THAT APPOINTMENT. SOMEWHERE IN THERE.

WOULDN'T THAT BE IN THE UNIFORM SECTION UNDER 2-9.1404 TOWARDS THE END MEETINGS.

RIGHT, RIGHT. EVERY OTHER ONE. SO MAYBE JUST DELETE THAT SECTION.

SECOND RIGHT? BECAUSE NOW IT'S APPLICABLE IN THE UNIFORM CODE.

RIGHT. OKAY. OKAY.

PUBLIC AMENITIES COMMISSION.

SO THEY'RE NOT MUCH IN THE WAY OF SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES, MORE OF REPHRASING AND I THINK CONDENSING SOME OF THESE ITEMS. AND I KNOW THE MAYOR HAD PUT SOME TIME ON THIS.

AND THE REASON THAT CHANGES WERE DRIVEN, THE ORIGINAL ORDINANCE REQUIRED THEM TO DO STUFF LIKE LET CONTRACTS, AND THEY WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LISTINGS OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES, NOT REVIEWING THEM, BUT ACTUALLY THAT THEY'RE DONE AND THEY DON'T HAVE THE MEANS TO DO THAT. SO I TRIED TO WRITE IT IN THE THINGS THAT THEY COULD DO THAT STILL APPLIED TO THOSE AREAS.

ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER SMUDE DID RUN THIS BY THE STATE, CORRECT? AND THEY THEY WERE OKAY WITH THE WORDING CHANGES BECAUSE WITH PRESERVATION, YOU HAVE TO RUN IT BY THE STATE AND.

CORRECT. WE'RE A CERTIFIED LOCAL AGENCY UNDER THE STATE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION, AND WE HAD A STAFF MEMBER FROM THAT OFFICE OPINE ON THESE AND INDICATE THAT WE'D STILL BE ABLE TO KEEP OUR CERTIFIED LOCAL PROGRAM STATUS WITH THESE CHANGES.

SO IT'S REWRITTEN TO THINGS THEY COULD ACTUALLY DO AND HAVE AUTHORITY TO DO, AND IT WAS PASSED BY THE STATE SO.

OKAY, SO TO THE MAYOR'S POINT, INSTEAD OF RETAIN CONSULTANTS THEY RECOMMEND CONSULTANTS TO BE RETAINED.

OKAY. I ASSUME WE'VE LEFT ALL THE OTHER RECREATION FUNCTIONS AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT WE HAD.

[03:35:05]

THERE WE GO. OKAY I SEE. YEAH. YEAH YEAH I MEAN CORRECT.

AND YOU KNOW, FOR WE DID MAKE A COUPLE SMALL PROPOSED CHANGES SO THAT THERE'S NOT OVERLAP BETWEEN TWO DIFFERENT COMMISSIONS. FOR EXAMPLE WE HAVE IT HERE UNDER RECREATION AND PARKS DUTIES ACT AS ADVISOR TO THE CITY COUNCIL IN ALL MATTERS PERTAINING TO PUBLIC RECREATION PROGRAMS, INCLUDING PLAYGROUNDS AND PUBLIC RECREATION RELATED ENTERTAINMENT.

THE PURPOSE OF THAT WAS BECAUSE WE HAD ANOTHER COMMISSION.

I THINK, MAYOR, YOU POINTED OUT WHERE, YOU KNOW, THEY MAY BE ADVISING ON ENTERTAINMENT.

SO WE WANTED TO MAKE THIS ONE LIMITED TO PUBLIC RECREATION RELATED ENTERTAINMENT.

SO MINOR CHANGES LIKE THAT JUST BY GOING THROUGH AND.

ALL RIGHT, LIKE THE BANDS ON THE PIER THAT'S DONE THROUGH THIS.

YEAH, YEAH, YEAH. WELL, YEAH, THERE'S STILL POTENTIAL FOR AT THE END OF THE DAY, HOW WE ASSIGN THE WORKLOAD, YOU KNOW YOU KNOW, SHAKESPEARE BY THE SEA IS AN EXAMPLE.

RIGHT. COULD THAT FALL UNDER THE PURVIEW OF THE CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION? SURE.

RIGHT. IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A POTENTIAL ACTIVITY 4TH OF JULY ACTIVITY AT THE SEASIDE LAGOON THAT PROBABLY FALLS UNDER THE PUBLIC AMENITIES COMMISSION. RIGHT. SO IT WILL JUST HAVE TO MAKE A JUDGMENT CALL AS TO HOW THAT PARTICULAR EVENT OR ENTERTAINMENT DOES IT FALL ON THE CULTURAL SIDE OR THE RECREATIONAL SIDE? WE'VE GIVEN THE TOOLS TO DO THAT NOW.

SO OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO HISTORIC RESOURCES PRESERVATION.

NOT MUCH IN HERE, I THINK, MAYOR YOUR INTENT WAS TO INCLUDE THE NAME CHANGE ONLY PRESERVATION.

YEAH IT'S UNDER THE PRESERVATION COMMISSION, WHICH NO LONGER. YOU'RE JUST UPDATING THAT? YEAH. YEAH. MAKES SENSE. YEAH. TRUING IT UP WITH THE CURRENT STATUS. THE FUN OF AS YOU DIG IN, YOU FIND MORE.

ALWAYS MORE. I WAS SURPRISED THAT SOME OF THE AGES ARE AT THIS POINT FOR OUR CITY NOT ALL THAT OLD.

YOU KNOW, A DISTRICT COULD BE 30 YEARS OLD WITH AS LONG AS IT'S SIGNIFICANT AND ALL THAT.

IT'S LIKE, THAT'S NEW HOUSES. WELL, I THINK WE DID THAT SURVEY IN 19.

WHATEVER IT WAS 94 OR SOMETHING. YES. AND THAT IS IT FOR THE PROPOSED CHANGES. SO CAN WE START FROM THE TOP? YOU WANT TO GO BACK? JUST ONE QUICK ONE. ONE LAST REVIEW, SUMMARIZE THEM ALL FOR US.

YEAH. JUST GOING TO READ THROUGH. SO ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ALOUD? VERBALIZE ALL OF THE. PRODUCTIVE. DID WE SEND THIS TO COMMISSIONS TO READ ALOUD.

WE COULD. SO WE DON'T HAVE TO TAKE AN ACTION ON.

I MEAN, NO, I THINK YOU'RE I THINK THE IDEA IS WE WOULD CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO NEXT WEEK WITH.

WE HAVE TO GO TO PUBLIC. INPUTS PROVIDED. PUBLIC COMMENT.

MOTION TO WHAT? CONTINUE. WE NEED A MOTION TO CONTINUE.

OKAY. BEFORE WE VOTE ON IT, ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC.

I HAVE JIM MUELLER, BUT IT APPEARS HE'S LEFT THE AUDIENCE UNLESS HE'S JUST OUTSIDE.

I THINK HE LEFT. JIM? HE'S BEEN GONE. OKAY. ANYBODY FROM THE PUBLIC? YOU'VE SPOKEN ALREADY? NOW JUST SET THE TIMER.

CUT ME OFF. THANK YOU. EUGENE SOLOMON, REDONDO BEACH.

SPEAKING FOR MYSELF TONIGHT. COUNCIL MEMBER WALLER MADE A POINT EARLIER WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT ZOOM MEETINGS.

IT SHOULD SHOULD BE CONTEMPLATIVE OF FUTURE FOR ALL OF THESE THINGS.

SO ZOOM AND OTHER EMERGENT PARTICIPATION TECHNOLOGIES OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, TO BE CONTEMPLATED OF THINGS TO NOT HAVE TO GO BACK AND CHANGE THE ORDINANCE IN THE FUTURE. I FEEL VERY PASSIONATELY ABOUT THIS. I FEEL LIKE A LOT OF THE CODE OF CONDUCT IS LIMITATION ON SPEECH AND EXPRESSION.

SO THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN NOW, IF SOMEBODY FROM ONE OF OUR UNION GROUPS COMES UP AND IS WEARING A UNION T SHIRT, THAT'S A POLITICAL EXPRESSION THAT WOULD BE PROHIBITED. PRIDE SHIRT, SHIRT SUPPORTING BLACK LIVES MATTER, A SHIRT SUPPORTING UKRAINE. THESE WOULD ALL BE POLITICAL EXPRESSIONS THAT WOULD BE PROHIBITED.

AND I DON'T FIND THAT THAT WOULD BE A JUST USE OF THIS ORDINANCE.

FREEDOM OF SPEECH GUARANTEES THE RIGHT TO EXPRESS ONESELF WITHOUT FEAR OF GOVERNMENT PUNISHMENT.

WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE COMMISSIONERS, LET'S TALK ABOUT PROCESS.

YOU HAVE ACTIVITIES ON SOCIAL MEDIA. ALL OF US THAT HAVE BEEN ELECTED, THE STAFF MEMBERS, THE CITY MANAGER, NOT ME. MR. WERE YOU AN EMPEROR? MR. WITH THE EXCEPTION OF PERHAPS MR. SMUDE, HAVE HAD SOMEBODY SAY SOMETHING ABOUT US THAT IS IMPROPER,

[03:40:01]

AND US POLICING BEHAVIOR ON SOCIAL MEDIA SEEMS TO BE A STEP TOO FAR.

WHAT'S THE PROCESS FOR THAT? WHEN SOMEBODY IS ENGAGING IN WHAT WOULD BE IMPROPER CONDUCT, JUSTIFIABLY SO.

THEY'RE MAKING OUTRAGEOUS ALLEGATIONS SAYING RIDICULOUS THINGS. SO IS THAT FLAGGED BY A MEMBER OF THE COUNCIL WHO BRINGS THAT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE COUNCIL? HOW IS THAT HEARD? IS IT A COUNCIL THAT THEN AGENDIZED MEETING? HOW? WHAT IS THAT PROCESS? IN ORDER TO DO THAT, YOU WANT TO REMOVE THAT PERSON OR YOU WANT TO GIVE THEM A WARNING? WHAT'S THAT PROCESS LOOK LIKE? WHAT IF IT'S SOMEBODY WHO IS THE CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE? OUR CURRENT MAYOR. FUTURE MAYOR. AND BUT IT'S THE MAYOR WHO'S IN VIOLATION OF THAT CODE WHO ENFORCES THAT? WHAT IS THE PROCESS THERE? THERE'S GOING TO BE A CONFLICT FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.

CITY ATTORNEY REPRESENTS THE CITY. WHAT IF IT'S THE CITY ATTORNEY WHO VIOLATES THAT CODE? SO THERE SEEMS TO BE SOME PROCESS THAT NEEDS TO BE WORKED THROUGH HERE.

AND I JUST THE INTENTION IS GREAT. I THINK THE MAYOR DID A GREAT JOB PUTTING ALL THIS TOGETHER.

THIS IS WHAT THE MAYOR, ONE OF THE MANY THINGS HE'S REALLY GOOD AT, IS PUTTING ALL THESE THINGS TOGETHER AND DISTILLING THEM.

AND COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT'S WORK. ALL REALLY GREAT, BUT YOU STILL HAVE A WAYS TO GO.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? DO YOU HAVE A CARD? OH, THE PERSON LEFT. WE HAD ONE CARD FOR JIM MUELLER, BUT HE WASN'T HERE.

OKAY, LET'S GET ONLINE. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

I HAVE A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP.

I THOUGHT I ACTUALLY LIKE THE SUGGESTION OF MR. WALLER OR COUNCIL MEMBER WALLER BROUGHT UP ABOUT THE MARKETING OR PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT SESSION IN THE BEGINNING.

I KNOW THERE'S SOME CONCERNS ABOUT PERHAPS HAVING THAT MORE TIME, BUT IF YOU LIMIT THAT TO ONE MINUTE, THEN YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE, AS WE'VE HAD MANY TIMES, SERIAL MEMBERS OF THE SAME GROUP COME UP.

I'M THE PRESIDENT. THREE MINUTES. I'M THE VICE PRESIDENT.

THREE MINUTES. OH, I'M THE SECRETARY OF THE ASSISTANT OF THE VICE PRESIDENT.

ANOTHER THREE MINUTES. SO NOW YOU'VE EATEN UP ALMOST HALF THE TIME FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT. I DON'T THINK THAT'S A BAD IDEA. ALSO I DO CONCUR WITH MOST OF WHAT MR. SOLOMAN JUST PRESENTED. I THINK THAT WE'RE KIND OF GOING DOWN A SLIPPERY SLOPE BY LIMITING A LOT OF FREE SPEECH COMMENTS, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT SAYS IN SOME OF THE COMMENTS, THE WORDING IN HERE IS, IS BASICALLY SAYING THAT THE PUBLIC MAY NOT BE AWARE OF THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN AN INDIVIDUAL AND THEIR PERSONAL AND THEIR PRIVATE, OR THEIR ROLE AS HEAD COMMISSIONER OR IN THE PUBLIC.

WELL, WHEN WE COME UP TO THE PODIUM MR. SOLOMON DID IT.

HE SAID, I'M COMING UP HERE SPEAKING AS A PRIVATE CITIZEN. I AM TOO, RIGHT NOW.

I DON'T THINK IT'S REALLY HARD TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THAT. AND, AGAIN, THE CRITERIA THAT YOU COME UP WITH AND DETERMINING WHAT'S INAPPROPRIATE OR NOT.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S INAPPROPRIATE IS THAT WHEN SOMEONE'S TALKING AND THEN SOMEONE UP AT THE DAIS LOOKING AT THEIR PHONE AND NOT LISTENING TO SOMEONE, IS THAT DISRESPECTFUL? I DON'T KNOW. I MEAN, IT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING TO CONSIDER.

AND I THINK THAT WHILE THE INTENTION IS, WELL SERVED BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY SOME COMMISSIONERS HAVE TO BE REMINDED AND THAT'S USUALLY IN THE BROWN ACT LIKE IF YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE SOMETHING AGENDIZED, WELL, YOU PROBABLY SHOULDN'T BE TALKING ABOUT IT ON PUBLIC COMMENT OR ON SOCIAL MEDIA, BECAUSE YOU CAN GET YOURSELF AN ISSUE FROM THAT. YOU MIGHT HAVE TO BE RECUSED, AND THAT COULD POTENTIALLY PUT THE CITY AT RISK.

AND I THINK MOST COMMISSIONERS UNDERSTAND THAT WHEN THEY'RE BEHIND THE DAIS, THEY ARE REPRESENTING THE CITY, AND THAT'S FINE. I MEAN, IF YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT HOW THEY'RE ACTING IN THE DAIS, THEY'RE NOT THROWING ROCKS AT PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE OR SWEARING OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

THAT'S FINE. BUT YOU KNOW SOMEONE WHO'S ONLINE SAYING, I DON'T LIKE WHAT SO-AND-SO DID OR DON'T LIKE WHAT THE COUNCIL VOTED ON THIS.

THAT SHOULDN'T BE A DETERMINATION TO SAY, WELL, YOU KNOW WHAT? I DON'T LIKE HOW THEY'RE BEING CRITICAL. LET'S HAVE THEM REMOVED FROM THE COMMISSION. THAT SETS A BAD PRECEDENT.

AND I THINK THAT THE FIRST AMENDMENT DOES, I THINK WE SHOULD SIDE MORE TO THAT, BECAUSE IF NOT, I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF NONPROFIT FIRST AMENDMENT GROUPS THAT WOULD BE HAPPY TO TAKE UP LITIGATION OF THIS SORT. AND THEY DO.

THERE'S A LOT OF CASE LAW ON THIS TYPE OF STUFF, SO JUST BE CAREFUL.

I MEAN, I THINK YOU'RE WELL-INTENDED, BUT, YOU KNOW, THE APPLICATION OF THIS IS LIKE MR. SOLOMON SAID, HOW DO YOU ENFORCE THAT? HOW WHAT'S THE PROCESS? WHAT'S THE PROCEDURE? YOU HAVE NOTHING THERE AT ALL. IT'S A BIG GRAY AREA.

AND I THINK ANY ATTORNEY WOULD SAY, YOU KNOW, IF YOU GOT TO ASK THE QUESTION WHETHER IT'S SAFE OR NOT, YOU PROBABLY SHOULDN'T. ANYWAY. THANKS. ANYONE ELSE WISH TO ADDRESS THIS ITEM? ANYONE ONLINE? YES. MARK HANSEN. GOOD EVENING.

MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL, CITY STAFF. MARK HANSEN KING HARBOR BOATER.

I WANT TO THANK ALL OF YOU FOR YOUR HARD WORK, YOUR DILIGENCE ON THIS.

[03:45:02]

TWO COMMENTS. ONE OF THEM, GENERAL, ON THE AGENDA.

I SENT YOU ALL A NOTE TODAY ENCOURAGING US TO MOVE THE PARTICIPATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO IN FRONT OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR. YOU GUYS HAD A GOOD DISCUSSION ON THAT THIS EVENING.

AND I'M EMPATHETIC TO THE FACT THAT SOMETIMES WE HAVE STAFF THAT'S THERE SPECIFICALLY IN CASE YOU GUYS PULL SOMETHING FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR THEM TO SUPPORT TAKING THAT ON BALANCE, IT'S A LITTLE BIT ASYMMETRICAL AS I THOUGHT ABOUT IT BECAUSE FOR THAT STAFF THEY KNOW THEY'RE ONLY GOING TO HAVE TO WAIT A ABSOLUTE MAXIMUM OF THE 30 MINUTES AND MAYBE LESS.

WHEREAS FOR THE PUBLIC WAITING ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS, THEY HAVE NO IDEA THOSE COULD GO, YOU KNOW, FOR A MUCH MORE LENGTHY AMOUNT OF TIME.

AND AS I MENTIONED IN MY BRIEF EMAIL TODAY YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN UP AGAINST THAT WHERE VARIOUS OF US WHO ARE MORE INVOLVED WITH THESE THINGS, WE GET QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMUNITY SAYING, HEY, I WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT, WHEN'S THAT GOING TO COME UP? AND WE CAN'T GIVE THEM A VERY GOOD ANSWER AT ALL.

WHEREAS OBVIOUSLY FOR STAFFING, THEY'RE THEY KNOW EXACTLY, YOU KNOW, 30 MINUTES MAXIMUM.

THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO WAIT. SO WITH THAT KIND OF ASYMMETRY, I WOULD CONTINUE TO RECOMMEND THAT YOU CONSIDER MOVING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION NON AGENDA ITEMS UP IN FRONT OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR. SECOND THING I WANTED TO COMMENT ON.

YOU HAD A GOOD DISCUSSION ABOUT THE HARBOR COMMISSION QUALIFICATIONS REGARDING HAVING A RESIDENT WHO LIVED ADJACENT TO THE HARBOR AREA, AND SOME OF US WERE THINKING, WELL, THAT WOULDN'T BE HARD TO FILL. BUT THEN WHEN STAFF REMINDED US ABOUT THE THOUSAND FOOT RULE, NOW ALL OF A SUDDEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A RELATIVELY NARROW NORTH SOUTH SLIVER THAT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO LIVE IN FOR THAT, AND WE'RE GOING TO BE RIGHT BACK UP AGAINST THE PROBLEM WE'VE HAD FOR DECADES, WHERE SOMETIMES WE HAVE A VERY HIGHLY QUALIFIED PERSON WE WANT TO USE.

AND NOW IF THEY DON'T HAPPEN TO LIVE IN THAT PARTICULAR SLIVER, WE CAN'T USE THEM.

IF THAT YEAR, LET'S SAY WHOEVER WE DID HAVE IN THAT THAT GEOGRAPHIC SPOT HAPPENS TO FALL OFF NOW OF EVERYBODY IN TOWN, THE ONLY ONE WE CAN USE IS SOMEBODY WHO LIVES IN THAT SLIVER.

SO ON THAT ONE AND I KNOW THIS IS WAS NEAR AND DEAR TO COUNCILMAN CASTLE'S HEART, SO I'LL LOBBY A LITTLE.

HAVE YOU THINK ABOUT THAT, THAT, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T WANT TO FIND OURSELVES WITH THAT UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE OF HAVING GREAT FOLKS THAT WE CAN'T USE BECAUSE THEY DON'T LIVE IN THAT SLIVER. HOPE THOSE TWO COMMENTS ARE HELPFUL AND THANKS AGAIN FOR ALL YOUR HARD WORK ON THIS.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? THAT CONCLUDES THE ZOOM AND THE ECOMMENTS FOR THE RECORD.

I DID HAVE SOME COMMENTS THERE. I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED IN THE FRAMING OF YOUR STATEMENTS THERE, EUGENE. AND THAT I THINK EVERYWHERE WHERE IT'S A REQUIREMENT, IT'S SPECIFIC, VERY SPECIFIC.

AND THEN THERE'S, PRETTY MUCH THERE'S WORDS LIKE THE COUNCIL EXPECTS.

IT DOESN'T SAY DEMANDS. IT DOESN'T SAY YOU SHALL COMPLY.

IT JUST SAYING AND THE ORIGINAL WORD WAS ASKS BUT I'M OKAY WITH EXPECTS AND IT SAYS REFRAIN FROM USE OF PROFANITY, OBSCENITY, OFFENSIVE LANGUAGE AND SPEECH ON SIGNS AND ON CLOTHING.

THAT DOESN'T SAY YOU CAN'T WEAR YOUR UNION SHIRT OR YOUR LANAKILA SHIRT OR YOUR CITY OF REDONDO SHIRT, AND IT DOESN'T EVEN IF YOU DO WEAR SOMETHING THAT HAS AN EXPLETIVE, IT JUST SAYS, WE ASK OR WE EXPECT.

IT DOESN'T SAY YOU'RE DENIED ACCESS BECAUSE OF THAT.

SO I'M NOT SURE. YOU KNOW, I DON'T, I THINK WE WERE TRYING TO BE VERY PRECISE WITH OUR WORDING IN THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'D LIKE EVERYBODY TO BE NICE TO EACH OTHER AND BE RESPECTFUL AND THAT.

AND WE'VE ASKED THAT. AND THEN THERE'S CERTAIN THINGS THAT IF YOU GO BEYOND THAT, LIKE YOU'RE NOT TALKING TO THE ISSUE OR YOUR CONTINUING TO TALK AFTER YOUR TIME'S UP, OR ARE YOU BLOCKING PEOPLE'S VIEWS OR YOU'RE INTIMIDATING PEOPLE.

THOSE ARE THINGS YOU CAN'T DO. AND THAT'S WE TRIED TO VERY PRECISELY WORD THAT.

AND I'LL ASK THE CITY ATTORNEY TO HELP MAKE SURE WE'RE, WE'RE YOU KNOW, VERY, VERY CLEAR IN, IN HOW WE WRITE THIS WHEN WE FINALIZE ALL THIS.

I DON'T EXPECT EVERY INTERIM PIECE TO BE DONE, BUT THAT WAS THE INTENT.

AND, YOU KNOW, TO THE EXTENT THAT YOU MAY HAVE MISREAD THAT, I MEAN, WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT IT, BUT THAT WAS THE INTENT TO JUST ASK PEOPLE. AND NONE OF THIS DID I JUST WRITE OUT OF MY OWN.

I DIDN'T MAKE IT UP. I FOUND EACH OF THESE EXAMPLES FROM OTHER CITIES, OR ACTUALLY FROM EARLIER VERSIONS OF OUR OWN.

AND SO I CONSOLIDATED WHAT I FOUND OUT THERE, KIND OF CHERRY PICKED THE THINGS THAT FIT FROM WHAT THE COUNCIL COMMENTED ON THROUGH THE YEARS. AND SINCE I'VE BEEN ON BOARD, BUT TRY TO BE VERY PRECISE ON WHAT'S ASKS OR EXPECTS BUT NOT DEMANDS AND AREN'T GROUNDS FOR KICKING PEOPLE OUT.

[03:50:06]

WE ALREADY HAVE THE RIGHT IN THE ONE ORDINANCE TO BOOT ANYBODY FOR WE DON'T EVEN HAVE TO HAVE A REASON.

SO SO THAT'S NOT THE INTENT OF THIS. IT'S TO KIND OF STEER.

THERE'S A COUPLE PLACES WHERE PEOPLE HAVE MISUSED THEIR TITLE AND THAT'S A SHALL.

YOU CAN'T DO THAT. BUT THE OTHER STUFF IS JUST SUGGESTIONS AND REQUESTS.

SO I'LL ASK THE CITY ATTORNEY AS WE GO THROUGH THIS TO MAKE SURE WE'RE PRECISE ON THAT WORDING AND THAT WE'RE NOT VIOLATING PEOPLE'S RIGHTS BECAUSE THAT'S NOT THE INTENT.

WITH THAT ANYBODY ELSE AFTER PUBLIC COMMENT, WANT TO SAY ANYTHING ON THIS? I HAVE NO HANDS RAISED. ARE WE ALL DONE? WE HAVE A MOTION TO CONTINUE.

DID WE GET A SECOND? SECOND? OKAY. ALL FOR IT.

AYE. OKAY. UNANIMOUS. NOW I GOT TO FIND MY AGENDA UNDER ALL THESE REFERRALS.

YEAH. MAYOR'S REFERRAL TO STAFF. OKAY. REFERRALS TO STAFF.

[Q. MAYOR AND COUNCIL REFERRALS TO STAFF]

SO COUNCILMEMBER WALLER. YES. I HAVE A BRR THAT I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THEM LOOK INTO ONCE PER YEAR. DEEP CLEANING OF THE ESPLANADE TO REMEDIATE THE PET URINE AND OTHER STAINS, AND TO AS PART OF THAT, LOOK INTO ALTERNATIVE PRODUCTS, CLEANING PROTOCOLS, VENDORS MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE NPDES COMPLIANT IN THOSE RESULTS. BUT I GUESS I CAN'T JUSTIFY ANY MORE.

AND CAN WE BRING WHEN YOU SAY THE ESPLANADE, CAN WE BRING THAT ALL THE WAY UP TO THE AREA BEHIND THE OLD LIBRARY, ALL THE WAY UP TO THE HARBOR? SO THE WALKWAY THAT'S UP THERE AS WELL, THAT'S BEEN AN ISSUE BEHIND THE LIBRARY THAT NEEDS TO BE CLEANED AS WELL.

AND TO THE PROMENADE AND TO THE. AS WE SAY, THE WALKING PATH.

YEAH, WE CAN DO THAT. THE NEW BIKE PATH. I'LL TELL YOU WHAT.

WE'LL WE'LL TRY TO CREATE A BIT OF A LINEAR FOOT COST MAYBE, OR SOMETHING, I DON'T KNOW, I.

AND WHEN COUNCIL MEMBER WALLER MENTIONED THIS MIGHT BE COMING, I MENTIONED THAT WOULDN'T TAKE LONG FOR IT TO PROGRESS TO ARTESIA BOULEVARD AND THE VILLAGE. I ALREADY DID ARTESIA BOULEVARD, REGULAR CAR WASH IN ARTESIA BOULEVARD.

I'VE ACTUALLY RECEIVED SOME COMPLAINTS ABOUT THAT AREA, BUT, YOU KNOW, BY THE PARKING LOT, BY VETERANS PARK. BUT SURE, JUST KEEP IT GOING.

OKAY. IS THAT IT? I WAS JUST GOING TO ASK THAT. IS THAT IT. DOES THAT FALL FROM THE BRR FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE? I MEAN, WHAT YOU'RE DOING THERE? I MEAN, JUST COST TO DO THAT.

YES IT IS. IT'S AN INQUIRY AS TO POTENTIAL EXPENSE TO BRING ON A WHAT I WOULD CALL A SPECIAL TREATMENT, SPECIAL CLEANING TREATMENT. OBVIOUSLY WE WE HAVE OUR REGULAR POWER WASHING CREW.

THEY CAN DO ONLY SO MUCH WITH THE EQUIPMENT THAT WE HAVE AVAILABLE TO US.

IS THAT FOR MID-YEAR OR NEXT YEAR? FOR BUDGET, WHETHER IT'S MID-YEAR.

BUDGET. OH. NEXT YEAR? YEAH, I'D SAY UP TO THE DISCRETION OF THE CITY MANAGER WHETHER IT FITS BETTER FOR MID-YEAR OR FINAL BUDGET. I HAVE NOTHING. COUNCIL MEMBER KALUDEROVIC.

THANK YOU. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE NEED A DISCUSSION, BUT JUST TO GET IT OUT IN THE OPEN, I'D LIKE TO REQUEST A BUS FOR THE FINAL EIR HEARING AT METRO, PLEASE. OH, I SECOND THAT. SECOND. IT'S A DISCUSSION ABOUT THE COST.

AND I MEAN. THIS IS GOING TO COME UP FOR THE BUDGET.

SO THIS ISN'T A BRR. NO, IT'S NOT A BRR. NO. WE CAN RESEARCH THE COST, BRING IT BACK, AND I'LL LET YOU KNOW IF IT'S SOMETHING I CAN DO WITHIN MY ADMINISTRATIVE DISCRETION. IF IT'S NOT ULTIMATELY, I'LL BRING IT BACK AS A COUNCIL ITEM REFERRAL.

I THINK IT'S WORTH A BRIEF DISCUSSION IN THAT, YOU KNOW, I, I'D LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ALSO HAVE THE ATTENDANCE TO NECESSITATE AN ENTIRE BUS. RIGHT. SO IS THERE A SECOND? I SECOND IT.

YES. WAIT, BEFORE WE GO THERE, THIS IS REGARDING THE GREEN LINE IN THE RIGHT OF WAY.

YEAH. YOU HAVE TO RECUSE YOURSELF ON THAT LINE.

NO THE C LINE. C LINE OR GREEN LINE YEAH. YEAH.

I'M GOING TO ABSTAIN. OKAY. ALL FOR. AYE. SO FOUR ONE ABSTENTION AND ONE ABSTENTION.

THAT'S IT. THANKS. THAT'S IT. OKAY. COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT.

NONE. I HAVE 12 BRR'S. SINCE I CAN'T MAKE A MOTION.

THAT HASN'T BEEN APPROVED YET. OKAY. WITH THAT, I'LL TAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN.

SO, SHOULD WE CHANGE THE TITLE TO, SAY, MAYOR, BRR'S AND COUNCIL REFERS TO STAFF.

IS THAT WHAT WE SHOULD HAVE ON THE AGENDA TEMPLATE? YEAH. MOTION TO ADJOURN.

MOTION TO ADJOURN TO NEXT TUESDAY, 4:30 FOR CLOSED SESSION.

[03:55:03]

CAN I INQUIRE IF WE HAVE BUSINESS NEXT WEEK? SHOULD WE CANCEL? YEAH. OKAY. ALL FOR. AYE. OKAY. WE'RE ADJOURNED.

WHAT? NO. OKAY. WHO SECONDED THAT? BRAD. COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI.

JUST ASSUME I DID ON.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.