Jul 21, 2026 City Council

[00:00:03]

OKAY, I'M GOING TO CALL THE MEETING. THE 4 P.M.

[A. CALL MEETING TO ORDER]

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

COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT. HERE. AND MAYOR LIGHT.

HERE. DO WE HAVE ANY BLUE FOLDER ITEMS? THERE ARE NO BLUE, NO BLUE FOLDER ITEMS FOR CLOSED SESSION.

OKAY, GOING DOWN TO E, PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS AND NON AGENDA ITEMS. THERE'S NOBODY IN THE IN THE AUDIENCE ANYONE ONLINE.

THERE ARE NO PARTICIPANTS ON ZOOM OR NO ECOMMENTS.

OKAY. COULD YOU READ OFF THE FOUR ITEMS WE'LL BE TALKING TO YOU F.1 THROUGH F.4 PLEASE.

[F. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION]

COUNCIL WILL DISCUSS THE FOLLOWING CLOSED SESSION ITEMS. F.1 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL, EXISTING LITIGATION REGARDING THE CASE OF CORNELIA BLAKELY VERSUS THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH AND DOES 1 THROUGH 25 INCLUSIVE CASE NUMBER 24TRCV02937. F.2, CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL EXISTING LITIGATION REGARDING THE CASE CLAUDIA SIRACUSA VERSUS THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, A PUBLIC ENTITY, ET AL. CASE NUMBER 26TRCV 00905.

ITEM F.3 CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR REGARDING PROPERTIES OF 100 AND 130 INTERNATIONAL BOARDWALK, REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA. 90277 A PORTION OF APN7505-002-932.

ITEM F.4 CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY WITH PROPERTY.

REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR WITH THE PROPERTY OF BASIN THREE SLIPS, REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA 90277 A PORTION OF APN7505-002-932. AND THAT IS ALL MAYOR. OKAY.

THANK YOU. CAN YOU LET THE RECORD SHOW THAT COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI HAS JOINED US AT 4:01.

04:02 FOR THE COMPUTER. YOU WERE BEFORE, BUT THAT'S CLOSE ENOUGH.

OKAY. CITY MANAGER WITZANSKY COULD YOU TELL US WHO WILL BE SPEAKING TO EACH OF THESE FOUR ITEMS? YES. THANKS, MAYOR. MYSELF FOR ALL ITEMS. CITY ATTORNEY JOY FORD AND ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY CHERYL PARK.

AND THEN FOR ITEM F.1, WE WILL BE JOINED BY JOSHUA DALE OUTSIDE LEGAL COUNSEL.

FOR ITEM F.2 WE WILL HAVE DAMIEN CAPOZZOLA OUTSIDE LEGAL COUNSEL.

AND THEN FOR ITEMS F.3 AND F.4, WE WILL HAVE WITH US ELIZABETH HAUSE, OUR WATERFRONT AND COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR, AS WELL AS KATHERINE BUCK, OUR WATERFRONT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MANAGER.

OKAY. THANK YOU. COULD I GET A MOTION TO RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION, PLEASE? SO MOVED. SECOND. OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION, AND A SECOND.

ALL FOR? AYE. ANYBODY OPPOSED? OKAY. MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

WE'LL BE BACK ON OR ABOUT 6:00 TO REPORT OUT ANY REPORTABLE ACTIONS AND TO START THE OPEN SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. CONVENING BACK TO OPEN SESSION FROM CLOSED SESSION.

[G. RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION]

COUNCIL MEMBER CASTLE. HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER KALUDEROVIC.

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

HERE. AND MAYOR LIGHT. HERE. CITY MANAGER. I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANYTHING TO ANNOUNCE, BUT CAN YOU CONFIRM THAT? NO. NO REPORTABLE ACTION THIS EVENING, MAYOR. OKAY.

THANK YOU. CAN I GET A MOTION TO ADJOURN TO OUR REGULAR OPEN SESSION? SO MOVED. SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ALL FOR? AYE. ANYONE OPPOSED? OKAY. MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

I'M NOW CALLING TO ORDER THE 6 P.M. OPEN SESSION REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

[A. CALL TO ORDER]

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

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

HERE AND MAYOR LIGHT. HERE. DO WE HAVE ANY VETERANS OR ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY IN THE AUDIENCE? PLEASE STAND TO BE RECOGNIZED FOR YOUR SERVICE AT THIS TIME.

OKAY. SEEING NONE. LET US ALL STAND FOR THE SALUTE TO THE FLAG AND REMAIN STANDING AFTERWARDS FOR A MOMENT OF SILENCE.

I'D LIKE TO CALL UP MAYA, WHO WILL BE DOING THE HONORS OF THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TODAY.

COME ON UP. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR, MAYA. GOOD EVENING.

GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS MAYA. I'M A THIRD GRADER AT BERYL HEIGHTS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.

MY FAVORITE SUBJECT IN SCHOOL IS MATH. I LOVE THE WEATHER IN REDONDO BEACH.

PLEASE PUT YOUR HAND OVER YOUR HEART AND JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.

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 PLEASE REMAIN STANDING FOR A MOMENT OF SILENT INVOCATION.

PLEASE. OKAY. YOU MAY BE SEATED.

MAYA. WELL DONE. COME ON UP AND GET A PICTURE WITH US.

[00:05:04]

OKAY. FAMILY. DO YOU WANT TO COME UP? YEAH. COME ON UP.

OH, OKAY. BRING YOUR LITTLE BROTHER AND HIS AIRPLANE.

YEAH. EVERYBODY'S WELCOME TO COME UP. YEAH. COME ON.

WE GOT TO GET THE WHOLE FAMILY. THERE WE GO. ALL RIGHT.

HE'S GOT THE ROCK ON. ROCK ON. HE KNOWS HE'S WITH THE COUNCIL.

ONE. TWO. THREE. ONE MORE. I LOVE IT. THANK YOU.

WELL DONE. WELL DONE MAYA. WELL, THAT WAS GREAT.

BRAD SAID HE WAS DOING THAT BEHIND MY HEAD. I DIDN'T.

HAVE NO PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS. SO WE'LL DO ANNOUNCEMENTS AND AB 1234 TRAVEL EXPENSE REPORTS AT THIS TIME AND I'LL START OUT.

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

THAT WAS THURSDAY NIGHT. I MET WITH OUR CITY AUDITORS TO DISCUSS THEIR AUDIT OF THE CITY, AND I ALSO ATTENDED THE SANITATION DISTRICT MEETING FOR OUR DISTRICT. AND THE MAJORITY OF THAT WAS ABOUT THE THE, THE BORING COLLAPSE AND HOW THEY WERE GOING TO RECOVER FROM THAT.

THEY HAVE ONE MORE MILE TO GO AFTER THEY RECOVER FROM THE BORING ACCIDENT, AND THAT'S HOW THEY'RE GOING TO GET NEW LINES OUT TO THE OUT TO THE SEA.

SO WHICH WHICH WHERE'S THE BORING ACCIDENT? WHICH BORING ACCIDENT? THE ONE WHERE IT COLLAPSED. IT'S JUST OUTSIDE OF PV.

OKAY. ABOUT A MILE INLAND. OKAY. LET'S SEE WE'LL GO DOWN THE LIST.

COUNCIL MEMBER WALLER. THANK YOU. MAYOR. LAST WEEK WAS THE RB POLICE REDONDO BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT BATTLE OF THE BADGES BLOOD DRIVE SET A RECORD FOR THE NUMBER OF DONATIONS. ALTHOUGH THE GOAL OF 150 WAS NOT MET, BUT MAYBE NEXT TIME.

YESTERDAY MORNING, I HAD THE HONOR TO INSTALL THE 2026-27 CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BOARD OF DIRECTORS.

CONGRATULATIONS TO NEW CHAIR MICHELLE BROWN AND ALL THE OTHER NEW OFFICERS.

THE RIVIERA VILLAGE ASSOCIATION HAD THEIR BOARD MEETING THIS MORNING, AND I'M ALSO CONGRATULATING THE NEW PRESIDENT, KIM JUDY FROM CARD DE A, WHO IS THE NEW RVA BOARD PRESIDENT.

THE NRBBA SUMMER MIXER IS AT ARTESIA BAR TOMORROW AT 8 P.M.

THURSDAY, I WILL BE ATTENDING THE SOUTH BAY CITIES COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS BOARD MEETING AND JULY 29TH IS DINE AROUND ARTESIA.

THEY STILL HAVE TICKETS. YOU CAN GET SOME BEFORE THEY SELL OUT. CRUZIN' THE LAGOON IS EVERY FRIDAY, 3 TO 6 P.M. AT THE HARBOR PARKING LOT AND LIVE MUSIC AT THE PIER THURSDAYS AND SATURDAYS THIS SUMMER.

THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER CASTLE.

I JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF ANNOUNCEMENTS TONIGHT.

FIRST, I WANTED TO CONGRATULATE KING HARBOR YACHT CLUB.

THEY HELD THEIR ANNUAL SORRY, THEIR ANNUAL REGATTA FOR CURE CANCER AND RAISED $85,000 THAT THEY DONATED TO CEDARS-SINAI RESEARCH LAB FOR CANCER RESEARCH.

SO I WANTED TO CONGRATULATE THEM. AND THEY'VE DONE THIS FOR APPROXIMATELY, I THINK IT'S ABOUT 35 YEARS AND ARE QUICKLY APPROACHING $1 MILLION CUMULATIVELY THAT THEY'VE RAISED OVER THE YEARS FOR THAT, FOR THAT RESEARCH LAB.

AND THEN NEXT I'D LIKE TO ANNOUNCE THURSDAY IN THE LIBRARY AT 5:30, COUNCIL MEMBER SCOTT BEHRENDT AND I WILL BE HOSTING A COMMUNITY MEETING.

AND IN THIS MEETING, WE WILL BE DISCUSSING EVERYTHING ABOUT THE CITY, BUT WITH A PARTICULAR EMPHASIS ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

HE AND I ARE BOTH MEMBERS OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE HERE ON THE COUNCIL. SO IF YOU'D LIKE TO HEAR MORE ABOUT THAT OR THINGS AROUND THE CITY, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO COME. AGAIN, 5:30 ON THE SECOND FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM IN THE LIBRARY.

NO PILLAR OF PUBLIC SAFETY? PILLARS OF. PILLARS OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

ECONOMIC PROSPERITY. REFRESHMENTS WILL BE SERVED.

THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER. KALUDEROVIC. THANK YOU.

MAYOR. THANK YOU TO KYLE, OFFICER LOFSTROM TO ORGANIZING THE BLOOD DRIVE.

PARTICIPATED IN THAT. AND HE BRINGS SUCH GREAT ENERGY AND HE REALLY GETS PEOPLE OUT.

SO WE DIDN'T MEET THE GOAL. BUT FOR SURE, NEXT TIME WE'LL WE'LL HELP HIM OUT IN THAT.

I ATTENDED THE SOUTH BAY HOUSING TRUST BOARD MEETING LAST THURSDAY DISCUSSING OPTIONS OF PROGRAMS THAT THE TRUST COULD FUND, INCLUDING POTENTIAL BUILD TO OWN HOMEOWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES THE NEED TO ADVOCATE FOR MODERATE INCOME HOUSING,

[00:10:07]

SO WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO REFINING THESE PROGRAMS AND MOVING FORWARD.

THAT'S IT FOR ME. OKAY. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI.

COUNCIL MEMBER KALUDEROVIC REMINDS ME THAT WE MET WITH THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AT 182ND AND KINGSDALE, WHERE THEY JUST GOT APPROVAL TO MOVE FORWARD AND SUBMIT THEIR BUILDING PLANS FOR ABOUT 150 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, INCLUDING 20% AFFORDABLE UNITS. THOSE WILL BE TOWNHOMES FOR SALE, AND THAT'LL BE IN DISTRICT FOUR ON THE BORDER OF DISTRICT THREE.

GREAT PROJECT, AND IT'S GOING TO BE A BEAUTIFUL DESIGN THAT SHOULD REALLY ENHANCE THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD THERE.

IN ADDITION, I WANTED TO THANK, COULD YOU LIGHT UP 2B PLEASE? I WANTED TO THANK OUR ENGINEERING TEAM, THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, FOR THIS BEAUTIFUL SAFETY ENHANCEMENT AT A HIGHLY FREQUENTED CROSSING AT RIPLEY AND FLAGLER. LET'S SEE IF WE CAN GET IT UP.

ALL RIGHT. CAN YOU GET THE PHOTO UP NOW? BUT DID YOU TAKE THE PHOTO AT NIGHT? ANY EVENT, YOU'LL SEE IT IF YOU GO TO RIPLEY AND FLAGLER.

THERE'S A BULB OUT THERE. BUT IT WAS JUST KIND OF EMPTY BEFORE.

AND NOW THEY EXPANDED THE SIDEWALK AND RAMPED IT SO THAT PEDESTRIANS ARE MORE VISIBLE AND ALSO CLOSER TO THE INTERSECTION WHEN THEY CROSS.

AND I APPRECIATE THEM DOING THIS OVER THE SUMMER SO THAT THE KIDS CAN USE IT WHEN THEY GET BACK TO SCHOOL HERE IN AUGUST.

THAT'S IT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I HAVE NONE TONIGHT.

OKAY. I DID FORGET ONE. ON TUESDAY, WE'LL BE HAVING NEXT TUESDAY, WE'LL BE HAVING THE RIBBON CUTTING ON THE BILL BRAND GATEWAY PARK OVER AT 182ND STREET, RIGHT NEXT TO THE ARCH SIGN. SO 3 P.M.

THAT WILL BE GOING ON. AND ANYTHING YOU WANTED TO ADD THERE, 191.

190TH IF YOU DON'T KNOW WHERE HERONDO IS, SAME THING.

YEAH. SO HOPE TO SEE A LOT OF PEOPLE THERE AND THANK THE COUNCIL FOR NAMING THAT AFTER BILL.

APPRECIATE IT. OKAY, WE'LL JUMP DOWN TO ITEM E NOW APPROVING THE ORDER OF AGENDA.

[E. APPROVE ORDER OF AGENDA]

ALL FOR? AYE. ANYONE OPPOSED? OKAY, SO WE WILL BE FOLLOWING THE WRITTEN AND PUBLISHED AGENDA.

NOW GOING TO ITEM G BLUE FOLDER ITEMS. DO WE HAVE ANY BLUE FOLDER ITEMS THIS EVENING?

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

WE HAVE A PUBLIC COMMUNICATION FOR H.5 REGARDING LICENSING AGREEMENT WITH BARRICADE AI TO PROVIDE COMPUTER REPORT WRITING SOFTWARE PLATFORM.

WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS FOR H.6 WHICH IS REGARDING THE COMMISSION POSITIONS VACANT BASED ON ABSENCE FOR THREE OR MORE MEETINGS SINCE OCTOBER 1ST OF 2025.

WE HAVE A PUBLIC COMMUNICATION FOR ITEM H.8, WHICH IS REGARDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 3313-26, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF REDONDO BEACH PERTAINING TO THE PARKING METER HOURLY RATES.

WE HAVE A PUBLIC COMMUNICATE OR A SIGNED AGREEMENT.

EXCUSE ME FOR H.17 BETWEEN THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH AND MULTIVERSE PLATFORMS. WE HAVE FOR ITEM J.1 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION. WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS REGARDING THAT ITEM.

WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS FOR N.1 REGARDING THE MODIFICATION TO THE REDONDO BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO AGE RELATED ORDINANCES.

WE ALSO HAVE PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS REGARDING ITEM N.3, WHICH IS THEN REGARDING THE BALLOT TEXT IN QUESTION FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE VOTERS FOR THE UPCOMING NOVEMBER 3RD, 2026, LOS ANGELES COUNTY GENERAL ELECTION.

PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 27 OF THE CITY CHARTER FOR PROPOSED MAJOR CHANGES IN ALLOWABLE LAND USE.

AND THAT IS ALL. MAYOR. OKAY. THANK YOU. CAN I GET A MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILE? MOVE TO RECEIVE AND FILE. SECOND. ALL FOR. AYE.

ANYONE OPPOSED? OKAY. MOTION CARRIES. NOW WE'RE GOING TO THE CONSENT CALENDAR.

[H. CONSENT CALENDAR]

SO MOVED. SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND BEFORE I CALL THE VOTE.

WE WILL OPEN THIS UP TO PUBLIC COMMENT. SO DOES ANYONE WE HAVE SOME CARDS.

ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK TO H.1 THROUGH H.18, THIS IS THE TIME TO DO IT.

LET'S SEE, WE HAVE ONE FOR H.6 FOR RON MAROKO.

[00:15:06]

I FIRST WANT TO STATE THE OBVIOUS UNDER THE MUNICIPAL CODE, SECTION 2-9.101, A COMMISSIONER MAY BE REMOVED AT ANY TIME FOR ANY REASON, WITH OR WITHOUT NOTICE, WITH OR WITHOUT CAUSE, AND A MAJORITY JUST BY A MAJORITY VOTE OF THE COUNCIL, BUT YOU CAN'T NECESSARILY REMOVE WHAT HAS ALREADY BEEN VACATED.

HENCE, WE HAVE TO LOOK AT ORDINANCE 2.2-9.107 REGARDING VACANCIES.

AND AS FAR AS I CAN TELL, THIS IS THE FIRST USE OF AN AUTOMATIC VACANCY ORDINANCE.

AND HERE ARE SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT I THINK YOU NEED TO CONSIDER IN ITS APPLICATION AS IT'S WORDED.

IT'S A SELF-EXECUTING ORDINANCE. YOU MISS THREE MEETINGS IN 12 MONTHS PERIOD, YOU'RE AUTOMATICALLY REMOVED.

YOUR POSITION IS AUTOMATICALLY VACANT. THERE'S NO ACTION THAT'S NECESSARY FROM THE COUNCIL.

THERE'S NO DISCRETION TO THE COUNCIL BECAUSE THE VACANCY IS BUILT INTO THE ORDINANCE.

IN OTHER WORDS, THE ACT OF NOT SHOWING UP CAUSES THE VACANCY IN THE COUNCIL HAS NO DISCRETION TO CHANGE THAT OUTCOME.

HOW IS IT DIFFERENT THAN WHAT'S IN THE CHARTER? AND YOU MAY RECALL, I WAS ON THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION WHERE WE ACTUALLY CONSIDERED THIS WAS ONE OF THE THINGS AND WHAT WE DON'T WHAT WE DON'T HAVE IN THE CHARTER IS AN AUTOMATIC IT'S SHALL AND THEN THE COUNCIL ACTS.

SO HERE YOU HAVE AN AUTOMATIC, IT'S A 12 MONTH PERIOD THAT ROLLS STARTING FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE.

SO WE'RE IN A PERIOD NOW. AND WE NEED TO DO, WE NEED THE STAFF TO NOTIFY THE, THE COMMISSIONERS, DO WE NEED THE COUNCIL TO NOTIFY, DID THE CLERK NEED TO DO IT? DOES THE MAYOR NEED TO DO IT? SO THEY KNOW AT LEAST THIS IS WHEN IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.

WE HAVE AN EXAMPLE OF THREE PUBLIC AMENITIES COMMISSIONERS AND ONE COMMUNITY THE CAC, THE PUBLIC ARTS GROUP ON YOUR LIST TO BE VACATED SEAT.

THE THIRD ABSENCE WAS IN APRIL, MAY, APRIL AND APRIL.

EACH ATTENDED A SUBSEQUENT MEETING AFTER THEIR ABSENCE TO ATTEND A TWO MEETINGS.

SO YOU KIND OF. AND ONE TOMORROW IS A MEETING.

SO SOMEBODY'S GOT TO NOTIFY THIS PERSON THAT THEY'RE NO LONGER ON A COMMISSION.

SO WHAT IF THEY SHOW UP AT THE MEETING? WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO AS FAR AS KEEPING THEM FROM TAKING A SEAT? WITH THE VACANCY OF THREE FROM PUBLIC AMENITIES, THAT LEAVES ME WITH FOUR.

AND THAT'S JUST BARELY A QUORUM. ONE TERM IS UP IN AFTER TWO MORE MEETINGS.

SO I SUGGEST THAT YOU REPLACE THAT PERSON. I SENT SOME SUGGESTIONS TO THE MAYOR TO DO THAT.

YOUR TIME IS UP. THANK YOU. AND JUST TO LET YOU KNOW, A LETTER DID GO OUT TO AN EMAIL, WENT OUT TO EACH OF THEM INFORMING THEM.

OKAY, ANYONE ONLINE? THERE ARE NO PARTICIPANTS ONLINE.

AND THERE WAS ONE COMMENT FOR H.16 IN THE POSITION OF OPPOSED.

OKAY. ANYONE ELSE FROM THE AUDIENCE WISH TO ADDRESS H.1 THROUGH H.18? OKAY. COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI YOU HAVE A COMMENT BEFORE I CALL THE VOTE? YES, PLEASE. MAYOR. I JUST WANTED TO THANK OUR PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ON H.7, A TREMENDOUS OVER $1 MILLION WORTH OF WORK ON ARTESIA BOULEVARD TO MAKE THAT BOULEVARD SAFE, SAFER. I WAS ACTUALLY DRIVING DOWN RINDGE THE OTHER NIGHT, AND I SAW A BIKE RIDER AT THE INTERSECTION AT RINDGE AND ARTESIA, AND THIS BLUE LIGHT LIT UP TO LET THE BIKE RIDER KNOW THAT THEY WERE DETECTED BY THE SIGNAL THAT THEY WERE THERE, SO THAT THE LIGHT WOULD TURN GREEN FOR THEM WHEN IT WAS TIME FOR THEM TO GO.

AMAZING WORK. THANK YOU ALL, THE BULB OUTS WERE REAL AT ARTESIA AND RINDGE WERE REALIGNED SO THAT DRIVERS DON'T IMPEDE VISION OF THE OPPOSING TRAFFIC, AND ALL THE SIGNAL HEADS WERE CHANGED OUT WITH THE FLASHING YELLOW TO KEEP TRAFFIC FLOWING.

SO THANK YOU ENGINEERING TEAM OVER THERE FOR YOUR GREAT WORK ON ARTESIA BOULEVARD.

THAT'S IT. THAT'S IT. ANYONE ELSE WISH TO COMMENT BEFORE WE? OKAY. I WILL CALL THE VOTE THEN. THIS IS APPROVING H.1 THROUGH H.18.

ALL FOR? AYE. ANYONE OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

DO YOU NEED TO READ ANY OF THOSE OFF? YES, MAYOR WE DO.

WE HAVE H.8 ADOPT BY TITLE ONLY, ORDINANCE NUMBER 33-13 OR 3313-26.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE THREE, CHAPTER SIX, SECTION 3 TO 6.03 OF THE REDONDO BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO PARKING METER, HOURLY RATES FOR SECOND READING AND ADOPTION.

WE HAVE ITEM H.9 ADOPT BY TITLE ONLY, RESOLUTION NUMBER CC-2607-054.

[00:20:03]

WE HAVE ITEM H.11 ADOPT BY 4/5TH VOTE IN TITLE ONLY, RESOLUTION NUMBER CC-2607-055.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA AUTHORIZING A FISCAL YEAR 2026 TO 2027 BUDGET MODIFICATION TO ALLOCATE $29,125 FROM THE CITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH FOR BEACH CITIES TRANSIT LINE, 109 COST SHARING TO THE CITY'S TRANSIT FUND.

AND WE HAVE ITEM H.12 ADOPT BY TITLE ONLY RESOLUTION NUMBER CC-2607-056 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING A FISCAL YEAR 2026 TO 2027 BUDGET MODIFICATION TO APPROPRIATE $198,126 IN PERMANENT LOCAL HOUSING ALLOCATION FUNDS FROM THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TO THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL GRANT FUND.

AND THAT IS ALL, MAYOR. OKAY. THANK YOU. I DID WANT TO ADD ONE COMMENT.

FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO DIDN'T NOTICE, WE HAVE AN EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATING AGREEMENT IN THERE FOR THE FUN FACTORY SITE, WHICH JUST GOT APPROVED. AND WE'RE VERY PLEASED AND LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH THE PROPONENT OF THAT.

SO THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TONIGHT. AND HOPEFULLY WE CAN COME TO A GOOD OUTCOME AFTER WE HAVE THAT EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATING PERIOD.

AND IF YOU READ IT, IT'S FAMILY FUN AND SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN MISSING AT THE FUN FACTORY SITE FOR QUITE SOME TIME.

SO WE'RE VERY PLEASED TO GET THAT BID IN AND WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU.

SO THANK YOU. LET'S SEE. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS.

[J. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS]

THIS SECTION IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WITH THE OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT ON ANY SUBJECT THAT DOES NOT APPEAR ON THIS AGENDA FOR ACTION.

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.

AGAIN, ONLY THIS IS LIMITED TO 30 MINUTES TOTAL CUMULATIVE TIME.

SO WITH THAT, I WILL START WITH THE FIRST CARD WE HAVE HERE.

MARK MARRIOTT. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND FELLOW RESIDENTS. MY NAME IS MARK MARRIOTT.

I'VE BEEN A REDONDO BEACH RESIDENT FOR MORE THAN 20 YEARS.

AND I RECENTLY LEARNED THAT THE CITY HAS A CONTRACT WITH THE SURVEILLANCE COMPANY, FLOCK SAFETY.

AND I JUST WANTED TO COME TO SHARE A LITTLE INFORMATION ABOUT THAT COMPANY AND EXPRESS SOME CONCERNS.

SO I MEAN, I'M NOT SURE IF EVERYONE'S AWARE THAT THIS COMPANY HAS A NATIONWIDE NETWORK OF CAMERAS AND THAT WHEN YOU PUT UP CAMERAS IN OUR CITY, THOSE GET NETWORKED WITH ALL THE OTHER CAMERAS AND ALL THE OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENTS ALL ACROSS THE COUNTRY, AND YOU DON'T REALLY HAVE CONTROL OVER HOW OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES ARE GOING TO UTILIZE THOSE CAMERAS.

FOR EXAMPLE, A TEXAS SHERIFF SEARCHED OVER 83,000 FLOCK CAMERAS NATIONWIDE TO OPEN A DEATH INVESTIGATION ON A WOMAN WHO HAD HAD AN ABORTION. A KANSAS POLICE OFFICER RAN HIS EX-GIRLFRIEND'S LICENSE PLATE 164 TIMES.

MULTIPLE OFFICERS NATIONWIDE HAVE BEEN FIRED OR CHARGED WITH STALKING THEIR EX-PARTNERS THROUGH THE USE OF FLOCK CAMERAS.

OHIO POLICE STOPPED A MAN AT GUNPOINT AND SICKED THEIR DOG ON HIM BASED ON A MISTAKEN LICENSE PLATE, READ FROM FLOCK SERVICES. THE ACLU CLAIMS THAT LICENSE PLATE READING SYSTEMS DISPROPORTIONATELY AFFECT MINORITIES. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE AWARE THAT ICE HAS ACTUALLY ACCESSED FLOCK SYSTEMS FOR IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT AND EITHER DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY THROUGH OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES.

AND IN 2020, KIMBERLY WILLIAMS OF OKLAHOMA, AN AFRICAN AMERICAN, WAS JAILED FOR OVER SIX MONTHS BASED ON A FALSE FACIAL RECOGNITION SCAN IN MARYLAND, A STATE SHE HAD NEVER VISITED.

IN ADDITION TO MISUSE OF FLOCK BY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS NOT EXACTLY BEEN SUPER TRUSTWORTHY WITH SURVEILLANCE OVER THE YEARS. THE NSA CONDUCTED WIRELESS WARRANTLESS WIRETAPPING THAT CAME OUT IN 2013.

[00:25:01]

TARGETING LAWMAKERS, JOURNALISTS AND PROTESTERS.

DATA BROKERS HAVE ABUSED POST 9/11 PROGRAMS. JUST LAST WEEK, WE LEARNED THAT THE CCP HAD OVER 220 MILLION VOTER RECORDS AND THAT THE CIA AND FBI HAD BEEN SUPPRESSING REPORTS OF VOTER FRAUD. SO I JUST WANT TO SAY, EVEN I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY CAMERAS YOU HAVE UP, BUT TAKE THEM DOWN. TAKE THEM DOWN BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE, BECAUSE THIS IS ONE OF THOSE THINGS WHERE, WELL, DOWN THE ROAD, WE JUST MIGHT BE SUBJECT TO, YOU KNOW, WHO KNOWS WHAT SORT OF GOVERNMENT. SO THANK YOU, SIR. APPRECIATE IT. AND ANYONE ONLINE? THERE ARE NO HANDS RAISED ONLINE.

AND THERE WAS ONE COMMENT FOR J.1 IN THE POSITION OF OPPOSED NOTED.

OKAY. WELL WE HAVE MORE HERE IN THE AUDIENCE.

SO RON MAROKO, YOU'RE MY NEXT CARD. YOU'RE THE NEXT CONTESTANT.

I'M GOING TO PUSH MY LUCK AND COVER THREE TOPICS IN THREE MINUTES.

FIRST ONE IS WILDERNESS PARK, AUGUST 5TH. IT WAS REFERRED TO STAFF, IT SHOULD BE HOPEFULLY COMING BACK SOON FOR YOU GUYS TO DECIDE TO MAKE IT A LANDMARK. THE SECOND IS THE DAWIDZIAK PARKETTE AGAIN THAT WAS REFERRED TO IN AUGUST OF 2025.

SO PLEASE BRING THAT ONE BACK AS WELL AND GET THAT DONE.

AND HOPEFULLY THE POLICY, I DON'T SEE HOW THE POLICY CAN NOT INCLUDE HIM.

AND THE THIRD THING IS THE UTILITY BOXES THAT COMMISSIONER MELENDEZ MENTIONED LAST WEEK.

ON JULY 20TH, 2021, THIS COUNCIL APPROVED A UTILITY BOX FOR ASHISH SHARMA AND RISHI PANDEY.

AND DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVED IT, IT'S NEVER BEEN PUT UP AND IT'S NEVER BEEN PROMOTED TO BE PUT UP BY STAFF.

I DON'T KNOW WHICH STAFF PERSON DECIDED IT SHOULDN'T BE DONE, BUT YOU'RE YOU'RE GOING TO BE GETTING MORE UTILITY BOXES.

AND SO WHAT I'M HOPING THAT YOU WILL DO IS REFER TO STAFF THAT THEY INCLUDE THE TWO BOXES THAT WERE NOT THAT WERE COUNCIL APPROVED, BUT WERE NOT INSTALLED TO BE PART OF THE CONSIDERATION WHEN YOU GET THAT OPPORTUNITY AGAIN.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND YOU GAVE TIME BACK MINUTE AND A HALF.

WELL DONE. A MINUTE AND A HALF FOR THREE TOPICS.

I CAN I CAN DO THE FOURTH ONE ABOUT. I HAVE BEEN GIVEN PERMISSION TO WRITE A LETTER WITH REGARDS TO OUR GUIDANCE FROM THE PUBLIC AMENITIES ON THE LGBTQ HISTORY. SO YOU'LL BE GETTING THAT TOO, AT SOME POINT.

OKAY. THANK YOU. ANYONE ONLINE THERE? THERE ARE NO PARTICIPANTS ONLINE.

OKAY. THE NEXT CARD FROM HERE IS LAURA MCMORRAN.

GOOD EVENING. COUNCIL, ELECTED OFFICIALS AND STAFF AND FELLOW CITIZENS.

MY NAME IS LAURA MCMORRAN. I'M A RESIDENT OF D ONE.

AND FIRST I WANT TO SAY I'M A BIG FAN OF TILT-A-WHIRL.

SO TONIGHT'S FUN FACTORY NEWS, I REALLY HOPE THAT AMENITY IS RESTORED.

I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND ENERGY.

YOU INVEST IN SERVING IN THE CITY. AND TRUTH BE TOLD, I DON'T ALWAYS AGREE WITH YOUR DECISIONS.

HOWEVER, I ALWAYS RESPECT THE OFFICE YOU HOLD.

RECENTLY, I BECAME AWARE OF A SIGNIFICANT ANNIVERSARY, AND THERE'S A COROLLARY BETWEEN WHAT I'M GOING TO SAY.

IN 1926, THE U.S. SUPREME COURT AFFIRMED THAT ZONING IS CONSTITUTIONALLY VALID EXERCISE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT POWER.

SO FOR 100 YEARS, IT'S BEEN MAKING PEOPLE MORE OR LESS UNHAPPY OR HAPPY.

THE LANDMARK CASE, EUCLID, OHIO, VERSUS AMBLER REALTY, FOUND THAT ZONING IS ROOTED IN GOVERNMENTS POLICE POWER, THAT POLICE POWER IS THERE TO PROTECT PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE.

ZONING REMAINS ONE OF PLANNING'S MAIN IMPLEMENTATION METHODS.

MODERN DAY PLANNING ENCOMPASSES DOZENS OF SUBFIELDS.

AND HERE'S AN INVITATION. AND MAYBE YOU'VE ALREADY BEEN INVITED.

BUT ON OCTOBER 3RD THROUGH SIXTH, THE CALIFORNIA CHAPTER OF THE AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION HOLDS ITS ANNUAL STATE CONFERENCE IN LOS ANGELES. THIS CONFERENCE PROVIDES 97 SESSIONS ABOUT PRESSING PLANNING ISSUES, STATE LEGISLATION, HOUSING AFFORDABILITY, CLIMATE RESILIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND MOBILITY.

IT WILL BE MANY, MANY YEARS BEFORE THE CONFERENCE IS HELD IN LOS ANGELES.

ATTENDANCE WOULD ENRICH COUNCIL MEMBERS SUCH AS YOURSELF, NATURALLY, STAFF WHO I HOPE ARE ALREADY REGISTERED AND PLANNING COMMISSIONERS TOO.

[00:30:06]

THANK YOU. ANYONE ONLINE? THERE ARE NO HANDS RAISED ONLINE.

OKAY, I HAVE NO MORE CARDS. SO ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE.

YOU'RE WELCOME TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON ANY NON AGENDA ITEMS. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. WAYNE CRAIG. I GUESS I MADE IT JUST IN TIME. LAST WEEK I TALKED ABOUT A PROBLEM I'VE BEEN HAVING WITH ADDICTIONS AND IT'S NOW EXTENDED TO SOMETHING ELSE NOW AT THE FARMERS MARKET. GUACAMOLE. IT'S REALLY GOOD.

IF YOU'RE NOT DOING ANYTHING TOMORROW. COME ON BY 2 TO 7.

GREAT PLACE TO GO. ONE OTHER THING I DID WANT TO MENTION.

I HEARD THE GENTLEMAN TALKING EARLIER ABOUT THE CAMERA AND FLOCK SITUATION, BUT I MENTIONED THIS AT ONE OF THE PUBLIC MEETINGS THAT WAS HOSTED BY COUNCIL MEMBER, BEHRENDT AND OBAGI REGARDING CONTRACTS WE HAVE WITH DATA SHARING COMPANIES, BUT ONE BEING PEREGRINE TECHNOLOGIES.

THEY ARE A COMPANY THAT THE CITY HAS CONTRACTED WITH.

IF YOU LOOK AT PEREGRINE TECHNOLOGY, YOU'LL FIND THAT MOST OF THE FOUNDERS OF IT CAME FROM A COMPANY CALLED PALANTIR.

HUGE DATA COMPANY, BILLION, BILLIONS OF DOLLARS WORTH OF CONTRACTS WITH THE GOVERNMENT.

AND AS I THINK I HEARD HIM MENTION, THAT A LOT OF THIS INFORMATION IS BEING USED TO AVOID HAVING TO GO THROUGH THE PROPER CHANNELS TO GET A SEARCH AND SEIZURE SEARCH WARRANT.

SO YOU CAN BASICALLY GET A SEARCH WITH DATA SHARED FROM A PUBLIC ENTITY.

NOW, A COUPLE OF THE CONCERNS I HAD ON THIS WERE, AGAIN, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT A CONTRACT WITH THIS COMPANY. ALL THE FOUNDERS SEEM TO BE DIRECTLY CONNECTED TO PALANTIR, WHICH IS CONCERNING, BUT EVEN MORE CONCERNING.

AND I MENTIONED THIS WITH SOME RELUCTANCE, BUT OUR FORMER POLICE CHIEF, WHO WAS INSTRUMENTAL IN GETTING THE CONTRACT AWARDED BY THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, IS A CONSULTANT FOR PEREGRINE TECHNOLOGY. I HOPE THERE'S NOTHING BEYOND THAT, BUT I KNOW THAT YOU AS ELECTED OFFICIALS, THERE'S A SUNSET PERIOD WHERE YOU CANNOT WORK FOR OR WORK WITH A COMPANY THAT YOU MAY HAVE HELPED GET A CONTRACT WITH WHILE YOU WERE IN OFFICE.

AND I DID MENTION IT TO THE CITY ATTORNEY. AND I, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, I RESPECT YOUR YOUR REVIEW OF IT, BUT I CERTAINLY HOPE THAT WE HAVE AN IRONCLAD CONTRACT ON THAT.

WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO REVIEW THE DATA THAT'S IN THERE. AND IF THERE'S A PROBLEM WITH IT, HAVE THE ABILITY TO, TO CANCEL IT BECAUSE FRANKLY, ANY DATA THAT'S OUT THERE CAN BE SHARED AND USED TO GO AGAINST PEOPLE WHO AREN'T DOING ANYTHING WRONG.

YOU KNOW, THE, THE HOPE ON THIS. I KNOW THE DATA WHEN THEY SHARE IT OUT THERE, THEY'RE TRYING TO SAY THAT THEY COULD MAYBE GET PEOPLE WHO MAYBE THROUGH A FAULT OF THE COURT SYSTEM, THEIR CASE WAS DROPPED AND THEY USED IT TO PROSECUTE LATER ON.

THAT SOUNDS GOOD, BUT YOU KNOW WHAT? WE SHOULDN'T ALL BE CAUGHT UP IN THAT. AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT DATA IS BEING USED.

AND, YOU KNOW, IN REDONDO BEACH, THERE HAVE BEEN ICE RAIDS.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT DATA WE'VE SHARED MAY HAVE INADVERTENTLY BEEN USED FOR THAT. ANYWAY, I THINK IT'S OUR TIME TO MAYBE DO A REVIEW OF THE CONTRACT, MAKE SURE WE DO, IN FACT, HAVE A GOOD CONTRACT THAT WE CAN CANCEL.

AND WE NEED TO KNOW WHERE THE DATA IS BEING SHARED. AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, HOW LONG IS THAT DATA BEING RETAINED FOR.

SO THAT'S ONE ISSUE THAT WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT THIS BECAUSE THEY MAY SAY, OH YEAH, WE DON'T KEEP IT. THEY SIPHON IT OFF TO ANOTHER ENTITY.

A FRIEND OF MINE WORKS FOR A COMPANY. HIS WIFE ACTUALLY, HIS WIFE WORKED FOR A DATA COMPANY.

HE HAD SOME MORE INFORMATION, BUT APPARENTLY THERE'S A LOT MORE STUFF TO THIS THAN MEETS THE EYE.

SO I KNOW IT'S NOT IN YOUR RADAR, BUT IT'S PROBABLY SOMETHING YOU SHOULD BE LOOKING AT SOON.

THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANYONE ONLINE? YES.

WE HAVE NANCY SKIBA WITH HER HAND RAISED. GO AHEAD.

NANCY? NANCY, ARE YOU THERE? THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL AND I, LAST WEEK I CAME IN DOWN THERE AND I INTERVIEWED COMMISSION POSITION.

AND ONE OF THE THINGS I MENTIONED WAS THAT OVER THE YEARS I HAVE GONE TO DIFFERENT DISTRICT MEETINGS BECAUSE I THINK THEY'RE VALUABLE, AND I WANT TO ENCOURAGE FOLKS TO SOMETIMES STEP OUT OF THEIR OWN DISTRICT AND GO MEET PEOPLE IN THE OTHER DISTRICTS, YOU KNOW, TO GET TO KNOW YOUR COUNCIL MEMBERS, YOUR NEIGHBORS, AND FIND OUT, BECAUSE SOMETIMES THINGS GO ON IN DIFFERENT DISTRICTS THAT YOU MAY NOT KNOW ABOUT, AND YOU USUALLY COME AWAY HAVING HEARD SOMETHING YOU HADN'T HEARD IN YOUR OWN PLACE.

SECONDLY, I ALSO HAD PARTICIPATED IN THE POLICE CITIZENS POLICE ACADEMY THAT WE HAVE HERE IN REDONDO WAS IN CLASS 41. AND I WANTED TO REALLY ENCOURAGE PEOPLE THAT THEY WOULD CLASS BECAUSE IT'S AWESOME.

YOU LEARN SO MANY THINGS ABOUT DIFFERENT PARTS OF LAW ENFORCEMENT THAT YOU JUST ENJOY SO MUCH.

AND EVERYBODY WHO WAS THERE IS SO HELPFUL, AND YOU JUST CAN'T IMAGINE WHAT THIS IS LIKE UNTIL YOU ACTUALLY GO THERE, YOU SHOULD REALLY GO. I REALLY ENCOURAGE FOLKS TO TAKE THE CITIZENS POLICE ACADEMY.

THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE WISH TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS? OKAY. LAST. GOT IT ONLINE? THERE ARE NO HANDS RAISED ONLINE.

OKAY. SO WE HAVE NO PUBLIC HEARINGS TONIGHT. WE'LL BE GOING DOWN TO ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION PRIOR TO ACTION.

[N.1. 26-0848 DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING MODIFICATION TO THE REDONDO BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO HEDGE-RELATED ORDINANCES]

[00:35:08]

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL, JOY FORD, CITY ATTORNEY.

WE ARE HERE FOR DISCUSSION ON POSSIBLE AMENDMENTS TO OUR HEDGE ORDINANCE.

STAFF IS SEEKING DIRECTION AS TO WHETHER YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE ANY AMENDMENTS.

WE HAVE A FEW RECOMMENDATIONS FOR YOU. AND IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS YOU WOULD LIKE, WE COULD BRING BACK A DRAFT FOR FIRST READING AT THE NEXT MEETING.

WITH ME TONIGHT, I HAVE A QUALITY OF LIFE PROSECUTOR STEPHANIE JOHNSON AND LEGAL INTERN COLE WEBB, WHO WILL BE GIVING THE PRESENTATION. CAN I BREAK IN? MAYBE YOU'LL COVER THIS, BUT IN THE PACKAGE, IT TALKED ABOUT RECOMMENDATIONS FROM TWO OF THE COUNCIL.

ARE THOSE GOING TO BE WORKED IN OR THAT. SO THE PRESENTATION JUST KIND OF BROADLY COVERS DIFFERENT TOPICS.

AND THEN WE CAN HAVE A DISCUSSION ON WHAT THE COUNCIL WE'D HAVE TO DIRECT YOU TO.

YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING. MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS.

COLLEAGUES. AND THE COMMUNITY. WE APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS THE CITY'S HEDGE ORDINANCES WITH YOU TONIGHT TO PREPARE FOR THIS DISCUSSION.

WE REVIEWED ORDINANCES FROM VARIOUS SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA CITIES, CONSULTED WITH CITY DEPARTMENTS, AND GATHERED FEEDBACK FROM RESIDENTS. WE RECOGNIZE THAT ANY CHANGES WILL IMPACT BOTH THE COMMUNITY AND CITY OBJECTIVES, AND OUR OBJECTIVE TONIGHT IS TO OFFER RECOMMENDATIONS THAT BRING CLARITY AND CONSISTENT GUIDANCE TO CITYWIDE HEDGE ENFORCEMENT. NEXT, OUR LEGAL INTERN, COLE WEBB, WILL GUIDE US THROUGH THE PRESENTATION, AND WE WILL GLADLY ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE AT THE CONCLUSION. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

WE'LL JUST JUMP RIGHT INTO IT. BEGINNING APPROXIMATELY DECEMBER OF 2025 CODE ENFORCEMENT BEGAN TO RECEIVE AN INFLUX OF COMPLAINTS REGARDING HEIGHT OVER HEIGHT HEDGES THROUGHOUT THE CITY.

IN RESPONSE, CODE ENFORCEMENT BEGAN TO ISSUE TO PROPERTY OWNERS WHO WERE ALLEGEDLY IN VIOLATION CORRECTION NOTICES.

THIS ENFORCEMENT HAS LED TO INCREASED QUESTIONS FROM PROPERTY OWNERS AND RESIDENTS ABOUT THE CURRENT STATE OF THE LAW AND HOW ALLEGED VIOLATIONS ARE ENFORCED.

WHEN REVIEWING THE CURRENT HEDGE ORDINANCE, THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HAS IDENTIFIED THREE KEY ISSUES.

THE FIRST IS THE LACK OF A DEFINITION AS TO WHAT CONSTITUTES A HEDGE.

THE SECOND IS THE LEVEL OF PENALTY FOR HEIGHT ONLY VIOLATIONS.

AND THE THIRD IS REGARDING WHO MAY FILE A COMPLAINT WITH THE CITY.

THE FIRST ISSUE, REDONDO BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE, HAS A DEFINITION FOR TREE, BUT NOT A DEFINITION FOR HEDGE.

THIS HAS LED TO SOME CONFUSION AND DISPUTES WHEN RESIDENTS ARE UNCLEAR AS TO WHETHER THEIR VEGETATION IS A TREE OR HEDGE WHEN DEALING WITH CODE ENFORCEMENT.

AS SUCH, STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND ADDING DEFINITIONS FOR FENCE OR WALL HEDGE, HEIGHT AND VEGETATION TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE.

THE SECOND ISSUE THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IDENTIFIED IS THE LEVEL OF PENALTY.

AS IT CURRENTLY STANDS, A HEIGHT ONLY VIOLATION IS A STRICT, STRICT MISDEMEANOR UNDER THE MUNICIPAL CODE, WHEREAS VIOLATIONS THAT HAVE A SAFETY CONCERN AND RISE TO THE LEVEL OF PUBLIC NUISANCE, MEANING THEY ARE A TRAFFIC OBSTRUCTION, THERE IS FLAMMABILITY CONCERNS OR IT IMPEDES A PUBLIC STREET OR SIDEWALK IS WHAT'S KNOWN AS A WOBBLETTE.

SO THE MORE SERIOUS MATTER CAN BE A MISDEMEANOR OR AN INFRACTION, WHEREAS A HEIGHT ONLY VIOLATION IS A MISDEMEANOR.

THEREFORE, STAFF WOULD LIKE TO WOULD RECOMMEND RECLASSIFYING VIOLATIONS OF HEIGHT ONLY AS EITHER AN INFRACTION OR MISDEMEANOR TO MAKE ENFORCEMENT MORE CONSISTENT. FINALLY, CODE ENFORCEMENT RECEIVED SEVERAL ANONYMOUS COMPLAINTS THAT WERE ALLEGING HEIGHT ONLY VIOLATIONS.

THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE REVIEWED SEVERAL LOCAL ORDINANCES REGARDING WHO MAY FILE A COMPLAINT.

AS SUCH, THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WOULD RECOMMEND ADDING A BONA FIDE COMPLAINANT STANDARD TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE.

SUCH A STANDARD WOULD LIMIT HEIGHT ONLY COMPLAINTS TO THOSE WHO ARE ACTUALLY IMPACTED BY THE ALLEGED VIOLATIONS.

WHILE IT WOULD NOT PROHIBIT COMPLAINTS TO PUBLIC NUISANCE VIOLATIONS.

[00:40:04]

IT WAS UNANIMOUS AMONGST THE DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS THAT THERE WAS NO INCREASE TO THE CURRENT HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS OF THE HEDGE ORDINANCE.

DEPARTMENT CONCERNS INCLUDED PRESERVING SIGHT LINES FOR FIRST RESPONDERS, PUBLIC SAFETY CONCERNS, WHETHER THAT WAS TRAFFIC OBSTRUCTION OR CRIME PREVENTION, AND ALSO ADA COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS.

SEVERAL CITY DEPARTMENTS ALSO RECOMMEND THAT CITY COUNCIL CONSIDER AN ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS FOR PROPERTY OWNERS WITH NONCONFORMING VEGETATION. SO JUST TO REVIEW, THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE RECOMMENDS ADDING THOSE DEFINITIONS TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE. IT RECOMMENDS RECLASSIFYING HEIGHT ONLY VIOLATIONS AS EITHER AN INFRACTION OR A MISDEMEANOR, AND RECOMMENDS ADDING NEW LANGUAGE ON WHO MAY FILE COMPLAINTS FOR ALLEGED VIOLATIONS.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND WE INVITE ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL.

SO THE PACKAGE HAS SOME POTENTIAL DEFINITIONS OF HEDGE.

AND DO YOU HAVE ANY SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS ON WHICH ONE OR IS IT JUST YOU'RE JUST LEAVING THAT UP TO THE COUNCIL? YES, COUNCIL. WE MAYOR WE DID, WE DID REVIEW, SEVERAL ORDINANCES FROM LAGUNA BEACH, BEVERLY HILLS, SANTA MONICA AND SANTA BARBARA, AND WE COMBINED SEVERAL OF THOSE ORDINANCES FROM THOSE VARIOUS CITIES TO ESTABLISH A REDONDO BEACH DEFINITION, WHICH IS OUTLINED IN OUR ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT. AND SO THAT'S YOUR RECOMMENDATION.

THOSE ARE OUR RECOMMENDATIONS THAT ARE LISTED ON THE THIRD PAGE.

YES. I JUST WANT THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE HAVE REVIEWED.

THE BRIEFING JUST SAYS YOU HAVE A CHOICE. IT DOESN'T SAY WHAT THE RECOMMENDATION IS.

YES, IT DOES SAY STAFF RECOMMENDS THE FOLLOWING DEFINITIONS.

NO, THE ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT DOES. THE BRIEFING DOESN'T.

SO I JUST WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR. YES. OKAY. DO YOU HAVE RECOMMENDATIONS WITH RESPECT TO WHAT WE SHOULD DO WITH THE HEIGHT HE GAVE US? NEITHER OR? THE RECOMMENDATIONS AS IT RELATES TO HEIGHT, THE HEIGHT SHOULD REMAIN AS IS. SO FRONT SETBACK SHOULD REMAIN AT 42IN.

SIDE AND REAR. SHOULD BE A MISDEMEANOR OR A PENALTY.

ARE YOU TALKING THE PENALTY FOR HEIGHT ONLY? YES.

YES. THE PENALTY. THE PENALTY FOR HEIGHT ONLY ALLEGED VIOLATION.

THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WOULD RECOMMEND THAT COUNCIL CONSIDER MODIFYING IT FROM A MISDEMEANOR TO A WOBBLETTE, WHICH MEANS IT COULD BE FILED AS AN INFRACTION OR A MISDEMEANOR.

SO IF THERE ARE ONGOING VIOLATIONS FOR OFFENSES THAT AREN'T CORRECTED AND MAY ADDRESS SAFETY CONCERNS THEN IT COULD POTENTIALLY RISE TO A MISDEMEANOR. BUT THAT WOULDN'T IN ALL LIKELIHOOD, START OUT AS A MISDEMEANOR OFFENSE.

SO IT ESCALATES OVER TIME. INFRACTIONS. CORRECT.

OR LACK OF ADDRESSING IT? YES. OKAY. THANK YOU.

COUNCILMEMBER BEHRENDT, THANK YOU. MAYOR. GREAT ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT.

WE CAN TELL THAT IT INVOLVED A THOROUGH REVIEW BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, PRETTY MUCH EVERY SINGLE DEPARTMENT WITHIN THE CITY THAT I COULD THINK OF AND OTHERS.

AND IMPORTANTLY, I THINK YOU'VE CAPTURED WELL, WHAT WE'VE HEARD FROM RESIDENTS, SOME OF WHOM ARE HERE TONIGHT, MANY OF WHOM WE'VE SPOKEN TO IN PERSON AND SEVERAL OF WHICH HAVE SUBMITTED COMMENTS.

SO THANK YOU FOR FOR DOING ALL OF THAT. AND TO, TO THE POINT MADE BY THE MAYOR AND YOURSELF.

THERE ARE RECOMMENDATIONS IN HERE, AS WELL AS SOME THAT WERE PROVIDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI AND I, WE DON'T HAVE A FORMAL SUBCOMMITTEE. WE DID DIG INTO THIS AND VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THE WORK YOU DID ON THAT.

[00:45:01]

SO ITEM ONE INCLUDE CLEAR AND UPDATED DEFINITIONS OF WHAT ACTUALLY CONSTITUTES A HEDGE AND FENCES AND WALLS.

THAT'S BEEN KIND OF A BIG CRUX OF THE ISSUE. HEY, WHAT IS A HEDGE? AND, AND I SEE YOU'VE STARTED THAT PROCESS IN HERE.

NUMBER TWO, REVISE THE ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WITH SOME LEVEL OF DISCRETION TO CHARGE EITHER CERTAIN VIOLATIONS AS A MISDEMEANOR, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, IT'S, THAT'S A, THAT'S A CRIME OR A INFRACTION, WHICH I UNDERSTAND TO BE MORE AKIN TO LIKE A TRAFFIC TICKET OR OTHER CITATION. AND I SEE YOU'VE BUILT THAT IN THERE.

CALLED A WOBBLETTE THE CITY ATTORNEY'S REFERRED TO IT AS.

AND THAT MADE A LOT OF SENSE. ITEM THREE INCLUDE A BONA FIDE OR GOOD FAITH COMPLAINT REQUIREMENT, FOR EXAMPLE, THE OWNER OR OCCUPANT OF AN ADJOINING OR NEARBY HOME IS THE PERSON OR PERSONS WHO CAN MAKE A COMPLAINT.

NOW WE'LL REDUCE THE LIKELIHOOD OF UNNECESSARY FILING OF COMPLAINTS, THE UNNECESSARY EXPENDITURE OF TIME AND RESOURCES, AND ULTIMATELY ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS THAT CONCERN ONLY MINOR, TRIVIAL OR OTHERWISE INCONSEQUENTIAL VIOLATIONS.

AND THAT SEEMED TO BE A SMART THING TO DO. ITEM FOUR AND THIS IS IMPORTANT, AND I SEE WE HAVE OUR DEPARTMENT HEADS OUT THERE TONIGHT.

ITEM FOUR IS TO NONETHELESS ENSURE THAT THE CITY RETAINS INDEPENDENT DISCRETION TO SEEK ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE FOR VIOLATIONS CONCERNING POLICE, FIRE AND PUBLIC SAFETY MATTERS, PUBLIC HEALTH, STATUTORY NUISANCES, ENCROACHMENT ONTO CITY SIDEWALKS AND RIGHTS OF WAY, ENCROACHMENT ON A POWER LINES INSTANCES WHERE MAYBE A LARGE LOT OR A SERIES OF ADJOINING LOTS FORM LIKE A WALLED OFF COMMUNITY, WHICH WE HEARD IS CONTRARY TO SORT OF THE THE LOOK AND FEEL OF REDONDO BEACH AND OTHER OBJECTIVE AND CLEAR CRITERIA BASED ON THE INPUT AND RECOMMENDATIONS THAT YOU MENTIONED AND THAT WE RECEIVED FROM ALL THESE DEPARTMENTS AND COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI COINED THE PHRASE SO-CALLED CRITICAL AND OR URGENT VIOLATIONS THAT THE CITY NONETHELESS RETAIN THE RIGHT AND ABILITY TO ENFORCE ON THOSE. ITEM FIVE, THE ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS, WHICH, YOU KNOW, THE CONCEPT WOULD BE TO PERMIT HEDGE HEIGHTS IN EXCESS OF THE 42IN TO BE REVIEWED FOR POTENTIAL APPROVAL BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR OR DESIGNEE, OR THROUGH SOME OTHER PROCESS THROUGH ANOTHER DEPARTMENT SUBJECT TO VARIOUS CRITERIA.

AND YOU KNOW, THAT SEEMS LIKE A GOOD IDEA, YOU KNOW? HEY, TAKE ANOTHER LOOK. IF A HEDGE IS HIGHER THAN 42 YOU KNOW, CAN I GET A VARIANCE? THE ISSUE THAT SEEMED TO COME UP AS WE DUG INTO IT, AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THAT WILL INVOLVE SOME ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN AND COST AND TIME TO DO THAT REVIEW. AND SO IF THE COUNCIL DOES DECIDE TO GO THROUGH WITH THAT, AND I'M KIND OF ON THE FENCE MYSELF, I WOULD THINK THERE SHOULD BE SOME COST RECOVERY ELEMENT.

AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT NUMBER IS. WE HAVE LIMITED STAFF.

THESE ARE HIGHLY TRAINED PROFESSIONAL RESOURCES THAT ARE DOING OTHER THINGS.

SO I'M NOT SURE THE FEASIBILITY OF THAT PROCESS.

I LIKE THE IDEA. I'D LIKE TO EXPLORE IT. AND MAYBE FOR THAT ONE, TAKE A CLOSER LOOK, COME BACK WITH SOME OPTIONS REALISTICALLY, BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO CREATE A KIND OF A PERCEPTION OF, OH, I'LL JUST DO THE ADR WHEN IN FACT WE CAN'T EVEN SUPPORT IT.

SO THAT MAY BE A GOOD IDEA. AND THEN SCROLLING DOWN WE HAVE ITEM SIX. AND AGAIN, THIS WAS ANOTHER COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI POINT I DIDN'T THINK ABOUT, BUT INCLUDE A NEAT AND ORDERLY REQUIREMENT FOR ALL HEDGES IN THE CITY, NO MATTER, YOU KNOW, WHAT TYPE OF PROPERTY. AND THAT MAKES SENSE BECAUSE EVEN IF YOUR HEDGE DOES EXCEED OR DOESN'T EXCEED A CERTAIN HEIGHT YOU KNOW, YOU COULD IMAGINE HEDGE INCLUDING ITS ROOTS ENCROACHING ONTO OTHER PROPERTIES OR DROPPING TO

[00:50:01]

THAT'S RIGHT THERE. AND THANK YOU FOR INCLUDING THAT IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT.

SEEMS TO MAKE SENSE. ITEM SEVEN REVISE THE STATEMENT OF PURPOSES IN THE ORDINANCE TO CAPTURE AND EXPLAIN THE INTENTIONS AND REASONING FOR THE REVISED ORDINANCE.

THE CITY ATTORNEY HAD MENTIONED THAT THE IMPORTANCE OF INCLUDING, IN THE VERY BEGINNING, WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THIS ORDINANCE TO KIND OF GUIDE EVERYTHING THAT FLOWS FROM THAT? PUBLIC SAFETY, SOME LIBERTY AND FREEDOM FOR HOMEOWNERS TO HAVE HEDGES OF CERTAIN TYPES, WHATEVER IT MAY BE. BUT INCLUDING THAT RIGHT UP FRONT, I THINK WOULD BE HELPFUL.

AND FOR FOLKS WHO ARE FOCUSED IN ON THIS. AND THEN LASTLY, ITEM EIGHT ARE KIND OF MISCELLANEOUS OTHER ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION.

BUT IN PARTICULAR EIGHT B, WHICH IS TO ADD A NEW HEIGHT REQUIREMENT OR LIMIT FOR SO-CALLED HVOS, WHICH ARE HIGH VISUAL OBSTRUCTIONS, AS I UNDERSTAND THEM, WHICH SANTA MONICA HAS RECENTLY ENACTED, WHICH, LONG STORY SHORT CAPS HEIGHTS AT 24IN AND CERTAIN SAFETY TRIANGLES AND DRIVEWAYS.

I LIKE THE CONCEPT. I KNOW IT WAS PUT FORWARD BY ONE OF OUR ESTEEMED STAFF MEMBERS WHO'S EXPERT IN THAT A CONCERN, AND I SAW THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE DIDN'T ADOPT THAT, AND I COULD UNDERSTAND WHY THAT MAY BE A LITTLE TOO MUCH.

NOW, I'M NOT SURE OF THE PRACTICALITY OF ENFORCING THAT 24 INCH.

AND, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE HAVE NON-CONFORMING DRIVEWAYS AND EVERYTHING THAT FLOWS FROM THAT.

SO I WAS HAPPY TO SEE STAFF DIG IN ON THAT ONE, MAYBE NOT ON THIS GO AROUND.

IT SEEMS TO BE THE TAKEAWAY AND THE IMPRESSIONS WE'VE RECEIVED.

AND THIS WAS BIG. AND AGAIN, ANOTHER ONE THAT COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI MENTIONED IS ENSURE THERE'S A REASONABLE NOTICE AND OPPORTUNITY TO CURE PROVISION IN THE STATUTE.

FOR FOLKS TO, YOU KNOW, GET NOTICE, HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO FIX IT RATHER THAN, YOU KNOW, IMMEDIATELY GO TO ENFORCEMENT EXCEPT FOR WHAT WAS BEEN COINED AS SO-CALLED CRITICAL AND OR URGENT VIOLATIONS WHERE IT'S LIKE, HEY, IT'S A SAFETY ISSUE. WE DON'T HAVE TIME FOR THAT.

AND YOU KNOW, ENSURING THAT THE CODE ENFORCEMENT FOLKS ULTIMATELY WILL BE CHARGED WITH CARRYING THIS OUT.

AND I THINK THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IS ALREADY WAY AHEAD OF IT.

HAVE GUIDANCE TO DETERMINE WHEN REVIEWING COMPLAINTS, WHAT ARE BONA FIDE COMPLAINTS, WHAT ARE NOT YOU KNOW, WHAT MAY BE A CRITICAL OR URGENT VIOLATION OR NOT? AND WHAT MAY BE SIMPLY MINOR, TRIVIAL OR INCONSEQUENTIAL VIOLATIONS THAT YOU KNOW, WE'VE PUT IN SORT OF THE LOWEST RUNG AND IN FACT, MAYBE THE NON-ENFORCEABLE RUNG OF THE STATUTE.

SO, YOU KNOW, TO RECAP, MAYOR, ESSENTIALLY WE'RE IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.

IN FACT, WE'VE ADOPTED, I THINK, 99% OF IT. THE REASON WHY IT'S NOT COMPLETELY MESHED IN MAYBE IN PART THAT WE'VE COME HERE BECAUSE WE WANTED TO GET TO THIS QUICK.

AND AGAIN, WE'RE AN INFORMAL, WE'RE NOT A SUBCOMMITTEE.

SO WE DIDN'T, YOU KNOW, REALLY GET IN THERE TOO MUCH.

SO KIND OF LONG STORY SHORT THAT THAT'S WHERE, YOU KNOW, THE PROPOSALS WE PUT FORWARD, IF THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, CITY MANAGER HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS ON THAT, LET US KNOW.

AND THEN I'LL JUST TURN IT OVER TO COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI AND THE REST OF THE COUNCIL, WHO HAVE BEEN PATIENTLY SITTING THERE WHILE I HAVE GONE ON MINUTE AFTER MINUTE AFTER MINUTE. YOUR THREE MINUTE TIMER. I CERTAINLY HAVE.

SO THAT'S ALL. THANK YOU. SO THANK YOU AND I APPRECIATE THE WORK YOU AND COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI PUT INTO THE REVIEW AND THE AMOUNT, THE DETAILED COMMENTS, A COUPLE QUESTIONS, AND I DON'T WANT TO WORDSMITH ANYTHING TONIGHT, BUT JUST JUST I'M INTERESTED IN YOUR THOUGHTS.

SO FOR THE ADR WOULD YOU CONSIDER THAT THE NEAREST NEIGHBORS HAVE TO BE NOTIFIED SO THEY'RE AT LEAST AWARE AND CAN WEIGH IN ON, YOU KNOW, IT'S A GREAT POINT. AND IT'S ONE THAT COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI RAISED, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, WHERE DOES THIS GO? YOU HAVE AN ADR AND NOW NEIGHBORS COME IN AND THEN THERE'S NOTICE AND A HEARING.

AND THEN PEOPLE ARE MAKING APPEARANCES AND STAFF'S TIED DOWN.

SO WE THOUGHT ABOUT THAT AND ULTIMATELY CONCLUDED THAT PROBABLY REQUIRES A DEEPER LOOK WHETHER TO DO AN ADR IN THE FIRST INSTANCE BECAUSE OF THAT. AND IF IT'S EVEN REQUIRED, LIKE THE WAY THE STATUTE'S WRITTEN AND HOW WE'RE CARVING OUT THESE EXCEPTIONS AND A CLEAR PROCESS, THERE MAY NOT EVEN BE A NEED FOR THAT.

SO THOSE ARE MY THOUGHTS. COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI, THE CITY MANAGER MAY HAVE DIFFERENT ONES, ADDITIONAL HEAR FROM STAFF AND CITY MANAGER AS TO WHAT YOU THINK THE ABILITY OF THE CITY IS TO PROCESS EXCEPTIONS FOR THE TIME IT'S GOING TO TAKE.

WHAT KIND OF EXPERTISE? I KNOW, I KNOW SUPER DIRECTOR MARC WIENER WOULD LIKE IS LIKE, I CAN HANDLE THIS,

[00:55:02]

JUST LET ME START ON A HIGH LEVEL BASIS ARE SUPPORTED BY STAFF.

THE, THE QUASI SUBCOMMITTEES WORK I THINK IS CONSISTENT WITH OUR VIEWPOINT.

THIS IS THE ONE AREA THOUGH, THAT I HAVE POINTED OUT A LITTLE CAUTION ON.

WE DO NEED TO PROCEED, I THINK CAREFULLY WITH THIS PARTICULAR ITEM, THE ADR ITEM.

WE NEED VERY CLEAR IF WE'RE GOING TO GO DOWN THIS PATH, WE'LL NEED TO DEVELOP VERY CLEAR OBJECTIVE STANDARDS.

I DON'T WANT TO PUT MARC IN A DIFFICULT SPOT PITTING NEIGHBOR AGAINST NEIGHBOR.

AND WE WILL NEED TO SET A VERY HIGH BAR BECAUSE I THINK ONE OF THE CRITICAL ELEMENTS TO THIS ENTIRE REVIEW, AND I'D LIKE TO JUST READ THIS SENTENCE BECAUSE I THINK IT'S WELL STATED.

MAINTAINING LOW FENCES AND HEDGES AND FRONT YARDS IS A FUNDAMENTAL URBAN DESIGN PRINCIPLE THAT IMPROVES CHARACTER, SAFETY AND LIVABILITY OF NEIGHBORHOODS. LOW FRONT YARD LANDSCAPING CREATES AN AN OPEN, WELCOMING APPEARANCE AND ALLOWS THE HOMES TO CONTRIBUTE VISUALLY TO THE STREET. THIS ISN'T ITS, WE'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT SAFETY.

THERE'S TRAFFIC ENGINEERING CONCERNS, SIGHTLINE CONSIDERATIONS. THOSE ARE ALL IMPERATIVE TO THIS DISCUSSION.

BUT THAT RIGHT THERE IS A VERY FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE TO THE WAY WE HAVE DEVELOPED OUR NEIGHBORHOODS AND I THINK THE EXCEPTION HERE SHOULD BE JUST THAT. IT'S A VARIANCE, IT'S A HIGH LEVEL EXCEPTION.

IT SHOULD NOT BECOME A PROCESS TOWARDS HOW I CAN ENCLOSE MY FRONT YARD.

AND I THINK THAT'S THE, THE, THE OBJECTIVE CRITERION THAT NEEDS TO BE CREATED HERE NEEDS TO BE VERY METHODICAL AND VERY CAREFUL, BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO CREATE THAT AS A STANDARD LONG TERM.

THAT SHOULD BE THE EXCEPTION, NOT THE NORM. SO THAT'S ONE CRITICAL AREA FOR US.

AND THEN OBVIOUSLY THAT FLOWS THROUGH TO THE TRAFFIC ENGINEERING AND PUBLIC SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS THAT I THINK ARE ALSO WELL ARTICULATED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

YOU KNOW, THERE WAS THIS NOTION, THIS NEW TRIANGLE METHODOLOGY THAT RYAN, OUR TRAFFIC ENGINEER, MENTIONED.

YOU KNOW, THAT'S IF YOU LOOK AT IT FROM, FROM TRANSPORTATION PERSPECTIVE, THAT THAT'S CRITICAL, THAT'S HELPFUL. HAVING INCREASED SIGHT LINES AT ALL INTERSECTIONS, DRIVEWAYS CROSSWALKS, ETC.

IS, IS VERY IMPORTANT. WE CAN LIVE WITH THE 42 INCH STANDARD THAT EXISTS IN THE CODE TODAY.

BUT AS YOU HEARD FROM THE RECOMMENDATIONS, OUR ENGINEERING TEAM WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT EVEN LOWERED.

WE THINK THAT'S GIVEN WHERE WE ARE AT FROM A COMMUNITY PERSPECTIVE, 42 IS THE RIGHT BALANCE.

THAT'S PROBABLY A BRIDGE TOO FAR, AS COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT MENTIONED AT THIS TIME.

SO WE'RE STICKING WITH 42. BUT THERE IS GOOD REASON FOR ADDITIONAL CLEARANCE AROUND DRIVEWAYS IN PARTICULARLY, AND CERTAINLY FOR HOMES THAT ARE ON CORNERS WITH CRITICAL INTERSECTIONS.

SO THOSE THINGS NEED TO BE CONSIDERED. I THINK THE ADA PATH TO TRAVEL IS PRETTY CLEAR.

EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS THAT. I THINK THE NEATNESS OF APPEARANCE, THE QUALITY OF MAINTENANCE IS IMPORTANT TO THAT.

AND MAKING SURE THAT PEOPLE CAN TRAVERSE ARE IN SOME CASES, VERY LIMITED SIDEWALK SPACES SAFELY.

AND THEN LASTLY, YOU'VE GOT THE PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT, WHETHER IT BE POLICE OR FIRE WHERE FRONT YARD VISIBILITY IS KEY FOR PUBLIC SAFETY FROM A, JUST A PATROL AND RESPONSE STANDPOINT FROM A FIRE PERSPECTIVE, IF YOU'RE COMING INTO A PROPERTY ON AN EMERGENCY CALL, VISIBILITY IS CRITICAL. AND THEN CERTAINLY THERE IS CONCERN ABOUT HEDGES GROWING TOO HIGH AND CREATING ENTANGLEMENTS IN ROOF STRUCTURES AND THE LIKE THAT CAN CREATE KIND OF FIRE RISKS. SO I THINK ALL OF THAT'S WELL LAID OUT HERE.

YOU'VE HEARD FROM EVERYBODY. I THINK THIS IS A GOOD PLACE TO START THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM FROM COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI AND BEHRENDT ARE GOOD.

I THINK THAT'S A GOOD PLACE FOR THE COUNCIL TO WORK FROM. ITEM NUMBER FIVE, THOUGH, I THINK IS GOING TO NEED SOME ADDITIONAL FLESHING OUT.

AND IF THERE SHOULD BE FULL COST RECOVERY FOR ANY KIND OF ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS, AND THAT WILL BE SOMEWHAT EXPENSIVE. SEND THAT BACK WITH DIRECTION TO PURSUE IT AND FLUSH IT OUT.

AND YOU CAN COME UP WITH WHAT FULL COST COST OPTIONS.

ONCE WE SET THE CRITERIA, WE'LL KNOW WHAT SORT OF STANDARD OF REVIEW WE'RE CREATING. AND THEN WE'D HAVE TO THINK THROUGH KIND OF WHAT OUR VOLUME AND WORKLOAD WOULD LOOK LIKE. THE MORE YOU PUBLICIZE THE PROCESS, THE MORE YOU BRING IN NEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR IN CONFERENCE CONSIDERATION, THE MORE DELIBERATE AND THE MORE EXPANSIVE THAT EFFORT BECOMES.

YEAH. SO MY CONCERN ON THAT, AND IS NOT SO MUCH ON THE FRONT YARD BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S PRETTY WELL DEFINED.

BUT THE BACKYARD WHERE IT'S NOT NECESSARILY A SAFETY CONSTRAINT, BUT THE NEIGHBOR HAS AN ASSUMPTION, THE BACK, THE NEIGHBOR THAT'S NOT ASKING FOR THE VARIANCE HAS AN ASSUMPTION OF OUR RULES AND THAT HIS NEIGHBOR WILL LIVE.

HIS OR HER NEIGHBOR WILL LIVE BY THAT. BUT THEN IF WE HAVE AN ADR PROCESS WHERE YOU KNOW, THE CITY OKAYS SOMETHING HIGHER,

[01:00:01]

AND THEY HAVE GOOD REASONS FOR IT. THEY HAVE NO RECOURSE.

AND NOW, YOU KNOW, THERE'S THE, THE NEIGHBOR THAT DID IT HAS THE CITY'S BLESSING.

AND THE NEIGHBOR WHO DOESN'T LIKE IT HAS NO CHANCE, DOESN'T EVEN KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON UNTIL IT'S TOO LATE.

WELL, TYPICALLY OUR ADRS ARE SUBJECT TO APPEAL.

SO THERE'S A PROCESS IF YOU DON'T INFORM THEM, IF YOU DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S OCCURRED, YOU KNOW, AND I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE THERE'S SOME TIME SENSITIVITY OR WE COULD CREATE AN EXPANDED REVIEW PERIOD FOR THAT APPEAL PROCESS FOR THESE PARTICULAR CASES OR NOTICING THE CHALLENGE IS IF, IF WE START TO CREATE A DELIBERATION, HOW ARE WE GOING TO CONSIDER ADR DON'T TYPICALLY HAVE PUBLIC INPUT, RIGHT? IT'S, IT'S KIND OF A STAFF REVIEW. AND NOW YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A HEARING AND MAYBE GOING AWAY FROM 80 HOURS FOR ME, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT'S RIGHT TO, TO APPROVE SOMETHING THAT THE ABUTTING NEIGHBOR NEVER KNEW WAS COMING UP.

AND I'LL JUST GIVE YOU MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE.

OUR NEIGHBORS PLANTED TREES AND FIRST THEY WERE TREES, THEN THEY GREW TOGETHER.

THEN THEY'RE A SHRUB. NOW THEY'RE UP INTO THE POWER LINES.

AND MY LANDSCAPER, YOU KNOW, I WAS OKAY WITH IT.

I AGREED TO CUT IT. I HAD TO CHANGE MY WHOLE YARD BECAUSE IT WAS SHATTERED NOW.

BUT ONCE IT GOT INTO THE POWER LINES, MY LANDSCAPER SAID, I'M NOT TRIMMING IT ANYMORE.

AND NOW IT'S GROWN SO MUCH THAT IT'S STARTING TO BREAK THE FENCE BETWEEN OUR TWO PROPERTIES.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, I CAN RIGHT NOW, I CAN COMPLAIN ABOUT IT, I CAN, I CAN, YES.

SOUNDS LIKE A BONA FIDE COMPLAINT. BUT IF THE CITY PROVIDED THEM SOME BLESSING ON WHAT THEY'RE DOING, THEN WELL, RIGHT. IF THAT HAD BEEN PERMITTED, WHICH IN THAT CASE, I DON'T THINK IT WOULD MEET OUR OBJECTIVE CRITERION BASED ON WHAT YOU JUST DESCRIBED. BUT YEAH, THAT THAT WOULD BE THE CONCERN.

THERE IS UNDOUBTEDLY CONCERN NEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR ON THESE ISSUES.

SO AND IF THAT'S IF THAT INPUT AND REVIEW IS DESIRED BEFORE THE DECISION IS MADE, THEN ADR IS AND MAY NOT BE THE RIGHT PROCESS OR FRAMEWORK.

THAT MAY SOUND THAT SOUNDS MORE LIKE A CUP OR A TRADITIONAL VARIANCE HEARING.

OKAY. AND THEN GOING BACK. SORRY, THAT WAS CONVOLUTED.

WAY TO GET BACK TO YOU. DO YOU HAVE A DEFINITION OF YOU SAID ADJACENT OR NEARBY? DO YOU HAVE A DEFINITION OF NEARBY? YES. IN THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HAVE DRAFTED ONE, I BELIEVE IT'S 150FT FROM THE LOCATION.

SO IT'S A NUMBER OF FEET. NUMBER OF FEET. GIS.

YEAH. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I WANTED TO THANK FIRST THE RESIDENTS OF DISTRICT FOUR FOR COMING, COMING UP TO US, SPEAKING TO US IN A VERY RESPECTFUL, THOUGHTFUL, CIVIL MANNER TO REQUEST THE CHANGE THAT YOU WANTED TO SEE, TO SHOW US PICTURES OF HOW YOU'VE BEEN AGGRIEVED BY THE COMPLAINTS THAT WERE LODGED, HOW YOU'VE HAD TO CUT YOUR HEDGES, HOW AWFUL THAT WAS. AND I WILL TELL YOU THAT THAT HAD A HUGE IMPACT ON ME AND IT MADE ME WANT TO GET TO WORK AND CONFER WITH COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT AND HE JUMPED ON IT. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT. BECAUSE HE STARTED, YOU KNOW, COMING UP WITH A BONA FIDE COMPLAINANT DEFINITION AND PULLED THAT FROM OTHER ORDINANCES AND STARTED CRAFTING A WHOLE, YOU KNOW, NEW HEDGE ORDINANCE, IF YOU WILL.

AND THEN I WANT TO THANK OUR, OUR QUALITY OF LIFE PROSECUTOR, OUR CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, BECAUSE THEY DID TREMENDOUS RESEARCH ACROSS MANY MUNICIPALITIES AND THEN CONFERRED WITH EVERY DEPARTMENT, PUBLIC PUBLIC WORKS, ENGINEERING, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FIRE POLICE.

AND, YOU KNOW, IT WAS EASY WHEN, WHEN RESIDENTS FIRST CAME UP TO SAY, YEAH, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO GROW IT TO SIX FEET.

BUT THEN ONCE YOU HEAR EVERY CONCERN, PUBLIC SAFETY CONCERN THAT EVERY ONE OF THESE DEPARTMENT HEADS OR DEPARTMENTS VOICED, YOU'RE LIKE, WOW, THIS IS MUCH THIS IS MUCH MORE SIGNIFICANT THAN JUST GOING, YOU KNOW, FROM 42IN TO 6FT.

THIS IS THIS IS A SIGNIFICANT JUMP. THAT'S A THREE FOOT JUMP.

AND IT CREATES A TOTALLY DIFFERENT NEIGHBORHOOD IF EVERYBODY CAN GROW TO SIX FEET.

SOMETHING I WANTED TO POINT OUT. AND SO, BY THE WAY, THANK YOU MISS JOHNSON, FOR BRINGING THIS ALL TOGETHER IN A CONCERTED REPORT ON QUICK NOTICE. AND THANK YOU, THE CITY MANAGER, FOR BRINGING THIS BACK SO QUICKLY TO PUT THE RESIDENTS AT EASE THAT WE WERE WORKING ON IT AND WORKING ON IT THOUGHTFULLY.

IF WE COULD LINE UP 2B. I THINK I DID GET THIS TO WORK NOW, PLEASE.

THIS DID THIS WITH A SENTENCE YOU READ JUMPED OUT TO ME AS WELL.

IN ADDITION, THE ONE SUBSEQUENT, FURTHERMORE, LOWER FENCES AND HEDGES STRENGTHEN NEIGHBORHOOD INTERACTION AS NEIGHBORS ARE MORE LIKELY TO AGREE AND INTERACT WHEN FRONT YARDS ARE OPEN AND VISUALLY CONNECTED TO THE STREET.

SO AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT HIT HOME TO ME BECAUSE WHEN I FIRST MOVED IN, IN DISTRICT FOUR, AND I WALKED OUT OF MY, MY FRONT DOOR, I COULD BE SEEN AND SEE MY NEIGHBORS.

AND THAT'S WHEN ONE OF MY NEIGHBORS TOLD ME ABOUT, HEY, A GOOD GARDENER THAT I COULD USE.

[01:05:04]

AND THAT'S HOW I KNOW ALL MY NEIGHBORS ON BOTH SIDES OF ME AND MY THREE AND A LOT.

SO I AGREE WITH MORE OR LESS EVERYTHING THAT COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT SAID.

WHAT I'D SAY TO FOLKS OUT THERE IS IF YOU'RE GOING TO COME SPEAK TO US ABOUT WHAT YOU LIKE OR DISLIKE IN THE PROPOSALS, IF YOU THINK THAT YOU HAVE A HEDGE THAT'S HIGHER THAN 42IN THAT YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO KEEP AND THAT YOU'RE GOING TO APPLY FOR THIS ADR IF IT GOES THROUGH, PLEASE TELL US WHY YOU THINK YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO HAVE A HEDGE MORE THAN 42IN, SO THAT WE CAN REALLY DECIDE WHETHER IT'S WORTHWHILE TO COME UP WITH THIS WHOLE ALTERNATIVE YOU KNOW, PROCESS TO BE ABLE TO SEEK PERMISSION FOR A HEDGE TALLER THAN 42IN.

I DID GET A EMAIL FROM HAI TRAN WHO IS HERE, WHICH I THINK BROUGHT UP AN ISSUE RELATIVE TO OUR DEFINITION OF HEIGHT, WHICH I, WHICH I AGREE WITH THAT IT'S NOT EXACTLY A CLEAR DEFINITION HERE AND WE HAD TO ADDRESS IT.

SORRY. COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT WE DIDN'T GET TO TALK ABOUT IT EITHER, BUT I'D ASK FOR CLARIFICATION ON THIS.

WHAT I THINK MR. TRAN WOULD SAY IS HIS PROPERTY SITS BELOW THE GRADE OF THE SIDEWALK.

IF THE HEDGE HEIGHT LIMIT IS MEASURED FROM THE THE GRADE AT HIS PROPERTY, THEN HE BASICALLY GETS NO HEDGE AND NO FENCE WHATSOEVER. WHEREAS HE WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE HIS PROPERTY SITS RIGHT HERE, BUT THE SIDEWALKS HERE UNDER A RETAINING WALL.

HE'D LIKE TO HAVE 42IN FROM THERE. SO IF WE COULD GET A CLARIFIED DEFINITION ON HEIGHT, YOU KNOW, THIS THIS DEFINITION SAYS THE FINISHED GRADE VERSUS THE EXISTING GRADE.

IT'S LIKE, WHICH ONE'S THE FINISHED GRADE? WHICH ONE'S THE EXISTING GRADE? I WOULD, I WOULD APPRECIATE A CLEANER DEFINITION THAT BODES IN FAVOR OF PRIVACY, WHATEVER IT IS THAT THE PERSON GETS FROM A HEDGE.

THAT'S, THAT'S NOT CREATING A, A FENCE OR BARRIER HIGHER THAN 42IN AT THE WALKWAY.

SO MEASURING FROM THE OUTSIDE, LOOKING INTO THE PROPERTY, ESSENTIALLY.

YEAH. MEASURING FROM THE PERSON WHO'S PASSING BY ON THE, ON THE STREET. THERE'S A, THERE'S A CONTRARY TO THAT AS WELL.

THE SCENARIO WHERE YOU HAVE A RETAINING WALL, LIKE A SLOPED PROPERTY ON A CORNER, THE FINISHED GRADE MIGHT ACTUALLY BE ABOVE THE SIDEWALK. SO WE ALSO HAVE TO BE THINKING ABOUT WHERE SHOULD WE BE CALCULATING THAT HEIGHT.

BECAUSE IF YOU LIMIT IT TO 42IN FROM THE SIDEWALK, IN THAT SCENARIO, YOU HAVE VERY LITTLE OR LIMITED HEDGEROW.

SO WE MAY WANT TO CREATE AN EITHER OR TYPE STANDARD, YOU KNOW, WHICHEVER IS HIGHER FINISH GRADE OR SIDEWALK OR SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES.

FLEXIBILITY THERE FOR GRADE DIFFERENTIALS SO EVERYBODY CAN GET A BENEFIT OF A OF A LITTLE HEDGE.

AND BY THE WAY, I DO HEAR THE FOLKS WHO COMPLAINED AND SAID, IN DISTRICT FOUR, WE'RE ALL REALLY TIGHT AND WE GET SHADE FROM OUR HEDGES AND IT COOLS DOWN OUR PROPERTIES WHERE WE DON'T HAVE AC AND THE LIKE.

I TOTALLY GET THAT. BUT THESE OTHER FACTORS ALSO FROM THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, YOU KNOW, BEING ABLE TO SEE INTO A PROPERTY, SEE IF SOMEBODY IS THERE.

THERE WAS, THERE'S A PROPERTY THAT WAS SENT IN WHERE THE HEDGE HAD GROWN AND ESSENTIALLY CREATED A DOORWAY.

AND THAT'S BEAUTIFUL. IT LOOKS GREAT IF ONE HOUSE DOES IT, IF EVERY HOUSE DOES IT, IT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT NEIGHBORHOOD.

IN ADDITION, SOMEBODY GOES INTO THAT HOUSE AND DECIDES TO BREAK IN OR WHATNOT.

NOBODY SEES THEM. NOBODY CAN SEE THE FRONT DOOR ANYMORE.

AND SO THAT CREATES PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE AND DOESN'T ALLOW US TO ENGAGE IN NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH.

SO I SUPPORT ALL THESE RECOMMENDATIONS AND LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING THANK EVERYBODY FOR THEIR TEAMWORK ON THIS GREAT TEAMWORK AND THE RESPONSIVENESS OF THE RESIDENTS AND LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING FROM EVERYBODY ELSE.

SO WHAT'S YOUR DESIRED OUTCOME? DO YOU TWO WANT TO FORM A SUBCOMMITTEE AND WORK WITH STAFF, OR DO YOU WANT TO JUST TURN OVER BROAD RECOMMENDATIONS AND LET STAFF WORK ON IT? IT'S A I MEAN, I THINK WE'RE I THINK WE'RE MORE OR LESS HERE.

WE'VE GOT TO IRON OUT SOME DETAILS AS TO THE ADR I THINK STAFF CAN COME UP WITH A GOOD, GOOD DEFINITION FOR HEIGHT.

THAT INCORPORATES WHAT WE'RE GOING TO HEAR AND WHAT WE'VE HEARD. SO TURN IT OVER TO STAFF.

YEAH I THINK SO. I MEAN WE DEPENDING ON THE DIRECTION WE GET FROM THE REST OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS YOU'LL GO THROUGH THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI AND I HAVE MADE AND I WALK THROUGH SUBJECT TO ANY CHANGES FROM OTHER INPUT FROM OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS, DRAFT THOSE WITH THE REMOVAL OF THE HVO AREA, THE THE 24IN COMES OUT AND THEN WORK ON THE ADR POTENTIAL PROCESS, COME BACK WITH SOME OPTIONS, FEASIBILITY, COST RECOVERY AND HAVE TO YOUR POINT, MAYOR HAVE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE DRAFT THIS, THE DETAILS ARE GOING TO BE CRITICAL.

I'M JUST ASKING, CAN YOU TALK THAT YOU DIDN'T FORMALLY FORM A SUBCOMMITTEE, BUT YOU HAD THIS LIST OF.

YEAH, I WOULD, SO IF YOU'RE OKAY, I'M OKAY WITH THAT.

[01:10:01]

OKAY. BUT I GUESS JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, WAS THE RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF NOW, IN LIGHT OF ON THE HVOS TO GO UP TO 36IN OR JUST TO LEAVE IT OUT COMPLETELY ON THE HVOS? AND LEAVE THE CURRENT HEIGHT. I THINK THE SITE TRIANGLE AREA IT, THE CURRENT ORDINANCE IS AT 36IN AND WE'LL KEEP THAT.

OKAY. BUT THAT'S FOR TRIANGLES AT CORNER LOTS, NOT AT DRIVEWAYS.

CORRECT. YES. SO WE'LL KEEP IT AT 42IN. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. THANKS. I'M GOOD WITH THAT. OKAY. COUNCIL MEMBER WALLER.

THANK YOU. MAYOR. IN GENERAL, I LIKE A LOT OF THE WORK THAT'S BEEN DONE.

A FEW OF THE COMMENTS THAT I'VE GOT HEDGE HEIGHT, I THINK NEEDS TO BE MEASURED FROM THE TALLER OF THE TWO GRADES.

AS COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI WAS SAYING, I THINK MAYBE THAT'S HOW YOU CAN WORD IT JUST THE TALLER OF THE TWO AND THAT'S HOW IT WORKS BECAUSE IT, YOU KNOW, IF YOUR PROPERTY IS BELOW THE STREET, THEN IT'S FROM THE STREET.

BUT IF THERE'S THAT RETAINING WALL, YOU'RE STILL GOING TO, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BASICALLY FALL OFF THE SIDE OF YOUR PROPERTY JUST BECAUSE YOU'RE 42IN ABOVE. YOU CAN'T HAVE ANYTHING THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. SO I THINK THE TALLER OF THE TWO IS WHERE THAT WOULD MAKE SENSE.

SUBJECT TO THE SAFETY. YES. ALL, ALL OF THIS IS SUBJECT TO.

SUBJECT TO. YEAH. WE'LL GET BACK TO MY THOUGHTS.

I WOULD CONSIDER EIGHT FEET FOR INTERIOR SIDE AND REAR YARDS.

I THINK THAT WITH HOUSING BEING TIGHTER AND TALLER NOW, YOU KNOW, MY NEIGHBOR'S GOT A MAXIMUM HEIGHT PROPERTY NEXT TO MINE. SO GOING TO EIGHT FEET, I THINK IS A REASONABLE FOR THE REAR AND SIDE YARDS FOR REASONABLE PRIVACY. STILL WANT TO HAVE THE SIGHT LINE REQUIREMENTS TO INTERSECTIONS AND DRIVEWAYS.

AND I ACTUALLY LIKE THE IDEA OF THE 24 INCH FIVE BY FIVE TRIANGLE HVO AT THE DRIVEWAYS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

BECAUSE THAT IS THE KIND OF COMPLAINTS THAT I GET ARE PEOPLE BACKING OUT OF DRIVEWAYS NOT BEING ABLE TO SEE.

SO I, I'M AMENABLE TO MODIFYING THAT, BUT I LIKED THE 24IN.

I THOUGHT THAT WAS A GOOD THING. I WOULD LIKE THE ORDINANCE TO PROTECT MATURE VEGETATION WHERE POSSIBLE.

SO THE, THE ENFORCEMENT GETS FOCUSED ON THE IMPACTS FOR SIGHT LINE SIDEWALKS, ADA ACCESS, EMERGENCY ACCESS REQUIRED EGRESS. BUT I DON'T WANT SEVERE PRUNING TO DAMAGE OR KILL WHAT WE WOULD CALL A MATURE OR EVEN A HERITAGE HEDGE. YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT HERITAGE TREES.

WE'VE GOT, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN'T DO THINGS TO DAMAGE HERITAGE TREES IN THE CITY.

AGAIN, THAT'S NOT JUST BLANKET ANY HEDGE THAT CAN GET THIS, THIS WOULD HAVE TO BE THROUGH, WHETHER IT BE A REVIEW PROCESS OR SOMETHING IN THE CODE THAT RECOGNIZES THAT.

I TALKED TO CITY ATTORNEY EARLIER ABOUT THIS.

AND SO SHE WAS GOING TO LOOK INTO SOME POSSIBLE LANGUAGE FOR THAT, BUT YOU KNOW, AS LONG AS, YOU KNOW, SAFETY, RIGHT OF WAY, ALL THAT IS SATISFIED, IF THERE'S A PLACE WHERE A HEDGE THAT'S BEEN AROUND AND MAYBE IT'S A HISTORIC PROPERTY.

THE HEDGE HAS BEEN AROUND FOREVER AND IT'S SIX FEET TALL INSTEAD OF 42IN IN CERTAIN PARTS, OR I DON'T KNOW, I DON'T KNOW THE EXAMPLES, BUT I DON'T WANT TO BASICALLY HAVE A BLANKET THING WHERE WE'RE NOW GOING TO TELL SOMEBODY, YOU HAVE TO BASICALLY KILL YOUR HEDGE. IT COULD BE THAT WE ALSO WANT TO BE ABLE TO GIVE PEOPLE TIME TO PROGRESSIVELY PRUNE IT DOWN. SO AGAIN, YOU'RE NOT JUST LIKE TOPPING A HEDGE.

IF YOU TAKE IT DOWN THAT WAY, YOU CAN PROGRESSIVELY BRING IT DOWN AND KEEP IT ALIVE.

YOU KNOW, WE ARE TREE CITY, USA. TREES ARE IMPORTANT TO US.

WE TALK ABOUT GREENERY. AND THEN WE'RE ALSO TALKING ABOUT JUST POTENTIALLY DAMAGING THE HEDGES.

AND SO THAT WAS MY CONCERN ON THAT. BUT OTHERWISE I DIDN'T HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS REALLY ON THE SPECIFICS OF THE LANGUAGE AND THE OTHER THINGS THAT YOU GUYS WENT THROUGH, I THINK ARE ARE VERY REASONABLE.

COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI. TWO, TWO QUESTIONS. FIRST AS TO COUNCIL MEMBER WALLER QUESTION REQUEST FOR THE HOV REGULATIONS.

DO WE THINK THAT A 36 INCH HEIGHT LIMIT FOR THE HOV AREA WOULD BE BENEFICIAL AT ALL? I GUESS I'D ASK THE CITY ENGINEER, I'LL HAVE RYAN LIU, OUR TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER, ADDRESS THAT.

SO I IMAGINE RIGHT NOW PEOPLE HAVE FENCES NEXT TO THEIR DRIVEWAY THAT ARE IN EXCESS OF 24IN.

[01:15:02]

DO WE THINK 36 COULD BE HELPFUL TO INCREASE VISIBILITY IN THAT FIVE BY FIVE HOV? YEAH, THAT'S, THAT'S A POSSIBILITY. AND I THINK THE REASON WHY WE INCLUDED THAT STATEMENT THAT SANTA MONICA DOES HAVE THIS ORDINANCE, BUT WE DIDN'T STRONGLY RECOMMEND IT, IS BECAUSE WE WOULD AUTOMATICALLY CREATE A LOT OF NON-CONFORMING PROPERTIES.

BUT WE WANTED TO MENTION IT AS A, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A CREATIVE NEW PRACTICE THAT SANTA MONICA DOES WHERE THEY TREAT THE DRIVEWAY TO STREET IS LIKE AN INTERSECTION, A MINI INTERSECTION OF SORTS. AND EVEN THE SANTA MONICA ORDINANCE DOES HAVE SOME LEEWAY IN TERMS OF EXISTING FENCES.

THEY TALK ABOUT NOT MAKING IT WORSE, BUT TRYING TO FIND COMPLIANCE OVER, OVER TIME.

SO THE PURPOSE WAS THAT WAS JUST TO HIGHLIGHT THAT THIS IS ANOTHER TOOL WE COULD USE.

BUT TO, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, YOU KNOW, 36 CERTAINLY WOULD BE HELPFUL COMPARED TO THE 42, ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE AT A LOT LINE WITH A HEDGE AND, AND THE DRIVER AND THE PEDESTRIAN CANNOT SEE EACH OTHER.

ALSO IN LIGHT OF TODAY'S VEHICLES, QUIETER EVS, LARGER CARS AS WELL THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, KIND OF STEERING THE TREND TOWARDS LOWER HEIGHT LIMITS. AND THE SECOND QUESTION WAS RELATIVE TO THIS INDEPENDENT JURISDICTION OF THE CITY TO ENFORCE AND BRING COMPLAINTS THAT WE HAD. GO AHEAD. YEAH.

URGENT AND OR CRITICAL VIOLATIONS. IT'S IN OUR RECOMMENDATIONS, WE HAD SAID ENSURE THE CITY RETAINS THE INDEPENDENT DISCRETION TO SEEK ENFORCEMENT OF THE ORDINANCE FOR VIOLATIONS CONCERNING POLICE, FIRE, PUBLIC SAFETY MATTERS, ETCETERA. WE'RE A COMPLAINT DRIVEN CITY.

WE DON'T DO ANY CODE ENFORCEMENT GENERALLY UNLESS THERE'S A COMPLAINT FIRST BY A RESIDENT FOR IT.

IS THERE A IS WOULD THERE BE A REASON TO PROVIDE THE CITY WITH THIS INDEPENDENT DISCRETION IF THE CITY DOESN'T ACTUALLY ENFORCE THINGS ON ITS OWN PROACTIVELY WITHOUT A COMPLAINT DRIVING IT? WELL, WHILE WE TYPICALLY, DUE TO STAFFING AND LEVEL OF RESOURCES, OPERATE ON A COMPLAINT BASIS.

THERE ARE INSTANCES WHERE WE MAY PROACTIVELY TRY TO ADDRESS A POLICY MATTER OF THE CITY THROUGH ENFORCEMENT ACTION.

IT IS. IT IS FORESEEABLE THAT TRAFFIC ENGINEERING CONCERNS.

IN FACT, IT'S HOW WE'RE ADDRESSING THE CURRENT LIST OF COMPLAINTS.

IF. IF. IF THE SITUATION HAS GIVEN RISE TO A SPECIFIC TRAFFIC ENGINEERING CONFIRMED SIGHT LINE IMPACT CONCERN, WE ARE CONTINUING TO FOLLOW UP. THAT'S. SO I DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THAT'S CLEARLY PART OF OUR POLICY GOALS.

I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE TO WRITE IT IN EXPRESSLY. I THINK WE WOULD ALWAYS HAVE THAT RIGHT.

I WOULD CERTAINLY HOPE THAT THE CODE WOULD PROVIDE US THAT RIGHT TO ENFORCE WHAT'S IN THE CODE ABSENT A COMPLAINT.

BUT IF WE NEED TO MAKE THAT ABUNDANTLY CLEAR, I THINK IT'S WORTH THE COMMUNITY UNDERSTANDING THAT, BECAUSE THAT I THINK IT SPEAKS TO OUR PRIORITIZATION OF CONCERN.

AND IF I COULD JUST ADD THAT CURRENTLY I WOULD CONSIDER THE WHAT YOU ARE CALLING CRITICAL AS ONE OF OUR NUISANCES. SO WE WOULD STILL HAVE DISCRETION TO ENFORCE THAT.

AND I DON'T THINK WE NEED ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE FOR THAT, WHICH IS WHY IT WASN'T A RECOMMENDATION.

BUT I THINK TO ADDRESS THAT CONCERN, THE CITY DOES HAVE THAT DISCRETION UNDER THE NUISANCE CODE.

OKAY. UNDER THE NUISANCE CODE, WHICH IS DEFINED INTO CERTAIN AREAS.

PLUS YOU'D BE ABLE TO DRAFT AN ORDINANCE THAT WOULD BE ENFORCEABLE TO CAPTURE WHAT THE CITY MANAGER MEANT AS WELL FOR THESE BROADER VIOLATIONS LAID OUT IN NUMBER FOUR.

YES, WE COULD DO THAT. THANK YOU. SO I DO HAVE A QUESTION RELATED TO THAT.

SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I LIKED ABOUT THE CITY'S DISCRETION IN WRITING THAT IN IS IF SOME SOMEBODY, A NON BONA FIDE COMPLAINANT WRITES IN AND THEY ACTUALLY HAVE A CREDIBLE, YOU KNOW, COMPLAINT THAT ALLOWS THE CITY THE DISCRETION TO CONSIDER THAT COMPLAINT WHERE PRESUMABLY. YEAH.

THE OTHER WAY WE'D HAVE TO DISREGARD, AT LEAST THE WAY I READ IT, WE'D HAVE TO DISREGARD IT.

UNLESS IT'S A PUBLIC NUISANCE. RIGHT? YES. SO, FOR EXAMPLE, ENCROACHMENT ON A SIDEWALK THAT DOESN'T TOTALLY BLOCK THE SIDEWALK.

I MEAN, WE HAVE A MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION THAT ADDRESSES ENCROACHING ON THE SIDEWALK AS A NUISANCE.

YES. FOR HOW? HOW MUCH? ANY. ANY ENCROACHMENT? I DIDN'T READ IT THAT WAY, BUT MAYBE THAT'S. MAYBE I MISSED THAT SECTION.

IT WAS IN THERE. IF IT. TO YOUR POINT, IF IT CREATES A SAFETY.

RIGHT. BUT IF IT DOESN'T CREATE A DIRECT SAFETY LIKE IT FORCES YOU TO HAVE HALF A SIDEWALK INSTEAD OF A SIDEWALK, YOU'RE SPOT ON THERE. THAT'S OR THAT WOULD BE ADA VIOLATION IF THEY CAN USE HALF THE SIDEWALK TO GET BY.

[01:20:04]

THAT'S THE INTENT OF ITEM FOUR, WHICH IS PUTTING INTO THIS ACTUAL STATUTE.

I KNOW. YEAH. ALL OF THOSE, PLUS SOME THAT MAY NOT CURRENTLY FALL UNDER NUISANCE, BUT THAT WE'VE LEARNED THROUGH THIS EXERCISE COULD STILL PRESENT A CRITICAL.

I LIKE THAT ELEMENT OF YOURS. TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION.

PRESUMABLY IF SOMEBODY WHO'S NOT A NEIGHBOR, NOT A QUOTE, NON BONA FIDE SAYS, HEY, THERE'S A TREE KNOCKING DOWN A LIGHT POLE OR POWER LINES, AND THEY CALL THE CITY, THEN THE CITY CERTAINLY COULD ACT ON THAT WITHIN THE DISCRETION PROVIDED HERE AND OTHERWISE, IF I HAVE THAT RIGHT. CITY MANAGER, YOU DO.

I THINK THE OTHER POINT THAT I WANTED TO EMPHASIZE IS THE GOAL HERE IS, OF COURSE, TO CREATE THE THE SPECIFIC RULES AND REQUIREMENTS THAT ALL OF OUR RESIDENTS SHOULD STRIVE TO MAINTAIN AND CORRECT. WHAT WE DON'T WANT TO DO IS CREATE A SYSTEM WHERE, OH, I'VE GOT COOL NEIGHBORS, SO MY HEDGE ISN'T GOING TO BE A PROBLEM BECAUSE I'M NEVER GOING TO HAVE A BONA FIDE COMPLAINT.

WE WANT EVERYBODY TO ADHERE TO THE STANDARDS, THE OBJECTIVE STANDARDS THAT YOU SET BY THIS ORDINANCE.

THAT'S FIRST AND FOREMOST. AND WE SHOULD ALWAYS, AS A CITY, HAVE THE ABILITY TO ENFORCE AGAINST THOSE STANDARDS, WITH OR WITHOUT A NEIGHBOR OR A BONA FIDE COMPLAINT.

NOW WHAT, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN IN PRACTICE FOR US, GIVEN OUR LEVEL OF RESOURCES AND ALL THE OTHER THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO DO IN CODE ENFORCEMENT. WE'RE LIKELY STILL TO RESPOND PRIMARILY TO COMPLAINTS UNLESS IT HAPPENS TO BE THAT TRAFFIC ENGINEERING CONCERN.

BUT AGAIN, WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS WE'RE SETTING THE FRAMEWORK FOR HOW WE WANT TO SEE THESE HEDGES MAINTAINED.

OKAY. I WOULD HATE, YOU KNOW, I APOLOGIZE COUNCIL MEMBER WALLER, BUT, YOU KNOW, I WOULDN'T WANT AN EIGHT FOOT HEDGE ON MY SIDE YARD BECAUSE MY SIDE YARD IS ONLY FIVE FEET WIDE. AND IT WOULD IT WOULD BLOCK ALL THE SUNLIGHT AND IT WOULD GROW OVER.

IT WOULD BE A MAINTENANCE, CONSTANT MAINTENANCE NIGHTMARE.

SO I WOULD HATE TO HAVE THAT AS A BLANKET RULE, ALTHOUGH, YOU KNOW, EIGHT FEET IS REASONABLE FOR ANYBODY WITH EVEN A STEP LADDER TO TRIM.

DOESN'T THAT DOESN'T GET INTO THE POWER LINES, WHICH WOULD BE AN SCE THING ANYHOW.

AND A SIX FOOT FENCE. YOU KNOW, THAT'S THAT'S MY HEIGHT.

THAT'S A FENCE YOU CAN CONTROL SIX INCHES WIDE, RIGHT? IF IT'S CEMENT BLOCK, IF YOU PUT A TREE UP, IF THE HEDGE IS ON YOUR PROPERTY, YOU CAN DO WHATEVER YOU WANT ON YOUR PROPERTY.

IT'S THEIR PROPERTY NIGHTMARE. YOU WANT, YOU WANT TO INCREASE THE HEIGHT LIMIT OF FENCES OR HEDGES OR BOTH HEDGES.

WELL, HONESTLY, I'D BE OKAY WITH BOTH, BUT I DON'T WANT TO TOUCH FENCES, SO WE'RE NOT.

I PERSONALLY DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH FENCES, BUT THIS, STAFF.

OKAY, I, I DON'T AGREE WITH THE FOOT SIDE YARDS AS A BLANKET APPROVAL.

THAT'S THAT'S MY ONE POINT. COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT.

YEAH, I WAS JUST GOING TO PICK UP ON THAT. DOES STAFF HAVE ANY INPUT APPRECIATION RECOMMENDATIONS ON EIGHT FOOT HEDGE IN THE BACK OR SIDE? HAVE YOU WHAT'S YOU KNOW, CONVERSATIONS I'VE HAD WITH THE TEAM GENERALLY HAS BEEN THAT'S, THAT'S NOT OUR PRIMARY CONCERN.

WE ARE, WE ARE COMFORTABLE WITH THE LANGUAGE AS DRAFTED.

I DON'T THINK WE HAVE MAJOR HEARTBURN. I THINK ANOTHER FOOT IS WHAT THAT WOULD ULTIMATELY MEAN.

RIGHT. SO I DON'T THINK THAT IS A YEAH. WELL IT'S WHAT DO WE HAVE CURRENTLY IT'S SIX PLUS ONE.

CURRENTLY SIX PLUS WHAT. IT'S SIX FEET. RIGHT.

SIX FEET. YES. CURRENTLY. SO IT WOULD BE A TWO ADDITIONAL FEET.

SO INTERNALLY WE HAVEN'T WE DON'T HAVE MAJOR HEARTBURN WITH THAT FROM A PUBLIC SAFETY STANDPOINT THAT WE, BUT WE DO RECOGNIZE THE NEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR ISSUE THAT THAT CREATES FROM A LIGHT AND VISIBILITY STANDPOINT, AIR LIGHT VISIBILITY. SO. IF WE GOT FIRE. IF.

THE CONCERN IS MORE, IS IT STARTING TO CREEP INTO ROOF LINES? WHAT'S ABOVE IT IN CERTAIN INSTANCES? ONE SECOND.

MA'AM, YOU'VE GOT YOUR FLASHLIGHT ON POINTED TOWARDS US.

IT'S VERY DISTRACTING. THANK YOU. THE ISSUE IS CERTAIN CERTAIN EIGHT FOOT HEDGES.

NOT A PROBLEM. RIGHT. BUT LOW ROOF LINE. SO I THINK IT'S A CASE BY CASE SCENARIO.

I MEAN, EIGHT FEET ON PRINCIPLE ISN'T NECESSARILY A PROBLEM. IT IT COULD BE DEPENDING ON ITS PROXIMITY TO ROOF LINES GUTTERS AND BUILDINGS.

SOME SOME EIGHT FOOT HEDGES ARE PROBABLY FINE.

OTHERS MAY BE PROBLEMATIC. YEAH. I THINK IF YOU HAVE A WIDER SIDE YARD, LESS SUSCEPTIBLE.

BUT IF YOU'RE FIVE FEET, THAT'S RIGHT ON TOP OF YOUR HOUSE.

BUT I CAN ALSO TELL YOU THAT FROM MY BACK DOOR, I LOOK RIGHT INTO MY NEIGHBOR'S BEDROOM WITH A SIX FOOT FENCE.

YEAH. AND SO IT'S LIKE, THAT'S ALL OF US. WELL, NO, I'M JUST SAYING AN EIGHT FOOT.

IF YOU IF I COULD PUT A HEDGE, THAT WOULD GET ANOTHER TWO FEET.

I THINK THAT WOULD GIVE MY NEIGHBOR A WHOLE LOT MORE.

BEDROOMS ON THE SECOND FLOOR, NEIGHBOR'S LIVING ROOM IS ON THE SECOND FLOOR.

SO RIGHT INTO MY BEDROOM, THAT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT. BUT YOU COULD GROW YOUR HEDGE TO 8 FEET AND SEE IF YOUR NEIGHBOR COMPLAINS. AND THEY PROBABLY WON'T COMPLAIN BECAUSE THEY'RE GETTING. OKAY, WE'RE GETTING OFF. AND THAT IS SORT OF THE FLEXIBILITY BUILT INTO THAT.

[01:25:05]

I'D LIKE THEM TO KNOW WHAT WE'RE STEERING TOWARDS BEFORE WE. I MEAN THEY'VE THEY'VE HEARD WHAT WE'RE STEERING. SO YOU'RE BASICALLY STEERING TOWARDS THE RECOMMENDATIONS, WHERE ARE YOU AT WITH ADR? FOR STAFF? TO COME BACK TO TEST THE FEASIBILITY AND FULL COST RECOVERY IF IT'S PRACTICAL.

I MEAN, IT SEEMS LIKE. THAT'S IF ANYBODY REQUESTS ADR.

ALL RIGHT. LET'S SEE IF ANYBODY REQUESTS ADR AND IF ANYBODY'S.

WELL I'M REQUESTING IT. OKAY. OKAY. WE'LL TAKE CARDS FIRST.

OKAY. FIRST MILES BURHART. NOT MUCH SIDE OF OUR BACKYARD.

YEAH. MR. MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. I'M MILES BURHART, 14 YEAR RESIDENT.

AS YOU LOOK AT UPDATING THE CODES, I THINK IT'S REALLY GOOD FOR YOU TO KNOW HOW THEY ARE ACTUALLY ENFORCED ON THE GROUND TODAY.

I CALL THIS ONE THE HITCHHIKER'S GUIDE TO SAFETY COMPLAINTS.

SO RESIDENTS USE ACCESS REDONDO BEACH. IT'S GREAT.

THEY FILE ISSUES. THREE THINGS REALLY HELP HERE, RIGHT? IF THEY SEND PHOTOS, IF THEY KNOW IT'S A SAFETY ISSUE AND IF THERE'S A PERSONAL IMPACT TO THEM.

MANY TIMES, HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINTS SEEM TO DISAPPEAR INTO A BLACK HOLE.

MANY GET CLOSED FOR INVALID REASONS OR WITH MISSING REASONS.

SOME CASES STAY OPEN FOR YEARS. I'M NOT JOKING.

DECADES. AND IF THEY RESOLVE, THEY GET PARTIAL OR INVALID FIXES.

I WANT TO SHOW YOU A REAL EXAMPLE THAT KIND OF HIGHLIGHTS THIS.

I CALL THIS ONE WHERE'S WALDO? TAKE A MINUTE TO TRY AND FIND WALDO IN THIS PICTURE.

OKAY. I OFTEN SEE ROLLING STOPS AT THIS INTERSECTION ALMOST ALL THE TIME.

I FILED A SIGHT LINE COMPLAINT IN FEBRUARY. THREE DAYS LATER, IT WAS CLOSED WITHOUT EXPLANATION.

AFTER MULTIPLE FOLLOW UPS, CODE ENFORCEMENT FINALLY SENT ME AN EMAIL AND THEY STATED THAT THIS CASE REMAINS CLOSED BECAUSE, AND I QUOTE, TREE HEIGHT ITSELF IS NOT REGULATED UNDER THE MUNICIPAL CODE.

AND THEY SAID THE VEGETATION WAS NOT CREATING, EXCUSE ME, DOCUMENTED VISIBILITY OBSTRUCTION.

THIS CASE REVEALS MANY SYSTEMIC FAILURES. I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH FOUR.

FIRST IS CALLED THE FAILURE OF INSPECTION. THAT MEANS CODE ENFORCEMENT HAS CLOSED THIS CASE LIKE MANY OTHERS, WITHOUT EVEN LOOKING AT THE PROPERTY. SECOND, A FAILURE OF TRAINING CODE FOR CORNER LOTS CLEARLY REGULATES TREES AND ANY OBSTRUCTION IN THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE.

TODAY, STAFF SIMPLY DIDN'T KNOW THE LAW. SO THIRD IS A FAILURE TO UNDERSTAND VISIBILITY STANDARDS.

WALDO WEIGHS 6,000 POUNDS, IS 20FT LONG, AND SEVEN FEET TALL.

NO DRIVER CAN SEE IT IN THIS PICTURE. IT'S A IT'S A FULL SIZE PICKUP TRUCK AT THE STOP SIGN.

OKAY. WHEN CODE ENFORCEMENT FAILS HERE, SAFETY GOES OUT THE WINDOW.

THE FOURTH FAILURE IS CALLED A FAILURE OF RESOLUTION. AFTER I POINTED OUT WALDO, THE STAFF CHANGED THEIR MINDS AND THEY BASICALLY ALLOWED THEM TO THIN THE TREES TO A FIVE FOOT TALL PRIVACY HEDGE. I'D REALLY LIKE YOU TO ASK THE CITY MANAGER TO PRIORITIZE AN AUDIT OF CODE ENFORCEMENT TRAINING AND PROTOCOLS ON SIGHT LINE SAFETY. THIS IS AN OPERATIONAL BREAKDOWN AT THE CITY LEADERSHIP LEVEL.

THE BLUE FOLDER CONTAINS THE PROOF. LET'S NOT WAIT FOR A NEAR MISS TO TURN INTO A TRAGEDY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. CAN I ASK A QUESTION? YEAH.

CAN YOU SHOW A PICTURE TO OUR TRAFFIC ENGINEER BACK THERE? RYAN? YOU SPOKE EARLIER. RYAN. HE'S BACK THERE.

HE'S STANDING UP. SO, RYAN, HAVE YOU HAVE YOU SEEN THIS? HE'S GOT TO GET TO THE MIC TO TALK. I DON'T RECALL EVERY SINGLE CASE THAT COMES MY WAY.

SOMETIMES CASES DON'T COME MY WAY. SO IF THE CASE WENT STRAIGHT TO CODE ENFORCEMENT.

I MAY OR MAY NOT BE LOOPED IN. BUT IF THEY DID REACH OUT TO TRAFFIC ENGINEERING LIKE LIKE ANY COMPLAINT THAT ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC, ANONYMOUS OR NOT, DOES BRING TO ME WHEN THEY DO EXPRESS TRAFFIC SAFETY CONCERNS, YOU KNOW, I WILL LOOK AT THE MUNICIPAL CODE, SUCH AS A CASE LIKE THIS.

YOU DON'T RECALL VIEWING THIS? I DON'T I DON'T RECALL VIEWING IT. OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT'S THAT'S MY ONLY QUESTION. THANK YOU. THEY DID. I WALKED THE PROPERTY WITH THEM. OKAY. THANK YOU. LET'S SEE. ANYONE ONLINE? YES, WE HAVE NANCY SKIBA.

GO AHEAD. NANCY. NANCY,

[01:30:09]

CAN I GET A MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILE SECOND? ALL FOR? AYE. OKAY. MOTION PASSES. GOOD EVENING. FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR DEDICATION AND YOUR CONCERN IN TAKING CARE OF OUR BEAUTIFUL CITY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MY NAME IS LARRY. MY WIFE CINDY.

WE'VE LIVED ON IN OUR HOME IN ROBINSON STREET FOR 38 YEARS, AND I'VE PREPARED SOME LITERATURE FOR YOU TO SEE SOME MATERIAL REGARDING HEDGE HEIGHTS.

AND I LIKE CINDY TO READ IT FOR YOU. THANK YOU.

WE'RE NOT HERE TO FILE A COMPLAINT AGAINST OUR NEIGHBOR, BUT JUST TO ADDRESS THE CURRENT HEDGE HEIGHT CODE.

OUR HOUSE BACKS UP TO OUR NEIGHBOR ON GRAHAM AVENUE, WHO HAS GROWN MASSIVE BAMBOO FOR YEARS.

THE BAMBOO CONSTANTLY HANGS OVER OUR GARAGE, AND WE'VE ENDURED RUBBISH THAT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO REMOVE FROM OUR PLANTS AND YARD.

OUR NEIGHBOR IS AWARE OF THIS, BUT HE DOESN'T CARE ABOUT THE DAMAGE TO OUR PROPERTY CAUSED BY HIS BAMBOO.

ALSO, THERE'S A THREAT OF FIRE DANGER DURING CERTAIN TIMES OF THE YEAR WHEN THE BAMBOO IS DRY AND WINDS ARE BLOWING.

A SIMPLE SPARK COULD IGNITE AND DESTROY NOT ONLY MY PROPERTY, BUT THE OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

SIMILAR TO WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN ALTADENA, MALIBU AND SURROUNDING CITIES OVER THE YEARS.

WE'VE TRIED TO REASON AND COMPROMISE WITH OUR NEIGHBORS, SUGGESTING THAT HE TRIM IT TO A REASONABLE LEVEL WITHOUT SUCCESS.

AND WE'VE SUBMITTED SOME PHOTOS TO SHOW YOU OF THE BAMBOO AND HOW IT AFFECTS OUR YARD AND THE DEBRIS THAT IT LEAVES.

AND THE BAMBOO THAT HE HAS IN THE FRONT OF HIS YARD AND THE BACK OF HIS YARD.

WE BELIEVE IN AN INDIVIDUAL'S RIGHT TO PRIVACY AND REASONABLE HEIGHTS, BUT FEEL THIS IS PUSHING THE LIMITS.

WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE ORDINANCE NOW IN PLACE IS NOT BEING ENFORCED AND UNDER CONSIDERATION TO EXTEND THE HEIGHTS.

WE DON'T WANT TO ESCALATE OUR CONFLICT, BUT WE DO WANT TO GIVE THE LEGAL RIGHT TO GROW BAMBOO IN A SMALL AREA, TO UNCONTROLLED HEIGHTS TO BE UNFAIR, UNREASONABLE, DANGEROUS AND UNHEALTHY.

IF THERE IS A HEIGHT CODE, I FEEL THAT IT SHOULD BE ENFORCED.

IF THE CODE IS CHANGED TO RAISE THE HEIGHT, PLEASE BE FAIR AND NOT ALLOW HEDGES, INCLUDING BAMBOO, TO REACH THESE ENORMOUS HEIGHTS THAT ENCROACH AND SPREAD TRASH ON ANOTHER PERSON'S PROPERTY.

I'M HOPING FOR A COMPREHENSIVE, LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE HEDGE HEIGHT CODE TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM.

PLEASE ADVISE ME WHEN YOU HAVE A CODE THAT IS ACTUALLY ENFORCEABLE.

WHEN MEETING FOR YOUR PROPOSED RULE CHANGES REGARDING HEDGE HEIGHTS.

PLEASE TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THESE SUBMITTED PHOTOS.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU. COMMENT. GO AHEAD. I JUST WANTED TO YOU KNOW, YOU COULD CONSULT AN ATTORNEY ABOUT CIVIL CODE YOUR RIGHTS UNDER CIVIL CODE 841.4. THAT'S A STATE STATUTE THAT DOES NOT PERMIT SPITE FENCES OR HEDGES OVER TEN FEET TALL.

AND YOU YOU WILL NEED TO. I KNOW YOU DON'T WANT TO COMPLAIN AGAINST YOUR NEIGHBOR, BUT THIS ORDINANCE IS ONLY GOING TO WORK UNDER ITS EXISTING EXISTING LANGUAGE. AND UNDER THE FUTURE LANGUAGE IS ONLY GOING TO WORK WHEN YOU, IF YOU COMPLAIN AND BRING BRING THE CITY'S ATTENTION TO WHAT YOUR NEIGHBORS, YOU KNOW, THE STATE OF YOUR NEIGHBOR'S HEDGE.

ALL RIGHT. SO TO RESOLVE IT, WE HAVE TO SEE AN ATTORNEY IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO KNOW.

YOU CAN. YOU CAN ONCE THIS, THIS IS RESOLVED.

ONCE WE FINALIZE A NEW ORDINANCE, YOU CAN COMPLAIN TO THE CITY AND YOU'D BE A BONA FIDE COMPLAINANT.

BUT ALTERNATIVELY, YOU ALSO HAVE REMEDIES POTENTIALLY UNDER THE STATE LAW AS WELL.

HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY. OKAY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

OKAY. ANYONE ONLINE? IS NANCY SKIBA STILL? HER HAND IS NOT RAISED.

OKAY THE NEXT CARD I HAVE IS JOANNE AND THEN LITTLE JOE DRESNER.

[01:35:08]

ALL RIGHT. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR LIGHT AND COUNCIL MEMBERS.

FIRST, I WANT TO SINCERELY THANK THE COUNCIL FOR LISTENING TO RESIDENTS AND DIRECTING STAFF TO PAUSE CODE ENFORCEMENT WHILE REVIEWING THE HEDGE ORDINANCE.

SEVERAL WEEKS AGO, MY HUSBAND, A RETIRED MARINE CORPS VETERAN, SPOKE BEFORE THIS COUNCIL AND ASKED TWO IMPORTANT QUESTIONS.

WHEN ONE SOURCE GENERATES A DISPROPORTIONATE AMOUNT OF ACTIVITY, DOES THAT PATTERN WARRANT REVIEW AND IS THE PROCESS FUNCTIONING AS INTENDED? I BELIEVE THESE QUESTIONS ARE AT THE HEART OF TONIGHT'S DISCUSSION.

THIS IS NOT ABOUT WHETHER LEGITIMATE SAFETY CONCERNS SHOULD BE ADDRESSED.

THEY SHOULD BE. PUBLIC SAFETY IS PARAMOUNT, AND I DON'T BELIEVE ANYONE WHO HAS SPOKEN BEFORE THIS COUNCIL HAS SUGGESTED OTHERWISE.

THIS DISCUSSION IS ABOUT ENSURING THAT THE CITY'S COMPLAINT PROCESS CANNOT BE ABUSED.

THE COMPLAINT PROCESS IS ONLY EFFECTIVE WHEN THE COMMUNITY HAS CONFIDENCE THAT IT IS FAIR, OBJECTIVE AND CANNOT BE WEAPONIZED AGAINST ITS RESIDENTS.

MY FAMILY HAS EXPERIENCED FIRSTHAND WHAT CAN HAPPEN WHEN THE COMPLAINT PROCESS IS ABUSED.

WE'VE REPEATEDLY HAD SOMEONE COME ON TO OR IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO OUR PROPERTY TO PHOTOGRAPH OUR HOME.

IT BECAME SO FREQUENT THAT NEIGHBORS BEGAN CALLING AND TEXTING TO LET US KNOW WHEN IT WAS HAPPENING.

I APPROACHED THIS INDIVIDUAL ONLY ONCE DURING THESE MANY MONTHS AFTER HE HAD BEEN ON OUR PROPERTY YET AGAIN, I ASKED WHY HE WAS CONTINUING TO PHOTOGRAPH OUR HOME.

WE WERE IN DIRECT COMMUNICATION WITH THE CITY.

HE BECAME HOSTILE. HE CALLED ME NAMES. HE REPEATEDLY TOLD ME THAT HE WOULD SEE THIS THROUGH TO THE END, THAT HE HAD NOTHING BUT TIME AND MONEY. I LEFT THE ENCOUNTER DEEPLY SHAKEN.

MY HUSBAND INSISTED THAT I FILE POLICE REPORTS SO THAT THE BEHAVIOR WOULD BE DOCUMENTED.

I SUBMITTED A PICTURE OF THE POLICE REPORT AND OF THE PHOTO TAKEN OF HIM IN FRONT OF OUR PROPERTY THAT DAY.

I DON'T SHARE THIS EXPERIENCE LIGHTLY, BUT I BELIEVE IT ILLUSTRATES WHY THESE CHANGES ARE NECESSARY.

ULTIMATELY, THIS IS NOT ABOUT MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, BUT IT IS ABOUT PROTECTING THE INTEGRITY OF THE CITY'S COMPLAINT PROCESS.

I THINK WE CAN ALL AGREE THAT THE INTERACTION I DESCRIBED DOES NOT REFLECT THE INTENT OF THE PROCESS.

THAT IS WHY THE PROPOSED BONA FIDE COMPLAINANT AND GOOD FAITH PROVISIONS ARE SO IMPORTANT.

COMPLAINT DRIVEN ENFORCEMENT SHOULD FOCUS ON NEIGHBORS WHO ARE GENUINELY AFFECTED AND WHERE THERE ARE LEGITIMATE PUBLIC SAFETY CONCERNS.

OTHERWISE, VALUABLE CITY RESOURCES ARE DIVERTED FROM THE ISSUES THAT TRULY MATTER.

I ALSO STRONGLY SUPPORT AN ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS SO HOMEOWNERS CAN WORK WITH THE CITY WHEN MATURE LANDSCAPING DOES NOT CREATE A SAFETY CONCERN. AS YOU FINALIZE THIS ORDINANCE, I RESPECTFULLY ASK YOU TO PRIORITIZE THOSE TWO THINGS.

I BELIEVE THESE RECOMMENDATIONS CAN CREATE A MORE BALANCED ORDINANCE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THAT WAS THE LAST CARD I HAD.

ANYONE ONLINE? THERE IS NO INDIVIDUAL ONLINE, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE THAT THERE WERE 19 COMMENTS RECEIVED FOR THIS ITEM.

THERE WERE TWO THAT WERE NOT KNOW POSITION LISTED, TWO THAT HAD A NEUTRAL POSITION LISTED, 14 WAS SUPPORT AND ONE FOR OPPOSE. OKAY. JUST ON THIS ITEM.

SO I WAS GOING TO OPEN IT UP, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE ONE MORE CARD.

LAURA, YOU'RE BACK UP. THANK YOU. I WASN'T SURE IF I'D SPEAK.

MY NAME IS LAURA MACMORRAN, AND I WANT TO FIRST THANK STAFF FOR A CONCISE AND INFORMATIVE STAFF REPORT.

I AGREE WITH MUCH OF IT, BUT I DO THINK THE ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS ON CORNERS, THE EXISTING STANDARDS DON'T GO FAR ENOUGH. THERE ARE THREE FACTORS THAT ARE IMPORTANT WHEN CONSIDERING SIGHT LINES.

IT'S GOING TO BE THE HEIGHT, THE SPEED AND THE DISTANCE.

SO A CODE TO CODE COMPARISON IS OKAY, BUT IT'S NOT COMPREHENSIVE OR IT'S NOT SPECIFIC ENOUGH.

THERE WAS A DISCUSSION TONIGHT OF BULB OUTS. I GREW UP ON A RIGHT OF WAY THAT WAS 60FT WIDE.

I LIVE ON A RIGHT OF WAY THAT IS 60FT WIDE. BUT THERE IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE.

MY PARKWAY NOW AND MY SIDEWALK COMBINED ARE EIGHT FEET.

MY CHILDHOOD PARKWAY COMBINED WERE 16FT, SO I HAD A BUILT IN BULB OUT ON MY SIDEWALK AND PARKWAY. THE PARKWAY WAS TEN.

[01:40:02]

I WOULD SEE AND LIKE 25FT IN LENGTH AT 36 AT CORNERS, JUST LIKE THIS GENTLEMAN, I HAVE TRIED REPEATEDLY. WE HAVE A SLIVER OF A WINDOW ON A CORNER I LIVE NEAR.

IT'S JUST A PEAK. IT'S TERRIBLE. AND THE CODE ENFORCEMENT, CODE ENFORCEMENT HAS GONE OUT AND WE DON'T GET RESOLUTION. I'VE WORKED FOR FOUR MUNICIPALITIES.

CODE ENFORCEMENT CAN BE BOTH PROACTIVE AND REACTIVE, AND I'VE EXPERIENCED IT BOTH.

AND AT LEAST I WOULD HOPE THAT THE CITY WOULD TAKE A PROACTIVE APPROACH WHEN IT COMES TO CERTAIN SAFETY CONCERNS, INSTEAD OF ALWAYS PUTTING THE BURDEN ON THE CITIZEN.

WE DON'T ASK LAW ENFORCEMENT WHEN THEY SEE A VIOLATION, WHEN THEY SEE SOMEONE DOING A CRIME.

HEY, DID YOU GET A CALL? DID SOMEONE COMPLAIN? NO, THEY RESPOND. IF SOMETHING'S IN PLAIN SIGHT, CODE ENFORCEMENT NEEDS TO TAKE ACTION.

OTHERWISE, IT'S PRESUMED THAT IT'S AN ACCEPTABLE STATUS, AND THAT MESSAGE IS CONVEYED TO THE PUBLIC BY ITS PERPETUAL EXISTENCE. SO THOSE ARE MY THOUGHTS. I HAVE MORE, BUT I'M OUT OF TIME.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ONLINE? THERE ARE NO THERE'S NOT ANYONE ONLINE.

NO. OKAY. WELL, I'M GOING TO ASK YOU EVERY TIME IN CASE SOMEBODY DIALS IN.

SO ANYONE FROM THE AUDIENCE WISH TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL? THANK YOU. WELL, THANK YOU MAYOR COUNCIL MEMBERS AND BEHRENDT AND THE FULL COUNCIL.

THANK YOU, CITY MANAGER WITZANSKY, FOR LISTENING TO THE CONSTITUENT CONCERNS AND PASSING ENFORCEMENT.

WE APPRECIATE THE RESPONSIVENESS IN PUTTING THE ITEM ON THE AGENDA SO WE CAN TALK ABOUT IT.

THANK YOU, CITY ATTORNEY FORD, FOR PREPARING THE REPORT.

YOU KNOW, I THINK IT WAS YOU KNOW, WE REALLY STRONGLY SUPPORT THE BONA FIDE COMPLAINANT REQUIREMENT.

I THINK IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S COMMON SENSE APPROACH THAT PREVENT WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED OVER THE LAST FEW MONTHS THAT HAPPENED IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE ACTUALLY IT'S NOT JUST SEVERAL COMPLAINTS. I THINK ONE OF THE PRESENTERS HAD SEVERAL COMPLAINTS, BUT IT'S CLOSER TO MORE THAN 100 COMPLAINTS THAT WE GOT ABOUT HEDGE HEIGHTS.

FROM A, I THINK THE BEST GUESS THAT WE HAVE IS A SINGLE INDIVIDUAL THAT'S BEEN GOING AROUND AND TAKING PICTURES OF ALL THE NEIGHBOR'S HEDGES AND SUBMITTING COMPLAINTS ONLINE. AND TO THE COUPLE THAT SPOKE BEFORE ME.

IT'S PRETTY EASY TO SUBMIT A COMPLAINT ONLINE, SO YOU CAN JUST SPEAK TO THAT.

YEAH EASILY ON, ON THE WEB ON THE WEBSITE. COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI.

I THINK YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW DESIGN PROCESS.

I THINK IT'S A REALLY GOOD RECOMMENDATION THAT I STRONGLY, FULLY SUPPORT.

AND THE REASON IS THAT MY PROPERTY SITS AGAIN BELOW SIDEWALK GRID, RIGHT.

I THINK THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT POINT UP.

AND THE FRONT UNIT DOESN'T HAVE A BACKYARD AND DOESN'T HAVE A ROOFTOP, SO THE PRIMARY LIVING SPACE IS OUTDOORS.

THE FRONT YARD. AND SO ANYBODY WHO WALKS BY CAN SEE INTO THE WINDOWS AT NIGHT.

THERE'S NO PRIVACY AT NIGHT. THEY'RE, THEY HAVE A LITTLE OUTDOOR SPACE THAT THEY CAN, YOU KNOW, HAVE THEIR MEALS THAT THEY HAVE NO PRIVACY. IF WE CAN'T YOU KNOW, HAVE SOME SORT OF PRIVACY SCREENING IN THE FRONT.

SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE A PROCESS THAT ALLOWS HOMEOWNERS TO APPLY FOR AN EXCEPTION TO THE ORDINANCE.

AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE'D BE HAPPY TO PAY FOR A FILING FEE TO HAVE THE CITY RECOVER THE COSTS.

YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW THE PROCESS FOR GETTING NEIGHBORS INPUT, BUT, YOU KNOW, YOU COULD AS PART OF THE APPLICATION, YOU COULD REQUIRE TO HAVE NEIGHBORS STATEMENTS OF SUPPORT THAT SOMETHING IS A GOOD IDEA.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO A HEARING. JUST ASK FOR ANYBODY WHO QUALIFIES AS A BONA FIDE COMPLAINANT INCLUDE A STATEMENT OF SUPPORT IN THEIR RIGHT.

SO IF YOU GET ALL OF THOSE INGREDIENTS IN THE APPLICATION, THAT'LL BE A LITTLE EASIER TO APPROVE.

AND THEN THE LAST POINT IS I'D LIKE TO ASK THE, THE CITY TO DIRECT STAFF THE COUNCIL TO DIRECT STAFF TO REVIEW THE CASES CURRENTLY IN ENFORCEMENT AND REEVALUATE WHETHER THE ORIGINAL COMPLAINTS MEET THE BONA FIDE COMPLAINT REQUIREMENT.

I THINK THIS IS, I THINK, AGAIN, I THINK A COMMON SENSE APPROACH THAT WOULD HELP THE RESIDENTS TO BENEFIT FROM THESE REFORMS.

[01:45:02]

YOU MENTIONED THE POTENTIAL ADR ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS.

YES. YOU KNOW, A CONCERN THAT COULD COME UP WITH DOING ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS IS YOU THEN CREATE A VERY ADVERSARIAL PROCESS POTENTIALLY RIGHT WHERE I LOOK OVER, I SEE MR. GENOVA, WHO'S HERE TONIGHT, LARRY, WHO HAD THE PHOTOS OF THE BAMBOO AND WHAT WE TRY TO DO TO ACCOMPLISH SORT OF THE ISSUE YOU RAISED IS TO INCLUDE THAT BONA FIDE NEIGHBOR REQUIREMENT. I MEAN, THE RULES ARE THE RULES, RIGHT? YOU TALKED ABOUT THAT EARLIER. YOU WANT TO FOLLOW THE RULES.

YEAH. 42IN IN THE FRONT, SIX ON THE SIDE. YEAH.

AND IF THERE'S NO OTHER SAFETY ISSUE, THEN IT REQUIRES A NEIGHBOR TO MAKE A COMPLAINT.

THAT'S SORT OF THE REASONABLE BALANCED COMPROMISE WE'RE TRYING TO REACH.

AND THAT SHOULD RESOLVE YOUR ISSUE WHERE YOU SAID, HEY, NO NEIGHBOR COMPLAINT, RIGHT? THE POTENTIAL PROBLEM OF THEN ADDING ON THE ADR IS, WELL, YOU SAID IT, IT'S THE STAFF TIME.

I MEAN, OUR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR IS HERE TONIGHT, BUT BELIEVE ME, HE'S GOT HOMEWORK TO DO.

HE'S GOT STAFF. WE'VE GOT ALL KINDS OF ISSUES IN THE CITY THAT HE NEEDS TO FOCUS ON.

I'M NOT SURE WE COULD OUTSOURCE THIS. AND, YOU KNOW, YOU TALKED ABOUT COST RECOVERY.

I GOT TO THINK I'M JUST KIND OF GENERALLY IT'S GOING TO BE PROBABLY $1,000, MAYBE LESS, YOU KNOW, SO THIS IS. THAT'S, I THINK, UP TO THE HOMEOWNER TO DECIDE, RIGHT.

IS THAT A TRADE OFF THAT THEY CAN'T, YOU KNOW, IF THEY WANT IT'S IMPORTANT ENOUGH TO THEM, THEN THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BE WILLING TO HELP THE CITY RECOVER THAT COST. RIGHT? SO I THINK PROVIDING THE PATH FOR THEM IS OPTION FOR THEM TO DO THAT IS ALWAYS IMPORTANT.

IT'S IMPORTANT. AND THANK YOU FOR RECOGNIZING THAT WE CANNOT SUBSIDIZE THAT OUT OF OUR RESERVES.

AND COUNCIL MEMBER KALUDEROVIC AND CASTLE HAVE SPOKEN TO THAT.

WE CAN'T WE'RE NOT GOING TO PAY FOR THIS OUT OF OUR RESERVES. YET, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT JUST, HEY, CAN SOMEONE TAKE A QUICK LOOK AT THIS? THIS IS, THIS IS GOING TO BE A VERY DETAILED PROCESS.

AS THE MAYOR SAID, IT'S GOING TO BE A LEGAL PROCESS. THERE COULD BE APPEALS.

THESE COULD COME TO US. WE COULD HAVE A FLURRY OF THEM.

YEAH. AND AGAIN, IT'S ADVERSARIAL. AND IF LARRY GENOVA SAYS, HEY, I GOT A 20 FOOT BAMBOO ON MY NEIGHBOR, I JUST WANT TO MAKE A GOOD FAITH COMPLAINT. HE SHOULDN'T HAVE TO BE DRAGGED IN.

SOME WOULD SAY TO THEN HAVE TO COME TO A HEARING AND BE CROSS-EXAMINED, YOU KNOW? SO LONG STORY SHORT, I MEAN, WOULD YOU BE OKAY WITH JUST YOU PERSONALLY? AND IT'S UP TO THE COUNCIL WITH LET'S JUST KEEP IT AT A GOOD FAITH NEIGHBOR REQUIREMENT 42 6 AND SHELVE THE ADR FOR NOW.

AND IF IT'S AN ISSUE, WE COULD ALWAYS RESERVE IT LATER.

YOU KNOW, I WAS SUGGESTING A HEARING. I WAS SUGGESTING MORE OF A INCLUDING STATEMENTS OF SUPPORT FROM THE NEIGHBORS IN THE APPLICATION.

SO IN THIS CASE, IF HIS NEIGHBOR WANTS TO FILE AN ADR, THEY WOULD NEED TO ASK FOR HIS STATEMENT OF SUPPORT IN THEIR APPLICATION, WHICH THEY WOULDN'T GET. SO THE APPLICATION WOULDN'T BE APPROVED.

MAKES SENSE YET, RIGHT? HE WOULDN'T BE MAKING THAT COMPLAINT IN THE FIRST PLACE IF HE WAS GOING TO DO THE RIGHT AN APPLICATION IN FAVOR TO SUPPORT A STATEMENT IN SUPPORT.

SO I JUST PUT THIS OUT THERE BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE A DECISION.

WE WANT TO BE BALANCED. THAT'S WHY WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS EXERCISE.

AND AT THE END OF THE DAY, YOU KNOW, IS AN ADR REALLY, YOU KNOW, IS THAT A STEP TOO FAR? SO AS YOU CAN SEE, I'M A LITTLE RELUCTANT ABOUT THAT.

BUT I WANTED TO HEAR FROM YOU AND I'M SURE I'LL HEAR FROM OTHERS.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MAYOR, FOR GIVING ME SOME EXTENDED TIME. AND I DO WANT TO SAY, I THINK I MISSTATED WHAT I MY INTENT WITH THE ADR, IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A VARIANCE PROCESS, THEN AN ADR WITH THE CHANCE FOR OTHERS TO OPINE ON IT.

THAT'S IF WE'RE JUST GOING TO GO BY OBJECTIVE STANDARDS.

I DON'T SEE THE NEED. OKAY. THANKS FOR CLARIFYING. I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT.

IF WE'RE GOING TO GO BY OBJECTIVE STANDARDS AND YEAH.

OKAY. ANYONE ONLINE? THERE ARE NO PARTICIPANTS ONLINE.

ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE? I THINK I SAW SOMEBODY TRYING TO STAND UP BEFORE TO TALK.

GOING ONCE. I'M GOING TO. I CAN'T HELP MYSELF.

WELL, DON'T DON'T COME UP JUST FOR THE HECK OF IT.

OH, NO. RICK CORTINA. AND YOU KNOW WHAT? I UNDERSTAND YOUR PROPERTY.

BECAUSE ON THE BACK EDGE OF MINE, RIGHT NEXT DOOR, IT'S OVER 40FT.

I GUARANTEE YOU 45FT AND THEY CAN'T GET TO IT.

AND IT STARTED OFF AS NICE LITTLE WHATEVER TREES AND IT GREW RIGHT NOW, MY NEIGHBOR WHO A BUILDER WHO'S BUILDING A NEW HOME, JUST PUT IN ABOUT 85 FICUS TREES RIGHT UP AGAINST THE FENCE LINE THAT ARE GOING TO GROW TO 40FT. THE COMPLAINTS BEEN PUT IN TO THE CITY AND NOTHING'S BEEN DONE OTHER THAN, OH WAIT,

[01:50:04]

SO HOW DO WE GET THE CITY'S ATTENTION? THIS HAS GONE TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT.

I'M JUST CURIOUS. ANYBODY FROM THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT HERE TODAY? WELL, WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO A QUESTION AND ANSWER OF STAFF. I GOT THAT. I'VE REGISTERED. I UNDERSTAND AND I'M CONCERNED ABOUT UNRESPONDED TO ACCESS REDONDO BEACH THINGS OR MISS, MISSED RESPONSES ON ACCESS REDONDO BEACH.

BUT THAT'S NOT PART OF THIS THIS HEARING. OH NO, NO, NO, THIS WAS ACTUALLY EMAILED IN, NOT ON ANYTHING ELSE AND HAND-DELIVERED AND ALSO SENT THAT SAID, I'M GOING TO GO ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE THING.

HOW ON THIS THING IS IT GOING TO BE RETROACTIVE AS AN EXAMPLE ON YOUR PROPERTY? WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE SIX FEET? AND BY THE WAY, YOU WERE CORRECT ON THE FIRE HAZARDS ABOVE SIX FEET ON SINGLE STORY.

YOU DO NOT WANT IT TO GO TO TEN FEET. THERE'S A REASON FOR THAT.

BUT ANYWAY, IS THIS GOING TO BE RETROACTIVE TOO? SO I THINK IT'S THE STANDARD. WE'RE NOT WE'RE NOT CHANGING THE STANDARD.

RIGHT. WELL, THE STANDARD SIX FEET. BUT THEY'VE GOT HEDGES THAT ARE 30 AND 40FT.

WHAT'S THAT. 30 40FT. 45FT IN THE BACK. OH YEAH.

I'VE GOT ONE AT LEAST 45FT. IT'S OVER THE POWER POLES BY AT LEAST TEN FEET.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS THERE'S A PAUSE RIGHT NOW ON ENFORCEMENT WHILE WE WORK THROUGH A REVISION.

ONCE THIS REVISION IS FINALIZED, YOU'LL STILL HAVE, YOU KNOW, YOU'LL KNOW THE STANDARDS THAT THEY'RE THAT THEY'VE GOT TO ABIDE BY.

AND YOU CAN STILL MAKE A COMPLAINT. AND IF YOU DON'T GET A RESPONSE FROM CODE ENFORCEMENT ON YOUR COMPLAINT AND INVESTIGATION, THEN YOU CAN EMAIL YOUR COUNCIL MEMBER, AND I'M SURE YOUR COUNCIL MEMBER WILL GET IN TOUCH WITH CODE ENFORCEMENT AND YOU WILL GET A RESPONSE.

OKAY. IN THAT CASE, THEN Y'ALL HAVE A GOOD ONE.

THAT WAS ALL I WAS GOING TO BRING UP. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? ANYONE ONLINE? THERE ARE NO PARTICIPANTS. PARTICIPANTS ONLINE.

COULD I HAVE A MOTION? SURE. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO DIRECT.

BY THE WAY. YEAH. I'LL TAKE IT DOWN. OKAY. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO DIRECT STAFF, INCLUDING THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, TO PURSUE A REVISED HEDGE ORDINANCE THAT FOLLOWS THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT MYSELF AND COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI AND I MADE, AND THAT WE DISCUSSED TONIGHT WITH TWO CHANGES.

NUMBER ONE, NOT INCLUDE EIGHT B, WHICH IS THAT 24 INCH ITEM, AT LEAST NOT NOW.

AND THEN ON NUMBER FIVE, THE ADR, I'M IN FAVOR OF TAKING THAT OUT.

IF SOMEONE FEELS STRONGLY ABOUT IT, I'M CERTAINLY ALWAYS OPEN MINDED.

YET I THINK WE'LL BE GOOD WITH THIS BONA FIDE COMPLAINANT REQUIREMENT, I REALLY DO.

I THINK THAT'S GOING TO SETTLE IT. AND THEN YOU KNOW.

AS NEEDED, APPOINT COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI AND I TO WORK ON A FORMAL SUBCOMMITTEE TO WORK WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IF NEEDED TO GO THROUGH THIS OVER THE NEXT WEEK OR SO.

AND THAT WOULD BE MY MOTION. AND THE AMENDMENT.

AND INCLUDE THE HEIGHT DEFINITION. YEAH. SO EVERYTHING THE HEIGHT, THE HEIGHT.

YEAH. THANK YOU FOR REMINDING THAT WHICH IS ADDRESSED.

THE DEFINITION OF HEIGHT TO ADDRESS ABOVE AND BELOW GRADE PROPERTIES TO ACCOMPLISH THE SAME INTENT AS THE 42 INCH VIEWING AND SIX FEET ON THE SIDE.

THANK YOU. THE HIGHEST OF THE TWO. YEAH. FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.

FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO REINCORPORATE THE FIVE BY FIVE HOV, BUT AT A 36 INCH MAXIMUM HEIGHT.

I DON'T YEAH THAT'S FINE WITH ME. SUBJECT TO CITY MANAGER OR SOMEBODY SAYING WE'RE GOING TO HAVE AN ISSUE.

WE HAVE WE HAVE THE 36. MY THOUGHT IS THIS. WE HAVE THE 36 INCH HEIGHT STANDARD FOR CORNER LOTS.

THIS WOULD BE THIS IS IMPOSED THE SAME STANDARD FOR DRIVEWAYS WHICH ARE AKIN.

YOU GOT CARS COMING IN AND OUT. YOU'VE GOT BICYCLE BICYCLISTS GOING IN AND OUT, BOTH FOR THE CARS TO SEE, THE BICYCLISTS AS WELL AS BICYCLISTS TO SEE THE CARS.

YEAH. I WOULD JUST SAY THE ONLY ISSUE I HAVE WITH THAT IS 36 IS REALLY LOW.

AND I'M WONDERING IF, YOU KNOW, NOT GOING THAT FAR WOULD STILL, WE ALREADY HAVE SOMETHING THAT PREVENTS SIGHT RESTRICTIONS THAT'S GOING TO BE PART OF THIS, RIGHT? SO IF SOMEBODY HAS A HEDGE AND WE'VE HEARD WE'VE GOTTEN THESE COMPLAINTS BEFORE FROM OUR FRIENDS THAT WOULD ALREADY, I WOULD THINK, BE COVERED UNDER A SAFETY VIOLATION.

IF SOMEBODY CAN'T SEE WHEN THEY'RE PULLING OUT OF THEIR DRIVEWAY.

AND THAT'S BEEN ENFORCED ON IN THE PAST. THOSE ARE DEFINITION OF 36.

YOUR DEFINITION OF IT MAKES SENSE. YOUR DEFINITION OF WHAT YOU CAN SEE BECAUSE 36 VERSUS 42IN.

[01:55:02]

I WOULD DEFINITELY SUPPORT THE 36 INCH. YEAH.

BEFORE WE GO THERE, MS. CITY ATTORNEY, WHAT IS THE CURRENT STATUTE SAY ABOUT DRIVEWAYS AND RESTRICTIONS ON HEDGES? THERE'S NOTHING SPECIFIC AS TO DRIVEWAYS. IT'S JUST 42IN IN THE FRONT.

RIGHT. ALL RIGHT, GIVE ME JUST ONE MOMENT. CAN WE USE WEASEL WORDS LIKE, WAS IT SANTA MONICA HAD SOMETHING ABOUT IF THERE'S IF IT'S A HARDSHIP OR.

YES. SANTA MONICA IS THE CITY THAT HAD THE 24IN FOR THE HVO.

THE WAY I ENVISION THIS WORKING NOW IS NEW, NEW CONSTRUCTION WOULD ABIDE BY THIS 36 INCH HEIGHT LIMIT IN THE FIVE BY FIVE HOV. HVO. AND IT WOULD JUST GET US PROGRESSIVELY TOWARDS A MORE VISIBLE ENVIRONMENT.

ANY. I'M IN FAVOR OF IT. ANY UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES TO THAT? BECAUSE I'LL TELL YOU WHAT WE CAN DO. WE'LL ASSESS THAT POTENTIAL, THE ADDITIONAL SIX INCH IMPACT ON EXISTING STRUCTURES, AND WILL REPORT BACK TO YOU AT THE TIME OF THE ORDINANCE DISCUSSION.

IF WE THINK THAT THAT'S GOING TO CREATE A SERIES OF POTENTIAL BONA FIDE COMPLAINTS OR SAFETY ISSUES.

HVO'S FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, I, I DON'T GET THE SENSE THAT 36 AND 42 IS GOING TO BE A MEANINGFUL DIFFERENCE FOR US.

BUT WE'LL, WE'LL ASSESS AND REPORT BACK TO YOU AN ALTERNATIVE.

IF WE DO THINK THAT THERE IS GOING TO MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE AND LEAD TO A BUNCH OF COMPLAINTS IS COULD WE GRANDFATHER IN EXISTING STRUCTURES AND HEDGES AT THEIR CURRENT AT THE CURRENT HEIGHT LIMIT? I THINK THAT'S WHAT I WAS GETTING TO SANTA MONICA.

SOME WORDING THAT ALLOWS THEM, IF THAT'S FOR.

I THINK THAT'S FOR NEW DRIVEWAY PERMITS, NEW CONSTRUCTION, YOU KNOW, THAT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT.

THAT'S NOT WORDS. THAT'S NOT WORDS. CAN YOU CAN YOU DO THAT? COME BACK. WE'LL ASSESS. YOU CAN TELL THERE'S A SENSE PEOPLE WILL ZERO IN ON THAT ISSUE.

TRY TO ADDRESS IT. OKAY. LET'S GIVE YOU A RECOMMENDATION.

I SECOND THE MOTION. OKAY. SO YOUR MOTION INCLUDES YOUR, A SUBCOMMITTEE IF REQUIRED, RIGHT? YEAH. I MEAN, WE'RE HERE. I MEAN, THERE'S ONLY TWO.

THEY'LL REACH OUT TO YOU EITHER SO THEY CAN TALK THE TWO OF YOU WITHOUT A SUBCOMMITTEE.

SURE. THANK YOU. OKAY. AND I GUESS ONE ONE POINT OF CLARIFICATION.

THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HAS DONE A NICE JOB PREPARING PROSPECTIVE DEFINITIONS OF FENCE OR WALL HEDGE HEIGHT VEGETATION.

IS THERE A GENERAL SENTIMENT OR FEEDBACK ON THOSE DEFINITIONS AS DRAFTED? IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL WORK THERE OR IS THAT? WHAT I WOULD JUST SAY, YOU KNOW, TO THE MAYOR'S POINT, NEEDS TO BE, YOU KNOW, IN CITY ATTORNEY SAID IT CAREFULLY, PRECISE, YOU KNOW, UNDER THE MICROSCOPE THAT IT HOLDS UP BECAUSE THIS IS IT.

THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO ENFORCE IT. SO AS LONG AS. THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO ENFORCE IT, AND THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GIVE GUIDANCE TO THE COACH. AND THAT'S THE OTHER SIDE OF IT.

I MEAN, I THINK OUR TEAM FEELS COMFORTABLE WITH THESE DEFINITIONS AS DRAFTED.

THAT'S WHY IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE'RE ALL CONSISTENT ON THAT.

YEAH. HEDGES. FENCES. OKAY. JUST NOT HEIGHT. AND THE HEIGHT COMPONENT IS I THINK WHAT I HEARD IS THE HIGHER OF THE TWO STANDARDS.

OKAY. THE HIGHER OF THE TWO STANDARDS, THE GRADE OR THE SIDEWALK.

OH OH OH. WHERE THERE'S. RIGHT. YEAH. ALL RIGHT.

ALSO, ENTERTAIN A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO INCLUDE ANYTHING ABOUT MATURE HEDGES OR PROGRESSIVE PRUNING.

SO IT'S NOT QUITE AS AGGRESSIVE THERE. I'M NOT SURE THAT'S GOING TO BE AN ISSUE.

AND THEN PEOPLE MAY JUST SAY, I MEAN FROM AN ENFORCEMENT STANDPOINT, YOU'RE GOING TO KILL MY TREE. GO AWAY.

SO OR MY HEDGE. WE'RE GOING TO GIVE THEM NOTICE.

PRESUMABLY PEOPLE WILL HAVE TIME TO PRUNE IT.

AND I'M CONCERNED IF WE OPEN UP A NEW CATEGORY, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A LOOPHOLE THAT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO PUNCH RIGHT THROUGH.

SO I THINK WE'LL BE OKAY. LOOK, IF WE HEAR THAT, WE COULD REVISIT THIS AT A LATER TIME.

ARE YOU INCLUDING THE ADR IN YOURS? BECAUSE SEE, THAT WOULD SORT OF COVER SOMEBODY COULD THEN GO THROUGH THE ADR PROCESS AND SAY, WAIT A SECOND, THIS HEDGE IS SPECIAL. CAN I DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT? YEAH, WE REMOVED ADR RIGHT NOW. SO SO I MEAN, THIS IS I MEAN, WE'LL ADDRESS PROGRESS.

YEAH. THERE YOU GO TO HEDGE IN PROGRESS. WE'LL BE BACK IF NEEDED.

I WILL SAY MOTION IN A SECOND. IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE THEY WANT TO ACCEPT YOUR FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.

IS THERE A SECOND? MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION? NO.

I'M NOT. ANYBODY ELSE? ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? A COMMENT MAYOR QUICKLY AS IT PERTAINS TO THAT CORRECTIVE ACTION.

I THINK WITH THE NEW PENALTY DEFINITIONS, WE'LL HAVE SOME DISCRETION ON HOW WE ADDRESS COMPLIANCE GOING FORWARD.

I THINK, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD NEVER BE OUR INTENTION TO TRY TO CREATE A SCENARIO WHERE WE FORCE THE, YOU KNOW, THE DEATH OF THE HEDGE. IF WE CAN FIND A WAY TO WORK TOWARDS COMPLIANCE AND PRESERVE THE THE VEGETATION,

[02:00:03]

ANOTHER POINT I THINK THAT'S WORTH MAKING. THERE'S BEEN SOME SHOTS THAT OUR CODE ENFORCEMENT REVIEW PROCESS AND PERHAPS YOU KNOW, ENFORCEMENT EFFORTS. I WILL SAY ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE TRYING TO CURE WITH THIS UPDATE IS THE DEFINITION OF A HEDGE.

ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT OUR TEAM HAS ENCOUNTERED IS WE EVALUATE THESE COMPLAINTS IS, IS THAT A TREE OR IS THAT A HEDGE? AND WE MAY NOT BE TAKING ACTION ON CERTAIN PROPERTIES BECAUSE WE'RE VIEWING IT IN OUR CURRENT DEFINITION AS A TREE AND NOT A HEDGE.

NOW, THAT WILL LIKELY BE MORE CLEAR WITH THIS NEW ORDINANCE.

AND THAT'S ULTIMATELY WHAT WE'RE ENDEAVORING TO DO HERE. SO APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S CONCERNS, BUT THERE MAY BE A VERY GOOD REASON UNDER OUR CURRENT DEFINITIONS, WHY WE OR LACK THEREOF, WHY WE'RE NOT ABLE TO TAKE THE ACTION THAT THEY HOPE WE TAKE.

WELL, LOOK, IT'S NOT AGENDIZED TONIGHT, BUT MY MY CONCERN IS WHEN THEY'RE SAYING IT'S A PUBLIC SAFETY THING.

AND, AND OUR, OUR, OUR TRAFFIC GUY HASN'T EVEN SEEN IT.

WELL, IT JUST DEPENDS ON, ON AND AGAIN, DEFINITION THAT, THAT THAT INITIAL COMPLAINT MAY HAVE BEEN EVALUATED AS A SERIES OF TREES AND NOT A HEDGE.

I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE MUCH BETTER. COULD STILL BE A SIGHT ISSUE.

COULD STILL BE. AND I THINK THIS EXERCISE IS GOING TO BRING ABOUT MORE.

I DON'T WANT TO BELABOR IT HERE. SO. OKAY. ONE QUICK COMMENT QUICKLY.

YES, WE'LL DO A VOTE. BUT I JUST I ALSO WANT TO THANK OUR CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS BECAUSE THEY'RE IN THE THANKLESS POSITION WHERE EVERY COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY ANY RESIDENT THEY'VE GOT TO FOLLOW UP ON, INVESTIGATE AND WRITE A LETTER FOR.

AND THEY'RE IN A DIFFICULT, VERY DIFFICULT POSITION HERE, RECEIVING THESE DOZENS AND DOZENS OF COMPLAINTS FROM SOMEBODY WHO DOESN'T LIVE ANYWHERE CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY, BUT THEY WENT FORWARD WITH THEIR JOB.

SO THANK YOU TO OUR CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS FOR BEING DILIGENT, DOING YOUR JOB, AND HOPEFULLY THIS GETS US A BETTER SPOT.

I'M GOING TO CALL THE VOTE. ALL FOR? AYE ANYONE OPPOSED.

MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY, AND I DID MAYOR WANT TO THANK COLE WEBB, WHO'S HERE TONIGHT, WHO WORKED ON THIS A LOT.

OKAY. NICE TO HAVE A WEBB BACK IN THE HOUSE. YOU LOOK FAMILIAR.

OKAY. DO YOU GUYS WANT A BREAK OR DO YOU WANT? I WANT TO MAKE A MOTION FOR A EIGHT MINUTE BREAK.

SECOND. EIGHT MINUTE BREAK. ALL FOR?AYE. OKAY.

OKAY. THANK YOU. CHAD WOULD SUPPORT IT. CHAD.

RECESS. 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. AND MAYOR LIGHT. HERE. OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO ITEM N.2.

[N.2. 26-0853 DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING THE PROPOSED POLICY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES FOR ADMINISTRATION OF THE CITY’S CROSSING GUARD PROGRAM, INCLUDING IMPLEMENTATION OF AN ANNUAL REVIEW PROCESS]

YES MAYOR, JANE'S GONNA PROVIDE A BRIEF PRESENTATION ON THAT.

BUT BEFORE I DO, I'D LIKE TO AGAIN PUBLICLY THANK THE MEMBERS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE, COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT, COUNCIL MEMBER KALUDEROVIC, WHO ASSISTED OUR TEAM THAT CONSISTED OF RYAN LIU, OUR TRANSPORTATION MANAGER, SENIOR TRANSPORTATION MANAGER SLASH ENGINEER OR TRAFFIC MAN, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL THEM.

JANE CHUNG OUT OF MY OFFICE WHO'S WORKED VERY HARD ON THIS. AND BRIAN LONG, CAPTAIN LONG, WHO'S HERE AND WE'VE GOT WHAT WE BELIEVE TO BE VERY POSITIVE RECOMMENDATIONS TONIGHT.

WE'VE, I THINK WE'VE LAID OUT A PROCESS THAT WILL WORK CREATE A CLEAR, OBJECTIVE ANNUAL REVIEW STANDARD, AND I THINK LEAD TO SOLID OUTCOMES THAT WILL HELP SUSTAIN THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE MADE WITH THE, THE RECENT ACTIONS ON THE PROGRAM HERE IN MAY.

SO WITH THAT, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO JANE. JANE, YOU'VE GOT THE FLOOR.

WONDERFUL. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS. JANE CHUNG WITH THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE AND CITY MANAGER WITZANSKY, ACTUALLY TOOK THE INTRODUCTION REALLY WELL. SO I'LL JUST GO RIGHT INTO MY PRESENTATION.

SO THE PRESENTATION TONIGHT WILL INCLUDE A BACKGROUND AS TO BRING YOU UP TO SPEED AS TO WHAT HAS HAPPENED SINCE MAY 5TH, IS THE DECISION THE COUNCIL MADE TO MODIFY THE CROSSING GUARD PROGRAM.

THEN WE'LL GO THROUGH THE SUBCOMMITTEE, RECOMMENDED POLICY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES, AND THEN CONCLUDE THE PRESENTATION WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS OR THE COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATIONS. SO LIKE I MENTIONED EARLIER, ON MAY 5TH, THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MODIFICATIONS TO THE CITY'S CROSSING GUARD PROGRAM, EFFECTIVELY REDUCING THE NUMBER OF LOCATIONS FROM 27 TO 18.

AND THEN, AS WELL AS APPROPRIATING ONGOING FUNDING FOR THE 18 CROSSING GUARD LOCATIONS OR STAFFED CROSSING GUARD LOCATIONS AS PART OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT'S CORE BUDGET.

AND THE DECISION WAS VERY MUCH DRIVEN BY THE FOCUS OF EQUITY, OBJECTIVITY AND SUSTAINABILITY OF THAT PROGRAM.

THE TABLE IN FRONT OF YOU ARE THE 18 LOCATIONS.

WE'VE KIND OF SPLIT IT BETWEEN THE TEN LOCATIONS THAT ARE TETHERED TO A SCHOOL, AND THEN EIGHT LOCATIONS AT LARGE.

AND THIS WILL BE CONNECTED TO THE ONE OF THE OR TWO OF THE OBJECTIVES THAT WE HAVE.

SO WE SPLIT THE LOCATIONS AS SUCH. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

[02:05:04]

SEVERAL THAT WILL BE COMPLETED BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHOOL YEAR, AND THEN THE REMAINING INSTALLATIONS CONTINUING INTO THE EARLY SCHOOL YEAR.

AND THESE ARE LOCATIONS WHERE CROSSING GUARD WAS EITHER RELOCATED OR REMOVED, AND ANY ONGOING PUBLIC COMMUNICATION UPDATES REGARDING THE TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES WILL BE PROVIDED THROUGH THE CITY WEBSITE, AS WELL AS SOCIAL MEDIA.

AND THAT HYPERLINK IN ORANGE YELLOW LINKS TO OUR DEDICATED WEB PAGE.

WE ARE ALSO GOING TO BE PUSHING OUT SOCIAL MEDIA PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENTS THIS MONTH, AS WELL AS BACK TO SCHOOL WEEK TO HELP INFORM STUDENTS AS WELL AS FAMILIES AS TO WHAT TO EXPECT. GIVEN THESE CHANGES.

SO THE SUBCOMMITTEE POLICY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES. THE OVERALL KEY TAKEAWAYS ARE THE FULL BULLET POINTS THERE LISTED IS TO SERVE AS A GUIDE FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE PROGRAM, AS WELL AS IMPLEMENTING A PROFESSIONAL, STAFF DRIVEN ANNUAL REVIEW PROCESS, PRIORITIZING LONG TERM ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS, AND PROVIDING A CONSISTENT, CONSISTENT CRITERIA FOR OBJECTIVE AND EQUITABLE EVALUATION OF THE PROGRAM.

THE FOLLOWING SLIDES WILL GO INTO EACH OF THOSE POLICY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES.

SO THE FIRST THREE HERE ARE, AS MENTIONED EARLIER IN THE KEY HIGHLIGHTS OF THE POLICY GOALS IS TO PRIORITIZE PERMANENT YEAR ROUND TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS WITH A FOCUS ON LONG TERM INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS, CREATING THAT ANNUAL REVIEW PROCESS LED BY ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS, INCLUDING OUR TRAFFIC ENGINEER, AND THAT WOULD BE REVIEWED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS SAFETY AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION.

AND THEN THREE, CENTRALIZING COMMUNITY FEEDBACK, WHERE ALL INPUT REGARDING THE CROSSING GUARDS OR CROSSING GUARD PROGRAM WILL BE ROUTED TO OUR TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER AS WELL AS THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE FOR CONSIDERATION AS PART OF THE ANNUAL REVIEW PROCESS.

THE GOALS OBJECTIVES FOUR FIVE AND SIX ARE LISTED HERE.

SO FOUR GOES INTO THE ANNUAL REPORT. SO WE WOULD BE MONITORING AND EVALUATING THE LOCATIONS THROUGHOUT THE YEAR, USING OBJECTIVE DATA TO ASSESS THE VALUE AND IDENTIFY ANY NEEDED ADJUSTMENTS, PURSUING ENGINEER SOLUTIONS WHERE POSSIBLE, REDUCING OUR RELIANCE ON SHORT TERM STAFFING AND FOCUSING MORE ON IMPROVING SAFETY ACROSS ALL OUR ALL HOURS OF THE DAY, AND THEN COLLABORATING WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR THE TEN SCHOOL BASED PLACEMENTS, WHICH WAS INCLUDED IN THAT TABLE IN PRIOR SLIDES, WITH A FOCUS ON MAINTAINING ONE CROSSING GUARD AT EACH SCHOOL LOCATION AND WORK DIRECTLY WITH THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS ON APPROPRIATE POSITIONING.

SEVEN IS TO EVALUATE THE EIGHT AT-LARGE CROSSING GUARD LOCATIONS, LOCATIONS, DETERMINING VALUE, BENEFIT AND NECESSITY, AND RECOMMEND ADJUSTMENTS AS DETERMINED BY OUR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS.

AND THEN, AS PART OF THE ANNUAL DATA COLLECTION, WE WILL BE COLLECTING MULTI-MODAL TRAFFIC DATA, PREVAILING CONDITIONS AND SAFETY METRICS. AND THAT WOULD BE PART OF THE ANNUAL REPORT THAT WE PRESENT TO THE PUBLIC WORKS SUSTAINABILITY, SAFETY AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION, WHICH LEADS TO OUR LAST POLICY GOAL AND OBJECTIVE NUMBER NINE.

SO THE PROCESS WOULD BE STAFF WILL PRESENT THE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COMMISSION IN EACH IN JULY OR JUNE AND JULY OF EVERY YEAR.

IF THE COMMISSION AGREES WITH WHAT STAFF RECOMMENDS, THEN THE, IMPLEMENT THE CHANGE, THE CHANGES WILL BE IMPLEMENTED THE FOLLOWING SCHOOL YEAR WITH NO FURTHER ACTION. AND THEN IF THERE IS A DISAGREEMENT OR THE COMMISSION IS RECOMMENDING A MODIFICATION TO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, THEN WE WOULD BRING IT TO CITY COUNCIL FOR FINAL DETERMINATION.

SO TO CONCLUDE TONIGHT'S PRESENTATION, THE SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDS THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE RECOMMENDED POLICY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES FOR ADMINISTRATION OF THE CITY'S CROSSING GUARD PROGRAM, AND STAFF IS AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

THANK YOU. AND AND THANK YOU, JANE, FOR SUMMARIZING.

I WILL SAY THE POLICY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ARE VERY DESCRIPTIVE IN THE ADMIN REPORT.

THOSE ARE THE NINE KIND OF STATEMENT PRINCIPLES THAT WE WOULD ADHERE TO GOING FORWARD.

YOU JUST RECEIVED A BIT OF A SUMMARY REPORT ON THAT.

BUT THE NINE, AS THEY READ IN THE STAFF REPORT WOULD BE OUR GUIDE GOING FORWARD.

SO APPRECIATE LIKE I SAID, EVERYBODY'S WORK ON IT.

I THINK THIS IS A GREAT PROGRAM, PROFESSIONALIZES THE PROCESS AND SETS US UP FOR A CLEAR ANNUAL CYCLE OF REVIEW.

BUT YOU'RE ASKING NOT JUST FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE GOALS AND POLICY, THE POLICY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES, BUT ALSO THE PROCESS. WELL, THAT'S IN THERE. THE NINE COVER BOTH PROCESS METRICS GOALS.

THE PROCESS IS CLEARLY EMBEDDED. IT'S EMBEDDED IN THE NINE.

OKAY. YEAH. OKAY. SO BY APPROVING THOSE WE APPROVE THE PROCESS.

PRECISELY LAID OUT. YEP. SO FIRST OFF, I THINK, YOU KNOW, APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK.

I KNOW THIS WAS A HARD ENDEAVOR, SO I APPRECIATE THE WORK OF COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT, COUNCIL MEMBER KALUDEROVIC,

[02:10:08]

BRIAN. YES. CAPTAIN. SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. I THINK THIS I THINK THIS IS A REASONABLE OUTCOME TO THIS.

I KNOW WE'VE BEEN DEBATING THIS FOR QUITE SOME TIME AND NOT JUST THIS COUNCIL, BUT FORMER COUNCILS.

AND IT SEEMED LIKE IT WAS TO ME HAVING JUST COME INTO THIS A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, IT SEEMED MORE LIKE A POLITICAL PROCESS OF PROMISES MADE DURING ELECTIONS, AND I THINK THIS PROCESS TURNS IT INTO MORE OBJECTIVE PROCESS THAT HAS GUARDRAILS ON IT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE MAKING DECISIONS BASED ON SOUND LOGIC, NOT ON CAMPAIGN PROMISES.

SO IT TAKES IT OUT OF THE POLITICAL REALM. I LIKE ENGAGING THE PUBLIC WORKS SUSTAINABILITY AND SAFETY COMMISSION.

SINCE WE'VE STEPPED DOWN OR STOOD DOWN THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION, IT SEEMS LIKE AN APPROPRIATE USE OF THAT COMMISSION.

AND I'M ALWAYS FOR ENGAGING OUR COMMISSIONS AND HELPING TAKE WORKLOAD OFF THE COUNCIL TO, TO GET THINGS DONE.

SO I APPRECIATE THAT AND ALL THE HARD WORK THAT WENT INTO THAT.

SO I'M FULLY SUPPORTIVE WITH THAT. I'LL GO TO FOLKS WHO ARE RAISED THEIR HAND.

SO FIRST IS COUNCIL MEMBER WALLER. THANK YOU MAYOR.

ONE, ONE SORT OF QUESTION ABOUT IT. I LIKE THE WELL, FIRST OF ALL GREAT WORK.

I LOVE THE OBJECTIVITY. IT MAKES IT OBJECTIVE INSTEAD OF SUBJECTIVE.

AND THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO HAVE FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS. BUT ONE OF THE QUESTIONS, SINCE THE BASIS IS THERE, STARTING WITH TEN SITE BASED CROSSING GUARDS WHAT IF RBUSD CAME TO US AND SAID THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO RELOCATE ONE OF THE SITE BASED GUARDS TO SOME OTHER SPOT SOMEWHERE, OR DO WE HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY TO MOVE THAT OFF, MOVE THAT CROSSING GUARD? SO THE WAY WE ENVISION THE TEN SCHOOL BASED LOCATIONS IS THAT EACH YEAR THERE WILL BE CONSULTATION WITH THE ON SITE ADMINISTRATOR AND THEN DISTRICT OFFICIALS TO DETERMINE WHERE THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT SCHOOL SITE CROSSING GUARD PLACED.

SO IF IF THEY IF THERE ARE FOUR PRIMARY INTERSECTIONS IN AND AROUND A PARTICULAR SCHOOL SITE AND, AND THE PRINCIPAL AND DISTRICT OFFICIALS AND OUR TEAM GET TOGETHER AND THEY SAY, HEY, THE BEST SPOT FOR THAT IS HERE BASED ON CHANGED DEMOGRAPHICS, CHANGE TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES OR WHAT HAVE YOU.

IF THAT'S A RELOCATION AROUND THE DISTRICTS, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD ULTIMATELY WORK WITH THEM TO DECIDE WHERE I THINK WE WOULD HAVE A BIGGER ISSUE IS IF THEY WERE SUDDENLY SUGGESTING, HEY, THAT SCHOOL SITE NO LONGER NEEDS.

THAT'S WHAT I WAS ASKING. WE WANT TO TAKE IT SOMEWHERE ELSE OUTSIDE OF THAT.

I THINK ONE OF THE PRIMARY PRINCIPLES OF THIS, OF THIS POLICY IS THAT WE WANT AND THIS IS WHERE THE, THE SORT OF TERM EQUITY COMES FROM, IN PART THAT EACH OF THE TEN SITES HAS AN AMBASSADOR HAS A CROSSING GUARD THAT'S RESPONSIVE TO THE COMMUNITY THAT THAT ALL FOLKS CAN SORT OF RALLY AROUND AND CELEBRATE WHERE WE SEE PERHAPS MORE EVALUATION.

AND FUNGIBILITY IS IN THE EIGHT AT LARGE LOCATIONS THAT ARE REALLY MORE AT THE CITY'S DISCRETION, REALLY, RYAN'S RECOMMENDATIONS AND THE LIKE, WHERE WE DECIDE, HEY, ARE WE GETTING THE BEST EFFICACY FROM THIS? IS THIS OUR BEST COST BENEFIT FROM A VALUE STANDPOINT ON AN ANNUAL BASIS? AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE'LL HAVE MORE OF THAT REVIEW.

WE DON'T FORESEE WITH THIS WITH THIS SET OF POLICIES TAKING A CROSSING GUARD AWAY FROM A PARTICULAR SCHOOL.

ULTIMATELY, WE WANT ONE IN EACH OF THE SCHOOL SITES, EVEN IF RBUSD REQUESTED.

I MEAN, IF THEY WERE TO REQUEST IT, WE COULD CERTAINLY CONSIDER IT.

WE COULD COLLABORATE WITH THEM. I WOULD BE HARD PRESSED TO SEE THEM DOING THAT.

I MEAN, YOU'D HAVE ONE PRINCIPAL PITTED AGAINST ANOTHER IN THAT SCENARIO.

BUT WE HAVEN'T CROSSED THAT BRIDGE. BUT WE THINK THERE'S VALUE IN EACH SITE HAVING A, A CROSSING GUARD.

AND I DON'T, I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT OR COUNCIL MEMBER KALUDEROVIC BUT THAT'S THE WAY I INTERPRET THE POLICY STATEMENTS HERE.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. OKAY. COUNCIL MEMBER KALUDEROVIC.

YEAH. I JUST WANT TO REITERATE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT YOU HAD MENTIONED.

ONE, THAT THIS PROGRAM HAD NOT BEEN EVALUATED IN ITS ENTIRETY BEFORE AND THAT THESE DECISIONS TO PUT THESE CROSSING GUARDS AT THESE LOCATIONS WERE MADE ONE BY ONE OVER MANY DECADES. AND IT DID AND NEVER REEVALUATED AFTERWARDS.

SO FOR EXAMPLE MY NEIGHBORHOOD FRANKLIN PARK NEIGHBORHOOD A DECADE AGO, VERY FEW KIDS WERE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.

NOW, YOU KNOW, DOZENS UPON DOZENS AND, AND THEY'RE CROSSING INGLEWOOD.

AND SO THIS IS WHY WE HAVE TO HAVE A RESPONSIVE REVIEW PROGRAM SO THAT WE CAN CHANGE WITH THE COMMUNITY DEMOGRAPHICS AS THEY CHANGE AS WELL.

[02:15:03]

THEY CAN BE ON THIS COMMISSION THAT WILL MAKE THESE DECISIONS AND, AND HAVE AN ANNUAL PROCESS FOR THAT.

AND REALLY, AS WE WENT THROUGH THIS. COUNCILMAN BEHRENDT AND I REALLY IT'S IT'S BEEN MORE OR LESS A YEAR THAT WE'VE BEEN REVIEWING THIS. THESE INTERSECTIONS INNATELY AREN'T THE DANGER, BUT THE TRAFFIC PATTERNS AND THE BEHAVIOR OF THOSE THAT ARE USING THE INTERSECTIONS, WHETHER YOU'RE DRIVING OR YOU'RE ON A EBIKE OR A BIKE, AND THE INTENTION IS NOT TO MAKE THEM SAFE JUST WHEN KIDS ARE CROSSING, BUT TO HAVE THEM BE SAFE ALL THE TIME.

SO THROUGH ENFORCEMENT, THROUGH CHANGES TO THE INFRASTRUCTURE, THE GOAL IS TO MAKE THEM SAFE ALL THE TIME.

AND I REALLY APPRECIATE US FOLLOWING THROUGH WITH THE PROCESS IN THIS SO THAT THE COMMUNITY AND COUNCIL MEMBERS, YOU MAYOR, UNDERSTAND THAT WHEN WE GET REQUESTS OR SOMEONE COMES UP TO THE PODIUM ASKING FOR A CROSSING GUARD, WE HAVE A PROCESS IN PLACE AND WE HAVE AN ANSWER FOR THEM ABOUT HOW THEY CAN PARTICIPATE AND HEAR THOSE CONCERNS OR HAVE THOSE CONCERNS HEARD.

SO I THINK THIS IS A GREAT POLICY FOR SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN STAGNANT FOR A LONG TIME. THAT'S IT. THANK YOU MAYOR.

OKAY. THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT. THANK YOU MAYOR. SO WITH THAT, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE SUBCOMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDED POLICY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES, OR ADMINISTRATION OF THE CITY'S CROSSING GUARD PROGRAM AS PROVIDED FOR IN ITEM N.2'S ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT.

SECOND. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. BEFORE I CALL THE VOTE, I HAVE ONE CARD ON THIS.

SO BRAYLEY PLATT. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. FIRST I WANT TO THANK YOU GUYS ALL FOR COMING TOGETHER AND DOING THIS COMMISSION. I DON'T AGREE WITH ALL OF THE INTERSECTIONS, BUT I UNDERSTAND IT'S HARD AND YOU CAN'T MAKE EVERYBODY HAPPY.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS JUST BROUGHT UP WAS THE SAFETY OF EVERYBODY.

SO I THINK ONE THING THAT WE'RE OVERLOOKING IS THE TRAFFIC AND THE E-BIKE SITUATION.

WHEN I WALK MY DOG, MY 70 POUND HUGE HUSKY, I HAVE ALMOST GOTTEN HIT AT LEAST TWICE A WEEK.

AND I WALK HER TWICE A DAY. PEOPLE DO. I ALMOST WANT TO PUT UP SIGNS THAT SAY THIS IS NOT A SUGGESTION.

STOP SIGN IS NOT A SUGGESTION. IT IS A LAW. YOU STOP YOUR CAR.

SO I THINK THAT'S ONE THING THAT I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING ABOUT TALKING ABOUT.

HEY, YOU KNOW WHAT? WE'RE GOING TO MAKE PEOPLE ACTUALLY STOP AT STOP SIGNS. WE'RE GOING TO, YOU KNOW WORK ON THESE E-BIKE SITUATIONS.

LET'S GET LICENSE PLATES ON E-BIKES SO WE CAN CALL IN A LICENSE PLATE ON E-BIKE.

MY ACTUAL 12 YEAR OLD SON CAME UP WITH THAT ONE.

BUT WHAT I'M THE MOST FRUSTRATED ABOUT IS THE FORD AND AVIATION.

AND THEN WE HAVE TAKEN FOR JEFFERSON, WE HAVE ONE, I UNDERSTAND EVERY SCHOOL HAS ONE, I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT YOU HAVE EVEN WHEN YOU GUYS DID THE INITIAL COUNTING, THERE WERE NO PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS AT FORD AND AVIATION YET.

YOU TOOK ONE OF OURS THAT WAS ONE OF THE HIGHEST PEDESTRIAN E-BIKE CAR CROSSING INTERSECTIONS.

YOU TOOK THE, I THINK IT WAS ELLEN AWAY. I KNOW FOR A FACT THAT ELLEN CROSSES MAYBE A HANDFUL A WEEK AT FORD AND AVIATION AND YOU GUYS KEPT THAT ON EVEN WITH A LOT OF PUSHBACK.

SO OUR CONCERN AT JEFFERSON IS THE HARKNESS AND MORGAN.

THAT'S WHERE CHRIS WAS. AND I ALSO WANT TO POINT OUT, WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, STAFFING ISSUES THAT JEFFERSON CROSSING GUARD SHOWED UP ALL THE TIME, THEY ALWAYS SHOW UP.

THEY ARE DEFINITELY NOT PART OF THE PROBLEM. SO I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A CALL TO ACTION TO REASSESS THE FORD AND AVIATION AND GIVE US CHRIS BACK AT MORGAN AND HARKNESS. ONE OF THE PROBLEMS WITH THAT IS THERE'S, IT'S A THREE STOP INTERSECTION, BUT ONE OF THEM IS IT'S, IT'S A BLIND INTERSECTION BECAUSE THE, THE FENCE AND NOW THAT IT'S COVERED WITH THE MESH LINING, YOU CAN'T SEE ONE OF THE STOP SIGNS. CHRIS HAS HAD TO GET IN AND WALK IN TRAFFIC AND STOP PEOPLE.

ALSO JUST OVERALL SAFETY. HE'S HAD TO STOP PEOPLE WHO ARE CRUISING BY LOOKING AT KIDS AND BE LIKE, YOU DON'T, YOU DON'T BELONG HERE. SO THERE'S SO MUCH MORE THAN JUST TRAFFIC AND SAFETY.

AND AGAIN, I KNOW YOU CAN'T MAKE EVERYONE HAPPY, BUT I REALLY WANT TO READDRESS THE FORD AND AVIATION AND HARKNESS AND MORGAN LANE,

[02:20:02]

MORGAN AND HARKNESS. OKAY. WHERE? IT'S BASICALLY CREATING THE SIGHT LINE ISSUE.

YEAH, THERE'S A SIGHT LINE BECAUSE THE STOP SIGN IS ABOUT 15FT BEFORE THAT.

OKAY. SO IT'S HARD TO SEE. OKAY. I MEAN, WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO, I GUESS, CONTACT THEM.

YEAH. THAT'S SOMETHING WE'RE ADDRESSING WITH THE DISTRICT. RYAN'S BEEN ACTIVE CONVERSATIONS WITH THE CEO AND WE HAVE THE SAME CONCERNS.

WE THINK THE MESH CREATES PROBLEMS AT OUR, ACROSS OUR VARIOUS INTERSECTIONS.

EVEN WITHOUT THE THE MESH LINING, YOU STILL COULDN'T SEE, RIGHT.

OKAY. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. OKAY. WE HAVE TO GO ONLINE NEXT.

WAYNE. THERE ARE NO PARTICIPANTS ONLINE. OKAY.

YOU SHOULD HAVE CALLED IT IN. WAYNE. YEAH, I WAS GOING TO CALL IN ON MY PHONE.

MAYBE I CAN DO THAT. ONE THING I WANT TO MENTION.

MAYOR LIGHT. I KNOW YOU WERE THINKING OF THE TERM SHRUBBERY WHEN THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT HEDGES.

I KNOW YOU'RE DOING TWO LAYERED WITH A PATH. YEAH.

ACTUALLY. SO YEAH, I THINK IT'S GOOD WE HAVE A PROCESS IN PLACE BECAUSE WHO KNOWS HOW SOME OF THESE CROSSING GUARDS WERE PICKED.

SOME OF THEM PROBABLY HAD TEN, 15 YEARS AGO. AND, YOU KNOW, SCHOOL PATTERNS CHANGE QUITE A BIT.

I'VE TALKED TO SOME FOLKS THAT I WORK WITH IN THE FARMERS MARKET WHO ARE REALLY GOOD AT PLANNING AND URBAN PLANNING AND UNDERSTANDING TRAFFIC FLOWS, AND IT MAKES SENSE TO DO THIS. I JUST KIND OF WONDER WHY IT WAS FAST TRACKED TO BE ON THE AGENDA, BECAUSE A FEW WEEKS AGO, THIS WAS STILL IN A SUBCOMMITTEE, AND I'M WONDERING WHY IT KIND OF CAME UP.

IT APPEARS THAT PROBABLY PUBLIC PRESSURE MIGHT HAVE HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THAT. BUT THE BIG QUESTION, THE BIG ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM, BIG PINK ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM, I GUESS YOU COULD SAY IS WHY ARE WE NOT TALKING ABOUT COST SHARING? BECAUSE FRANKLY, YOU KNOW, I HEARD A COMMENT MADE IF THE RB'S RBUSD REQUEST A CROSSING GUARD, THAT SHOWS TO ME THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE PAYING FOR THAT ALL THE TIME. NOW, I BROUGHT THIS UP BEFORE.

I'M NOT SAYING THAT THEY HAVE TO PAY FOR EVERYTHING ON IT, BUT IT SHOULD BE SOME COST SHARING. I ASKED ONE OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS AT THEIR DISTRICT MEETING, WHY DON'T WE DISCUSS THIS? BECAUSE AT THE TIME IT WAS LIKE ALMOST LIKE 4 OR $500,000 A YEAR.

AND THE RESPONSE I GOT WAS, WELL, THAT'S INTERESTING.

I'VE TALKED TO A FORMER COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO WERE PART OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE, AND THEY SAID FOR A YEAR AND A HALF, WE NEVER EVEN ASKED THE SHARE COST.

I DON'T KNOW, I WASN'T THERE, BUT ALL I'M GOING TO SAY IS THAT WHILE HAVING CROSSING GUARDS IS IMPORTANT, YOU KNOW, I HAVE FRIENDS, FAMILY, HAVE KIDS, GO TO SCHOOLS. I DON'T WANT TO SAY WE HAVE TO GET RID OF THEM, BUT WE HAVE TO BE LOOKING AT SOME COST SHARING. A FEW WEEKS AGO, WE WERE FIGHTING OVER COMING UP WITH $20,000 JUST TO HAVE FREE PARKING FOR A WEEK IN RIVIERA VILLAGE.

CROSSING GUARDS COST A LOT. IT'S A BIG CHUNK OF CASH ON IT.

THE SCHOOL DISTRICT DOES HAVE A LOT OF MONEY THAT THEY ORIGINALLY HAD ALLOCATED FOR REPAIRS, LIKE ROOFS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. MILLIONS OF DOLLARS WHEN THEY GOT 280 MILLION IN, GUESS WHAT? THAT MONEY GOT REALLOCATED IN.

THEY HAVE MONEY AVAILABLE FOR IT. HOW MUCH YOU HAVE TO PAY, THAT'S WHAT YOU GUYS HAVE TO WORK OUT.

BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR FOR COMMENTS LIKE IF RBUSD RBUSD REQUEST A CROSSING GUARD, WE HAVE TO NOW PAY FOR IT.

THAT'S NOT HOW THIS WORKS. WE'RE SEPARATE ENTITIES.

I THINK WE NEED TO REEXAMINE THAT FUNCTION AT SOME POINT.

THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU. YOU KNOW, I'M NOT GOING TO DISPARAGE THE SCHOOL BOARD OR THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, BUT TO THINK THAT WE HAVEN'T HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH THEM IN THAT DIRECTION IS NAIVE.

SO, SO THEY'VE BEEN HAD AND, AND WE DIDN'T COME TO FRUITION ON IT.

SO BUT I'M NOT DISPARAGING ANYONE FOR THEIR DECISION.

SO JUST WANTED TO GET THAT OUT THERE. WE DID NOT LEAVE THAT AVENUE UNEXPLORED.

ANYONE ELSE, ANYONE ONLINE? THERE IS NO ONE ELSE ONLINE.

AND THERE WAS ONE ECOMMENT RECEIVED WITH NO POSITION INDICATED. OKAY.

AND WE HAVE ONE OTHER PERSON IN THE AUDIENCE.

DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK ON THIS, LESLIE? OKAY. WITH THAT, I WILL CALL THE VOTE.

WE HAVE OUR HANDS UP. OH, YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO RAISE YOUR HAND.

OKAY. I HAVEN'T RAISED MY HAND. COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI.

I WANTED TO ADDRESS THE COMMENT ABOUT AVIATION AND FORD.

SO THAT WAS A PROPONENT OF THAT INTERSECTION.

IN NO SMALL PART BECAUSE ABOUT 20 KIDS CAME DOWN HERE AND THEY LIVE ACROSS AVIATION AND THEY RIDE THEIR BIKES DOWN TO, TO JEFFERSON BECAUSE THEY ARE THAT FAR FROM JEFFERSON THAT THEY CAN'T WALK AND THEY CAN'T WALK BACK AND THEY'RE THAT SMALL.

AND SO I DIDN'T WANT THOSE SEVEN, EIGHT, NINE YEAR OLDS WALKING THERE, DRIVING THEIR BIKES ACROSS AVIATION WITH NO CROSSING GUARD, WITH THOUSANDS OF CARS THAT DRIVE AT 35MPH PLUS ON AVIATION, WHERE WE HAVE HAD REPEATED ACCIDENTS, CARS CRASHING INTO BUILDINGS THAT ARE DRIVING SO FAST AND OUT OF CONTROL, AND THESE KIDS ARE PLEADING FOR HELP TO GET ACROSS

[02:25:03]

AND THAT'S WHY I WAS, I WAS A CHAMPION FOR THEM.

NOW, IF THERE'S ANOTHER INTERSECTION THAT'S PROVEN TO BE MORE DANGEROUS THAN AVIATION AND FORD, BY ALL MEANS, MAYBE YOU SHOULD GET THAT CROSSING GUARD, BUT I'D LIKE TO SEE THE PROOF OF THAT WITH THE DATA ON THE ACCIDENTS, WHICH WASN'T CAPTURED, BY THE WAY, IN ANY OF THE REPORTS THAT WE GOT.

SO FAR, I HAVE NOT SEEN THE DATA ON THE ACCIDENTS AT THE INTERSECTIONS ON THE STREETS, SO MAYBE WE CAN INCORPORATE THAT ALSO IN THE FUTURE IN THE ANALYSIS OF THE RISK AT EACH OF THESE INTERSECTIONS. BUT I THINK NOW YOU MAY, BUT I THINK MORE IMPORTANTLY IS NOW WHEN PEOPLE HAVE A REQUEST LIKE THAT, WE HAVE A PROCESS TO ADJUDICATE IT VERSUS AN AD HOC CITY COUNCIL.

YEAH, I THINK THAT'S I THINK THAT'S THE KEY STATEMENT HERE.

THIS THIS PROFESSIONALIZES THE PROCESS, IT ALLOWS STAFF TO COLLECT THE APPROPRIATE DATA.

ACCIDENT HISTORY CAN BE WORKED IN. AND THE OTHER THING IT ALLOWS US TO DO IS EVALUATE THE ACTIONS AND BEHAVIORS OF DRIVERS, PEDESTRIANS, BICYCLISTS AFTER WE'VE IMPLEMENTED THE VARIOUS TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES THAT WERE THAT WERE IN THE PROCESS OF, I THINK THAT'S GOING TO MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE. AND AGAIN, THE GOAL IS SUSTAINABLE 24/7 TRAFFIC SAFETY AT ALL LOCATIONS THROUGH ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS RATHER THAN ONE TIME RESOURCE. RIGHT. CROSSING GUARD AND HAVING OUR OUR PATROL DIVISION GO OUT AND WRITE TICKETS IS NOT THAT'S NOT THE SUSTAINABLE WAY TO ADDRESS THESE THINGS. THE SUSTAINABLE WAY IS TO MAKE IMPROVEMENTS TO SIGHT LINES AND BEHAVE IN DRIVER BEHAVIOR.

SO THAT'S WHERE OUR FOCUS WILL BE. AND EACH YEAR, AS WE MAKE MORE IMPROVEMENTS ALONG THOSE LINES, WE'LL EVALUATE BEHAVIORS AND TRAFFIC PATTERNS TO DETERMINE WHERE WE SHOULD BE PLACING VALUE ON FUTURE LOCATIONS.

THAT'S THE BEAUTY OF THE PROCESS. AND TO THE EXTENT THAT WE CAN DEPOLITICIZE IT, I THINK THAT'S A BENEFIT TO EVERYBODY.

COUNCIL MEMBER KALUDEROVIC, YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO ALSO ADD THAT, YOU KNOW, I'VE HEARD FROM JEFFERSON PARENTS ABOUT THE, THE ADVOCACY THAT WE SAW THAT THE. NOT ALL THE STUDENTS THAT CAME TO SPEAK WERE ONES THAT WERE CROSSING THE STREET, THAT THEY WERE THERE IN SUPPORT OF THEIR FRIENDS WHO MAY HAVE BEEN USING THAT.

SO WHAT I WILL SAY IS THAT THIS PROCESS THAT WE ARE COMING UP WITH ALLOWS FOR THIS, THIS IS NOT THE LOCATIONS ARE NOT STAGNANT FOR DECADES.

NOW. WE WILL BE REVIEWING THIS EVERY YEAR, WHICH WE HAVEN'T BEEN DOING IN THE PAST.

SO THERE WILL BE AMPLE TIME FOR, FOR PARTICIPATION AND DATA COLLECTION SO THAT WE WILL HAVE THOSE NUMBERS TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS. OKAY. THAT WAS THE LAST HAND I HAD.

SO WITH THAT, I'M GOING, THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR AND I'M GOING TO CALL THE VOTE.

ALL FOR? AYE. ANYONE OPPOSED? OKAY. MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

ITEM N.3, THIS IS THE DISCUSSION OF THE BALLOT MEASURE FOR THE GENERAL PLAN CHANGES AND THE ARTICLE 27 VOTE REQUIRED

[N.3. 26-0862 DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING BALLOT TEXT AND QUESTION FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE VOTERS FOR THE UPCOMING NOVEMBER 3, 2026 LOS ANGELES COUNTY GENERAL ELECTION PURSUANT TO ARTICLE XXVII OF THE CITY CHARTER FOR PROPOSED MAJOR CHANGES IN ALLOWABLE LAND USE, DETERMINE WHO SUBMITS ARGUMENT FOR, AND BALLOT LETTER DESIGNATIONS, AND ELECTION OR MEASURE RELATED ITEMS]

I THINK MARC'S GOING TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF A PRIMER AND BACKGROUND, JUST TO REMIND YOU ALL WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE ACTING ON ON AUGUST 4TH AS IT RELATES TO THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE. AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT, ELEANOR WILL TAKE IT FROM THERE AND TALK YOU THROUGH KIND OF THE BALLOT AND ARTICLE 27 RELATED ELECTION PROCESS THAT WILL FOLLOW THOSE LE, LUE AND ZONING ORDINANCE CHANGES.

AND BEFORE YOU GET INTO THAT HAS HAS ALL THE COUNCIL READ THE CHANGE, THE BLUE BLUE FOLDER ITEM RELATED TO THE BALLOT QUESTION? HAS ANYBODY NOT READ IT? WE'LL HAVE IT UP HERE.

OKAY. I'LL WALK YOU THROUGH IT. THERE'S BEEN A COUPLE OTHER SMALL CHANGES THROUGH THE OUTSIDE CONSULTANT.

OKAY. OKAY. WE'LL HAVE THAT FOR YOU. YEAH. THANK YOU, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL.

MY PORTION OF THE PRESENTATION IS PRETTY SHORT.

I JUST WANT TO GO OVER THE SCHEDULE FOR THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE ADOPTION PROCESS.

SO WE WILL BE BRINGING THE RESOLUTION AND ORDINANCES TO THE CITY COUNCIL ON AUGUST 4TH FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE UPDATED LAND USE ELEMENT AND THE ZONING ORDINANCES TO IMPLEMENT THOSE CHANGES.

THAT INCLUDES THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR AACAP, CHANGES TO FLOOR AREA RATIOS, OTHER THINGS THAT ARE ADDRESSED THROUGH THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE. WE WILL BE BRINGING BACK A SECOND READING OF THE ORDINANCE ON AUGUST 11TH TO ADOPT IT.

AND THEN ON AUGUST 18TH, AND THIS IS OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF ARTICLE 27, WE WILL BE BRINGING THE REMAINING PORTIONS OF THE GENERAL PLAN TO THE CITY COUNCIL.

THAT INCLUDES THE OPEN SPACE AND CONSERVATION ELEMENTS.

THE NOISE ELEMENT AND THE SAFETY ELEMENTS. WE'LL BEGIN THE DISCUSSIONS ON THAT.

[02:30:01]

AND I DO WANT TO NOTE THAT FOR YOUR ITEMS THAT YOU RECEIVED IN THE PACKET TONIGHT, ONE OF WHICH IS THE TEXT AMENDMENTS THAT WOULD BE PLACED ON THE BALLOT.

I'M AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THE COUNCIL MAY HAVE ABOUT THOSE.

I KNOW THEY'RE PRETTY NUANCED AND DETAILED, AND WITH THAT, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO ELEANOR.

OKAY. YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE FOR ME. THANK YOU.

OKAY. HERE'S THE BALLOT QUESTION. SO WHAT WE'LL NEED SO THAT WE HAVE THIS READY FOR AUGUST.

YEAH. AUGUST 4TH IS A DIRECTION REGARDING THE PROPOSED QUESTION AND THEN ALSO THE BALLOT TEXT.

I KNOW IT'S LIKE 44 PAGES, SO I'LL NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT IS WHAT YOU WANT FOR THE AUGUST 4TH ELECTION.

SO HERE'S THE BALLOT QUESTION THAT HAS BEEN CHANGED.

THIS INCLUDES CRAIG STEELE'S SUGGESTIONS, OUR OUTSIDE ELECTION EXPERT.

RIGHT FOLLOWING YOUR ADDED RIGHT AFTER SHALL THE, HE ADDED MEASURED BE ADOPTED TO AMEND THE AND THEN HE CROSSED OUT THERE WAS THE AMEND WAS THAT SORT OF AFTER THE ORDINANCE.

SO HE CHANGED THOSE BASED ON THE BLUE FOLDER ITEM.

THERE IS 66 WORDS. I'VE COUNTED THEM. SO AT THIS POINT IT'S.

AND YOU NEED UP TO 75 WORDS. SO YOU CAN ADD MAYBE A COUPLE MORE IF YOU'D LIKE, BUT OTHERWISE THIS IS WHAT I HAVE.

AND THIS, THIS IS WHAT WILL GO ON THE BALLOT QUESTION.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT I HAD A QUESTION ON IT.

IF YOU'RE ASKING AND IF I HANDS ARE UP, I'LL GO IN ORDER.

I'VE GOT HANDS UP. CAN WE GET THROUGH THE REST OF THE BRIEFING AND THEN GO. OKAY. OKAY, GREAT.

SO AND THEN THE NEXT THING IS THE BALLOT LETTER DESIGNATION.

WE DID RECEIVE SOME SUGGESTIONS FROM COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI.

AND THE FIRST CHOICE WAS ART. WE DID CALL THE COUNTY.

THEY SAID THEY WOULD CONSIDER IT AND AND ALSO, SO WHAT WILL HAPPEN IS USUALLY THEY'LL GIVE IT TO US. HOWEVER, IF THERE IS A COUNTY MEASURE THAT THEY FEEL THEY WANT TO USE, THAT'S GOING TO BUMP TO THEM. SO BUT RIGHT NOW, THIS IS WE'RE GOOD WITH THIS.

THAT'S WHY I NEEDED THE SECOND CHOICE, WHICH YOU GAVE ME AR AND CHOICE AAC.

SO WE NEED TO GIVE THEM THREE CHOICES. WE CAN HAVE A SPECIAL ELECTION TOO.

EXCUSE ME. ARE THEY GOING TO HAVE A SPECIAL ELECTION AS WELL? NO, NO, NO, THEY'RE HAVING THIS STATE WIDE. EXCUSE ME.

THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION. OKAY. FOR THE GOVERNOR AND ALL OTHER.

YEAH, FOR OTHER MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS ALSO. AND SO FOR US, IT'S A SPECIAL ELECTION, BUT WE'RE GOING TO ALSO ASK THE COUNTY TO INCLUDE OUR MEASURE.

GOT IT. THE OTHER THING WILL BE WHO'S GOING TO DRAFT THE ARGUMENTS FOR OR IN FAVOR.

AND IT CANNOT EXCEED 300 WORDS. IT'S GOING TO BE DUE ON AUGUST 14TH.

PRIORITIES WILL BE SET. SO TECHNICALLY IT'S JUST A LIST OF WHO CAN PROVIDE US THE ARGUMENTS FOR FIRST, WHICH WOULD BE COUNCIL OR. COUNCILMEMBER BEHRENDT AND I.

OR WHOEVER. WILL DRAFT ARGUMENT FOR. OKAY. AND AND WE'LL SOLICIT EVENTUALLY SIGNATURES.

LET'S HOLD OFF. OKAY. AND THEN ON AUGUST 5TH, ONCE WE ACCEPT THESE RESOLUTIONS ON AUGUST 4TH.

ON AUGUST 5TH, WE WILL PROVIDE THOSE THAT ARE GOING TO DO THE ARGUMENTS.

THE ARGUMENT INFORMATION BOOKLET, WHICH WILL HAVE ALL THE FORMS FROM THE COUNTY THAT WILL NEED TO BE FILLED OUT, AND THEN THE IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS. AT THAT POINT, I WILL ASK THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PROVIDE THE IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS, AND IT WILL BE DUE AUGUST 14TH. AND I THINK THAT'S IT.

ANY QUESTIONS? YES. IS THAT THE LAST? YEAH, THAT'S THE LAST ONE.

OKAY. SO LET'S FIRST GO WITH ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE ON WHAT'S BEEN PRESENTED.

AND THEN WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS WALK THROUGH EACH OF THESE QUESTIONS AND GET AN ANSWER.

I CAN CONSENSUS ACROSS THE COUNCIL. THAT'S OKAY WITH YOU GUYS.

SO ANY QUESTIONS FIRST. YEAH. BUT ON THE BALLOT QUESTION.

WELL QUESTIONS ABOUT THE WORDING. IS THAT CONSIDERED A QUESTION OR ANY.

WELL I'D SAY YOU'RE ASKING ANY QUESTIONS. IS IT A QUESTION OR IS IT A REQUEST? SO LET'S GO ON NUMBER ONE. ANY QUESTIONS ON NUMBER ONE OR COMMENTS OR.

YES. YES. OKAY. SO COUNCIL MEMBER WALLER HAS HIS HAND UP.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I THOUGHT I READ IN THE ALL THAT PAPERWORK WAS ALSO SOME REZONING PORTIONS OF ALTA VISTA AND

[02:35:07]

BUT THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. SO I MADE A NOTE OF THAT TODAY.

SEAN SCULLY IS OUT ON VACATION THIS WEEK. I'M GOING TO SPEAK TO HIM WHEN HE GETS BACK.

I'M NOT SURE IT NEEDS TO BE INCLUDED AS PART OF THE BALLOT MEASURE.

SO I'M GOING TO LOOK INTO THAT. IT. IT'S THE GENERAL PLAN CHANGES THAT AFFECT THE SCHOOL SITES WHEN IT WAS OPEN SPACE VERSUS. I REMEMBER WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE, THE QUESTION IS WHEN DO WE APPROVE THAT, IF NOT NOW? WELL, IT'S AND I GUESS THE QUESTION IS, IS THAT BETTER PART OF THE PI FAR, PI ZONE.

FAR CALCULATION ITEM. IF IT'S NOT ESSENTIAL AS IT RELATES TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ITEMS, WE'LL EXCLUDE IT. SO OKAY. BUT ALSO THERE'S A QUESTION I'M NOT SURE IT'S SUBJECT TO ARTICLE 27.

SO THAT'S MY INTERPRETATION IS IT WOULDN'T BECAUSE THERE'S NO DEVELOPMENT RELATED TO IT.

IT'S JUST REDRAWING BOUNDARIES. SO SO I DON'T THINK IT NEEDS TO BE PART OF THE BALLOT TEXT.

OKAY. THAT'D BE GOOD. BUT YEAH, THE REWORDING IS MUCH BETTER BECAUSE I'D COME UP WITH A REWORDING BASED ON MY READING OF EVERYTHING.

AND THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I PUT IN THERE TRYING TO SUMMARIZE EVERYTHING.

YOU KNOW, MY WORDING VERSUS YOUR WORDING. I THINK EVERYTHING'S COVERED.

SO I DON'T NEED TO PUT IN MINE. EXACTLY. I YIELD TO SCOTT NOW.

COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT. THANK YOU. MAYOR. OKAY.

WE'LL GO TO NUMBER ONE. APPROVE BALLOT QUESTION, BALLOT MEASURE TEXT. LET'S PULL IT UP AND GO THROUGH IT.

SO HERE'S THE PROPOSED BALLOT QUESTION. THIS HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE OUTSIDE CONSULTANT.

CORRECT. SO IS THIS GOOD TO GO? YEAH? THIS IS IT.

YOU GUYS ARE COMFORTABLE WITH IT? THIS IS GOOD TO GO. OKAY, EVERYONE TAKE A MOMENT, IF WE MAY, TO JUST READ THROUGH IT RIGHT NOW.

LOOKS FINE TO ME. ANYONE HAVE COMMENTS? MAYOR'S.

COUNCIL MEMBERS. I'M GOOD WITH IT. GO AHEAD. COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI. DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU WANT TO MENTION? ANYTHING ABOUT THE IN THE IE PARENTHETICAL. NEW FLOOR AREA RATIO.

COMMA. HEIGHT LIMIT. CAPS. NEW FLOOR AREA RATIO AND HEIGHT LIMIT.

COMMA HEIGHT LIMIT CAPS OR SLASH HEIGHT LIMIT.

BECAUSE I MEAN THAT THAT IS A SALIENT ASPECT OF WHAT'S CHANGING.

I DO HAVE HEIGHTS IN MY THING THAT I MENTIONED.

SO I'D BE IN SUPPORT OF ADDING HEIGHT AS A SPECIFIC.

IE. ANYONE OPPOSED TO ADDING HEIGHT HEIGHT LIMITS TO THAT? I'M NOT OPPOSED. I WANT GO AHEAD. I THINK IT'S A GOOD ADDITION TO HAVE.

I THINK IT'S GOOD TO ADD. IS THERE ANY REASON NOT TO ADD IT FROM THE CLERK OR CITY ATTORNEY OR ANYONE ELSE? I THINK IT'S FINE. CITY MANAGER SO WOULD YOU.

SO NEW FLOOR AREA RATIO AND HEIGHT LIMIT. CAPS AND ROOFTOP DINING.

JUST FLOOR AREA RATIO. COMMA HEIGHT CAPS AND ROOFTOP HEIGHT CAPS.

WORKS. LIMIT AND CAPTURE THE SAME WORDS, RIGHT? MORE BUILDING HEIGHTS, FLOOR AIR RATIO, HEIGHT CAPS AND ROOFTOP DINING HEIGHT LIMITS INSTEAD OF CAPS.

I THINK IT WOULD BE. YEAH, I THINK YOU WOULD SAY NEW FLOOR, NEW FLOOR AREA RATIO CAPS, COMMA HEIGHT LIMITS, AND ROOFTOP DINING. THAT MAKES SENSE. TAKE OUT THE COMMA THOUGH AFTER RATIO.

EITHER HEIGHT LIMITS OR BUILDING HEIGHTS, BUT AREA RATIO CAPS.

TWO. YEAH. RIGHT THERE. THERE YOU GO. YEAH. HEIGHT LIMITS.

THERE YOU GO. LIMITS AND ROOFTOP DINING LIMITS.

LIMITS. PLURAL LIMITS. NO, NO, THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M ON.

WELL, IT'S A STYLE GUIDE THING YOU CAN DO. THERE YOU GO.

CAN WE DO THAT IN ELECTIONS? OXFORD COMMAS ARE REQUIRED.

YOU DON'T NEED A COMMA THERE. OKAY. NO. YOU DO.

IT'S OXFORD COMMA. YOU SAID YOU DO. IT'S MORE SPECIFIC.

YEAH. DO WE NEED EXTRA SPECIFICITY? DOESN'T COUNT TOWARDS WORK.

WHAT'S THAT? WELL, COMMAS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE LIKE PEPPER. YOU DON'T WANT TO PUT TOO MUCH PEPPER. OKAY, LET'S NOT GET INTO GRAMMATICAL.

SO BOTTOM LINE, WHAT'S BEST FOR THE BALLOT? COMMA.

NO COMMA. THE COMMENTS CLEARER, BUT COMMA SETS IT OFF AS A STANDALONE ISSUE, I THINK.

STANDALONE ISSUE. OKAY. YEAH. OKAY. OKAY. ADD THE PEPPER.

ANYTHING ELSE? COUNCIL MEMBER ON THE. I LIKE PEPPER.

[02:40:04]

I DON'T THINK THAT'S, I DON'T THINK THAT'S SUBJECT TO ARTICLE 27. OKAY.

IT'S NOT ARTICLE 27. ALL RIGHT. SO THAT'S THE BALLOT QUESTION.

COULD YOU WAIT. YOU'RE GOOD. NO I'M GOOD. COUNCIL MEMBER CASTLE.

COUNCIL MEMBER. OKAY. YEP. AND THEN NEXT IS THE I THINK YOU SAID THE BALLOT LANGUAGE.

ELEANOR. YES. SO LET'S GO THROUGH. SO. WELL, THAT IS A BIG, BIG DOCUMENT.

WELL, CAN I ASK SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT IT? YEAH.

YES. I'M RUNNING THE MEETING. WELL, YOU SAID I THOUGHT I HAD THE FLOOR.

YOU TURNED IT. I SAID WE'RE GOING TO GO ONE BY ONE. AND I CALLED ON YOU FOR NUMBER ONE.

NUMBER ONE IS APPROVED BALLOT QUESTION AND BALLOT MEASURE TAX. I'M GOING TO.

SO NOW WE'RE GOING TO NUMBER TWO. HE'S GOING TO, GOING TO ON 1.B STILL ON ONE MAYOR.

I'M LOST THEN. WELL THAT'S ONE BALLOT QUESTION.

BALLOT MEASURE. THOSE ARE TWO THINGS. THOSE ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. MAYOR. I'M WITH YOU NOW.

WELL, I APOLOGIZE. YOU'RE STILL IN CHARGE. WHAT DO YOU WANT TO DO? I WANT YOU TO GO AHEAD, SINCE WE'RE NUMBER ONE. ALL RIGHT. OKAY. BALLOT MEASURE TEXT.

THERE'S A LOT THERE. COULD WE AT LEAST TALK ABOUT THAT AND ASK SOME QUESTIONS IF YOU COULD PULL IT UP? YOU LOOK AT IT. WE HAVE TO PULL UP THE ADMIN REPORT, I THINK.

YEAH. LET ME. OKAY.

OKAY. OKAY. SO THE BEGINNING OF IT IS.

WHAT? IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE KIND OF HALFWAY THROUGH A PAGE IS OUR BEGINNING OF THE PAGE THAT BEGINS THE BALLOT QUESTION.

IT'S THE FULL. IT'S THE FULL RESOLUTION. OKAY.

SO THE WHOLE RESOLUTION, THE WHOLE RESOLUTION IS GOING TO BE ATTACHED TO AS THE BALLOT MEASURE TEXT.

I PERSONALLY THINK THIS IS ATTACHMENT. SO WHAT HAPPENS IS THIS BALLOT TEXT WILL BE THE EXHIBIT FOR THE RESOLUTION.

AND THIS WILL GO ON OUR WEBSITE. AND ON THE IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS WE'LL HAVE LITTLE COMMENTS SAYING THAT THE IF THEY WANTED THE FULL BALLOT MEASURE TEXT, THEY WOULD GO TO THIS. WE WOULD PUT A LINK, WE'D PUT A WEBSITE, AND THEY WOULD GO TO THIS DOCUMENT.

OKAY, SO I DON'T THINK THIS IS READY AND I DON'T WANT TO WORDSMITH IT TONIGHT.

YEAH. BUT YEAH, I MEAN, I'LL JUST ASK SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT IT.

WE'LL GO FROM THERE. GO AHEAD. YEAH. ALL RIGHT.

SO THAT'S EXHIBIT A, THE DRAFT BALLOT MEASURE TEXT.

I DON'T SEE IT ALL THE WAY HERE. SO THAT THAT'S IT.

IT'S THIS RESOLUTION THAT GOES FOR, YOU KNOW, FROM THAT PAGE ALL THE WAY FINISHING.

YES, 46 PAGES. WITH THE TEXT UNTIL. IT'S THE CODE AMENDMENTS AND THE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TEXT CHANGES.

BUT THERE'S A SUMMARY OF EACH OF THOSE CHANGES PRIOR TO IT DISPLAYING WHAT THE CHANGE IS AND THEN IT BREAKS IT DOWN.

SOME OF THE AMENDMENTS WERE MADE IN NOVEMBER 2024 WHEN WE, THE COUNCIL TOOK ACTION ON THE HOUSING ELEMENT IMPLEMENTING.

AND THERE WERE SOME OTHER AMENDMENTS WITHIN THOSE THAT DID NOT FALL UNDER THE HOUSING ELEMENT.

THE OTHER SET OF AMENDMENTS WILL BE FROM THE ADOPTION ON AUGUST 4TH.

OKAY. THANK YOU. AND THEN ON PAGE 44 OF 46, IF YOU JUST JUMP TO THAT REAL QUICK.

THANKS. IF YOU COULD SCROLL UP TO PAGE 40. KEEP GOING A LITTLE FURTHER.

044 RIGHT THERE. SO THE SCHOOL UPDATES, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THAT OUT FOR THE REASONS WE JUST DISCUSSED TONIGHT.

I THINK SO. YOU THINK SO? YES. OKAY. AND THEN THIS WHOLE THING TO THE MAYOR'S POINT IS THIS.

WE HAVEN'T GONE THROUGH LINE BY LINE. IS THIS ACCURATE? IS THIS WHAT WE APPROVED? IS THIS IT? THIS IS WHERE WE'RE GOING? IT'S WHAT'S BEEN DISCUSSED. THE THE FIRST HALF OF IT WAS APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL IN NOVEMBER 2024, THE PHASE TWO PORTION WILL BE ADOPTED ON AUGUST 4TH, BUT IT'S CONSISTENT WITH ALL THE ITEMS THAT WE'VE PRESENTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL OVER THE NUMEROUS MEETINGS. THAT INCLUDES INCREASING THE AACAP FAR FROM 0.6 TO 1.5, CHANGING THE ASSOCIATED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND INCREASING THE INDUSTRIAL ZONE NORTH OF MANHATTAN BEACH, NORTH OF MANHATTAN BOULEVARD FROM 0.7 TO 1.0.

AND THEN A FEW OTHERS. THERE'S SOME PROPERTIES ON PCH ALSO.

AND THAT'S BEEN REVIEWED BY YOU AND YOUR STAFF AND REREVIEWED TO ENSURE IT CAPTURES WHAT THE COUNCIL APPROVED.

[02:45:01]

I SEE THE MAYOR'S BODY LANGUAGE IS SHOWING QUESTIONS.

BUT I'M ASKING YOU FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE. SO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT ONE, I THINK WE'VE DETERMINED TO TAKE IT OUT. YEAH. AND THIS IS A DRAFT. SO THE COUNCIL'S NOT ADOPTING THIS RESOLUTION TONIGHT.

WE'RE SHARING IT IN ADVANCE TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ON IT.

YEAH. IT DOES INCLUDE THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE AACAP THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THE INCREASE IN FAR.

YEAH. IF IT WERE JUST THE THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING BEING INCREASED OR THE SETBACKS BEING CHANGED, I DON'T THINK THAT ALONE WOULD TRIGGER ARTICLE 27.

THAT'S NOT TRIP GENERATING, BUT THE FAR INCREASES.

OUR THOUGHT ON PACKAGING IT UP IS THAT WE, WE WOULD NOT ALLOW THAT BUILDING ENVELOPE UNLESS THE FAR GETS APPROVED.

SO IT MAKES SENSE TO HAVE IT AS ONE KIND OF CONSOLIDATED ITEM.

ONE CONSOLIDATED ITEM. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THOSE WERE MY ONLY QUESTIONS.

THE POINT BEING, WE JUST WANT TO ENSURE WHAT'S IN HERE ACCURATELY REFLECTS WHAT THE COUNCIL APPROVED, THAT IT COMPLIES WITH WHATEVER NEEDS TO BE COMPLIED WITH WITH RESPECT TO THE ELECTION AND OUR OWN INTERNAL PROCESSES, PROCEDURES AND REDONDO BEACH LAWS. IN OTHER WORDS, THAT THIS IS GOOD TO GO.

SO THAT'S IT. AND IF YOU'RE SAYING IT IS AND YOU'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO SCRUB IT AND COME BACK, THEN. YEAH, WE'LL GO THROUGH IT ONE MORE TIME LINE BY LINE.

AND LIKE I SAID, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT ONE, I CAUGHT THAT WHEN I WAS GOING THROUGH IT AGAIN TODAY, SO IT SHOULD NOT BE INCLUDED. OKAY. BECAUSE THE GOAL IS HOPEFULLY TO GET THIS PASSED AND THEN HAVE NO ISSUES LIKE, HEY, WE'RE DONE. AND WE ARE DEFAULTING, I THINK AS SORT OF MARC ALLUDED TO HERE ON, ON ADDING THINGS THAT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, USE THE WORD WOBBLERS OR WOBBLETTES.

YEAH. YOU KNOW, WE'RE ERRORING ON THE SIDE OF OVER DISCLOSURE HERE.

OKAY. CANDIDLY, I THINK YOU COULD MAKE A CASE THAT SOME OF THESE THINGS COULD BE EXCLUDED AND IT COULD BE MORE FOCUSED ON SOME OF THE BIGGER ITEMS. I JUST DON'T THINK WE WANTED TO RISK MISSING ANYTHING CRITICAL.

LET'S NOT MISS ANYTHING CRITICAL. OKAY. WELL, THANKS FOR DOING IT. THAT'S ALL I GOT. MAYOR. YEAH. AND JUST SO MY, MY CONCERN WITH INCLUDING MY UNDERSTANDING AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, PHASE ONE, WE'VE ALREADY DONE WITH THE HOUSING ELEMENT, CORRECT? IT'S BEEN ADOPTED IN THE HOUSING ELEMENT CHANGES.

CHANGES NECESSARY TO IMPLEMENT THE HOUSING ELEMENT ARE EXEMPT FROM ARTICLE 27.

THERE WERE SOME OTHER AMENDMENTS THAT WE MADE AT THAT TIME THAT WERE RELATED TO HOUSING THAT WE WANT TO DO CONCURRENTLY, BECAUSE WE THOUGHT OTHERWISE WE WOULD BE PRECLUDED FROM DOING THAT AT A LATER DATE, BECAUSE IT WOULD BE REDUCING ALLOWED DENSITY WITHIN THE CITY.

SO WE DID THAT ALL AS ONE ITEM, AND THAT INCLUDED CHANGING THE MIXED USE ZONE ALONG ARTESIA TO COMMERCIAL.

WE DOWN ZONE SOME OF THE RESIDENTIAL WHERE IT WAS LOWER DENSITY.

SO THERE WERE SOME CHANGES THAT WERE NOT EXEMPT FROM ARTICLE 27 THAT WERE ADOPTED AT THAT TIME.

RIGHT. BUT THOSE SHOULDN'T BE IN THIS RESOLUTION.

SO THEY'RE. WILL CONFUSE VOTERS. THEY'RE GOING TO THINK IT'S IN THERE. I'M CONFUSED BY IT RIGHT NOW.

WHAT'S IN WHAT'S OUT. WELL, IT'S BEEN ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL BUT IT HASN'T BEEN VOTED ON.

DOESN'T HAVE TO BE. RIGHT. I BELIEVE IT DOES BECAUSE.

THEN WHY CALL THAT PHASE ONE? WHY DON'T JUST CALL IT.

THESE ARE THE THINGS YOU'RE VOTING ON. DON'T CONFUSE THEM WITH PHASE ONE AND PHASE TWO.

BECAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING THE WAY PHASE ONE WAS ORIGINALLY DESCRIBED WAS THAT'S AN ACTION TAKEN BY THE COUNCIL AND WAS IMPLEMENTED AS REQUIRED BY THE HOUSING ELEMENT.

AND IF I'M MISSING IT, THEN ONE SOLUTION TO THAT MAY BE JUST TO SIMPLY NOT.

IF. IF THAT TERM OF ART, PHASE ONE IS SOMETHING THAT'S STICKING IN YOUR VERNACULAR.

IN THAT RESPECT, MAYBE WE SHOULD JUST DISCUSS IT AS ACTIONS TAKEN ON NOVEMBER 5TH AND AND 12TH OF 2024, SUBJECT TO ARTICLE 27. YEAH, THAT THAT MAKES SENSE BECAUSE THE THE PHASE ONE WAS PRIMARILY ASSOCIATED WITH THE HOUSING ELEMENT CHANGES.

THESE WERE SOME OF THE SECONDARY CHANGES THAT WE DID CONCURRENTLY.

THAT'S GOING TO LOSE. I MEAN, YEAH, THERE WERE SORT OF COMMERCIAL LOST ON ME.

YEAH. IT'S COMMERCIAL RELATED CHANGES THAT HAD A HOUSING ELEMENT TONE.

RIGHT. BUT THEY WEREN'T EXPRESSLY HOUSING ELEMENT.

IT WAS. YEAH. CHANGING SOME ZONES THAT ALLOW RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL AND THEN SOME REDUCING OF ALLOWED PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY VOTING ON.

YEAH. SO I THINK WE JUST TALK ABOUT THE TIMING RATHER THAN CALLING IT PHASE ONE AND PHASE TWO, WE CAN DESCRIBE,

[02:50:05]

SUPPORT IT THAT WAY. I DON'T SUPPORT IT WITH THE PHASE ONE AND PHASE TWO.

WE CAN REFRESH THOSE TITLES. OKAY. COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI, DID YOU HAVE YOUR HAND UP ON THAT ONE? NOPE. COUNCIL MEMBER CASTLE. I JUST HAD JUST TALKING WITH ONE OF MY DISTRICT MEMBERS.

IF THERE WAS SOME WAY, BECAUSE THIS IS SO LONG, 46 PAGES, IF THERE WAS SOME WAY TO SORT OF EITHER HAVE A TABLE OF CONTENTS OR SOMETHING SO THAT PEOPLE COULD SEE, COULD EASILY FIND THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD TO FIND OUT WHAT'S GOING TO IMPACT AROUND THEM.

THAT WAS JUST ONE REQUEST THAT I HAD FROM SOMEONE.

I'M NOT SURE HOW EASILY. YEAH, WE COULD DO THAT.

OKAY. I CAN LIKE AN INDEX. EXACTLY. SO IF IT'S, YOU KNOW, UP IN DISTRICT FIVE VERSUS RESOLUTION WITH AN INDEX, WELL, WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO PUT IT IN THE REZONE NECESSARILY. WE COULD ADD OTHER RELATED YOU COULD COLLECTION MATERIAL AT THAT LINK, THE WEB PAGE. I MEAN THIS WHOLE THING IS GOING TO HAVE A MEASURE DD AN ARTICLE 27 ANALYSIS THAT'S GOING TO GO INTO MUCH MORE DETAIL THAN THIS THING IS, AND IT WILL BE HOPEFULLY. TABLE OF CONTENTS AND AND ALL OF THAT.

SO YOU CAN GO TO THE SPECIFICS AND LOOK AT THE CHANGES AND THE IMPACTS, RIGHT.

AND NOT HAVE TO DIG THROUGH ALL 46 PAGES LOOKING FOR YOUR BLOG KIND OF THING.

THAT'S ALL. SO WE'RE GOING TO OVER THERE'S A YEAH, THERE'S A LOT OF INFORMATION.

YEAH, THERE'S NO QUESTION ABOUT THAT. I JUST THINK WE NEED TO BE VERY CLEAR.

THIS IS WHAT YOU'RE VOTING ON, NOT ON THIS DATE.

WE APPROVED PHASE ONE THAT INCLUDED HOUSING ELEMENT STUFF.

THAT'S JUST GOING TO CONFUSE PEOPLE. JUST WHAT WHAT ARE THEY VOTING ON RIGHT NOW? WELL, THE CHALLENGE TOO, IS SOME OF WHAT YOU'RE AND THIS ACTUALLY WE HEARD FROM CRAIG STILL TOO.

TYPICALLY YOU WANT THE ACTION THAT YOU'RE TAKING IN THE BALLOT IS SUPPOSED TO BE REFLECTIVE OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

SO WE'RE EMBEDDING OUR RESOLUTIONS TEND TO PROVIDE A HISTORIC SOME, YOU KNOW, SORT OF DESCRIPTION OF EVENTS.

AND THAT'S WHERE YOU'RE SEEING SOME OF THAT. SO I THINK IN THIS CASE, WE JUST NEED TO WORK ON PHRASING THAT DOESN'T ELICIT MAYBE A DIFFERENT FEELING, BUT WE WANT THE RESOLUTION TO BE IN ITSELF SELF-EXPLANATORY FROM A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE.

ABSOLUTELY. ABSOLUTELY. JUST NOT CONFUSING. RIGHT.

OKAY. IS YOUR HAND STILL UP? COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI.

NO. OKAY. OKAY. CAN WE MOVE TO TWO, OR DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU WANTED ON? OKAY. CAN YOU BRING UP WHAT'S NUMBER TWO? LETTER DESIGNATIONS.

WE HEARD IT'S ART, THEY'LL THEY'LL CONSIDER IT.

BUT IF A COUNTY THING OVERRIDES IT, THEN THEY GO TO AR.

I DON'T REALLY HAVE A PREFERENCE BETWEEN SECOND CHOICE AND THIRD CHOICE. I'M OPEN TO OTHER THINGS, TOO. OKAY.

ANYONE ELSE? THAT'S FINE. OKAY. NUMBER THREE, I THINK YOU PROPOSED THAT YOU AND COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT WILL DRAFT IT, AND I'M OPEN. I THINK THERE'S POWER TO ALL FIVE OF.

I THINK WE'RE LIMITED TO FIVE. CORRECT? CORRECT.

SIGNATURES. I THINK IT'S POWERFUL FOR THE WHOLE COUNCIL SIGNS OFF ON IT.

BUT IF ANY OF YOU DON'T, I DON'T MIND. I'M NOT GOING TO BE HERE.

TO SIGN OFF? OKAY. WELL, THEN I'LL BE THE FIFTH.

YEAH. WHEN IS THE SIGN OFF? THE 14TH. SORRY. WHAT WAS IT? WHEN IS THE SIGN OFF? THE 14TH. WHEN'S THE FIRST DAY WE COULD SIGN OFF ON IT? SO I NEED THE FORM FILLED OUT WITH THE 300 WORD STATEMENT AT 5:30 ON AUGUST 14TH.

WHAT WAS THE FIRST DAY I COULD GET IT BACK TO YOU? WHAT DAY ARE YOU GOING TO GIVE IT TO ME? GIVE ME THE FORM. YOU'RE GOING TO GET IT AUGUST 5TH.

SO I CAN GET IT BACK TO YOU ON AUGUST 6TH. ARE YOU AVAILABLE ON AUGUST 6TH OR THE 14TH? NO, NO, I WILL BE OUT OF TOWN. OKAY. OKAY. UNABLE TO SIGN.

YOU CAN DO A DIGITAL SIGNATURE. YOU CAN ACTUALLY SIGN IT AND FAX IT AND THEN GIVE IT TO US THE NEXT DAY.

I WANT TO FIND A FAX MACHINE. YEAH. WELL, MY EMAIL.

MY EMAIL. DIGITAL. A DIGITAL PHOTOGRAPH OF A SIGNATURE OR.

YEAH. OKAY. OKAY. I'M HAPPY TO TAKE A PHOTO. YEAH, WE'LL FIGURE IT OUT IF THAT'S ACCEPTABLE.

OKAY. AND IF THAT FALLS THROUGH, I CAN SIGN YOU.

OKAY? I'M A BACKUP. DOUBLE CHECK WITH THE COUNTY.

I'LL KNOW IF YOU'RE ALLOWED. I FORGOT WE'RE DOING WITH THE COUNTY, SO. YEAH. OKAY.

OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE WE NEED ON THAT? I THINK THAT'S IT.

OKAY. CAN. DO YOU NEED A MOTION TO THAT EFFECT? THIS JUST STAFF DIRECTION I THINK. YEAH. I THINK WE'RE ON DIRECTION.

YEAH. IF YOU'D LIKE. SURE. I MEAN, I THINK I THINK WE HEARD THE INPUT TONIGHT.

WE'LL WE'LL ACCOMMODATE AND YOUR ACTION ITEMS ARE ON THE FOURTH.

SO TONIGHT WAS A CONVERSATION. LOOK IF YOU UNDERSTAND IT AS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT WE DON'T NEED TO DO I, I UNDERSTAND. YEAH. YES. OKAY. NOW BEFORE WE FINALIZE THAT, LET'S OPEN IT UP TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC.

DO WE HAVE ANY CARDS ON THIS ONE? OKAY. ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE?

[02:55:13]

FIRST OF ALL, I THINK YOU'RE IF YOU'RE GOING TO CALL THIS A BALLOT MEASURE CALL, WHY DON'T YOU CALL IT GP OR RGP LIKE GENERAL PLAN OR REDONDO GENERAL PLAN.

THAT'S WHAT THIS IS. KEEP IT SIMPLE. I'M GLAD THAT YOU'RE MAKING SOME ATTEMPTS TO.

THE LANGUAGE IN THE BALLOT LANGUAGE ITSELF IS A LOT BETTER.

I WAS TALKING A COUPLE OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS. I WAS VERY CONFUSED.

MAYOR LIGHT, I TOTALLY AGREE. WE NEED TO TELL PEOPLE WHAT THEY'RE VOTING FOR.

IT'S A HECK OF A LOT MORE SENSE. AND ONE THING THAT I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE ALL, WE READ THE STUFF DAY IN AND DAY OUT.

AND, YOU KNOW, LIKE I SAID, I GO TO A, I KNOW YOU GUYS READ A LOT OF PAGES WHEN YOU GET COUNCIL MEETINGS, BUT, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S MEETINGS WE HAD, WE HAD 250 PAGES TO READ THROUGH. YOU'RE ASKING THE PUBLIC TO VOTE YES ON SOMETHING WITH A 46 PAGE ATTACHMENT. WHO'S GOING TO READ THAT? I DON'T KNOW, BUT I THINK YOU NEED TO MAKE IT A LOT EASIER FOR PEOPLE TO FIND STUFF ON IT.

THERE WAS MENTION OF HAVING AN INDEX, BUT I THINK BEYOND THAT, YOU NEED TO HAVE SOMETHING ON THE CITY WEBSITE WHERE YOU CAN SAY, HERE'S THE LINK, HERE'S THE GENERAL PLAN. WHAT AREA IS IMPORTANT TO YOU? DIAMOND STREET, PCH. I CAN SEE WHAT'S GOING TO GO ON IT.

IF YOU WANT TO GO ON ARTESIA, YOU WANT TO SEE WHERE THE OBAGI 20 STORY TOWERS ARE GOING TO BE BUILT? YOU COULD LOOK AT THAT. HE'S LOOKING AT ME KIND OF FUNNY, BUT JUST TO MAKE IT EASIER TO FIND STUFF.

NOT 20. YEAH, I KNOW. EXACTLY. BUT NONETHELESS, I MEAN, JUST TO MAKE IT A LOT EASIER FOR PEOPLE TO FIND STUFF BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE ASKING ME, WELL, WHAT DOES THIS MEAN? WELL, IT'S A 46 PAGE DOCUMENT BROKEN UP INTO FIVE SECTIONS.

EACH SECTION HAS THESE DIFFERENT SUBSECTIONS WITH IT. ARTESIA AVIATION ARE ONE.

THERE'S A SECTION THAT'S FROM DIAMOND STREET TO 190TH.

THERE'S ANOTHER ONE FROM DIAMOND TO RUBY, AND THEN RUBY TO PCH AND EVERYTHING IN BETWEEN.

ONE OF MY NEIGHBORS AROUND THE CORNER FREAKED OUT BECAUSE HE THINKS THAT BECAUSE THE BUILDING NEXT TO HIM IS GOING TO HAVE AN OVERLAY OR REZONING ON IT, THEY'RE GOING TO TEAR IT DOWN AND BUILD A FIVE STORY BUILDING ON IT. IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

BUT, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE KIND OF QUESTIONS. YOU'RE GOING TO GET THROWN AT YOU. AND JUST LIKE WHEN YOU GUYS WERE TALKING ABOUT THE FAR AND WHATNOT, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE THE PUBLIC NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND THIS.

THERE'S A LOT OF THERE'S SOME FOLKS OUT THERE WHO LIKE, LIKE THIS TO FAIL AND THEY'RE ALWAYS OUT THERE.

BUT I THINK IF YOU MAKE IT MORE EASY FOR PEOPLE TO FIND STUFF AND INDEX SOMETHING ON A WEBSITE, YOU CAN LOOK STUFF UP WITH, JUST GOING TO MAKE IT A LOT EASIER TO SELL IT THROUGH. AND AGAIN, I THINK THE MAIN THING IS CALL IT OUR GENERAL PLAN OR REDONDO GENERAL PLAN.

THEY'LL GET IT IF YOU DO THAT. ANYWAY, JUST SOME SUGGESTIONS.

THANKS. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? ANYBODY ONLINE? THERE'S NO ONE ONLINE. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE? OKAY. COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI. I THINK MR. CRAIG BRINGS UP SOME FAIR POINTS.

I'M OPEN TO GP, ALTHOUGH I THINK THAT THIS THE ART REALLY HAS SOME IDENTIFICATION WITH IT IN NORTH REDONDO AND SOME PASSION, AND I THINK PEOPLE WILL TURN OUT BIG FOR THAT, GETS THEIR JUICES GOING, GETS MY JUICES GOING.

I WILL ALSO ADD I DO APPRECIATE YOUR POINT ABOUT THIS 46 PAGE DOCUMENT.

WHEN WE RAN MEASURE FP MR. WITZANSKY, WE PROVIDED A FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT MEASURE FP OR INFORMATIONAL.

COULD WE DO THE SAME THING FOR THIS MEASURE? YES, WE CAN PROVIDE FACTUAL INFORMATION.

AND EASILY ACCESSIBLE ON THE CITY WEBSITE. WE CAN.

TO COUNCIL SO THAT WE CAN DISSEMINATE IT TO RESIDENTS.

YEAH. AS LONG AS IT'S FACTUAL AND NOT, YOU KNOW, PURPOSELY PERSUASIVE INFORMATION.

AND DON'T FORGET EACH VOTER WILL BE MAILED AN ARTICLE 27 ANALYSIS THAT COMPLIES WITH ARTICLE 27.

IT'S LARGELY AROUND TRAFFIC, BUT. THAT'S GOING TO BE A LOT, A LOT OF PAGES OR MAIL TO LINK TO BE WE DON'T HAVE TO MAIL IT THE TEXTS TO THEM. YEAH.

THAT CHANGED FROM THE CHARTER AMENDMENT, RIGHT.

SO, BUT WE WILL HAVE, WE WILL PROVIDE THEM ACCESS TO GET IT OR THEY CAN CALL THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE AND GET A HARD COPY MAYBE ON THE INFORMATION.

WE CAN PROVIDE A QR CODE SO THEY CAN SEE THE WHOLE THING.

OH I ACTUALLY YEAH WE CAN. WELL I'D HAVE TO GET THE COST FOR A POSTCARD OR SOMETHING ON THAT.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. IT'S IT'S VOLUMINOUS. THERE'S NO QUESTION.

IT'S A LOT TO DIGEST. YEAH. SO I QUESTIONED THAT INTERPRETATION OF THE RECENT CHARTER CHANGE.

I'LL HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT BECAUSE WE WERE PRETTY SPECIFIC IN ARTICLE 27 ABOUT MAILING IT TO EVERY VOTER PER THE PER THE CHARTER COMMITTEE REVIEW.

NO, I KNOW I WANT TO GO LOOK AT THAT AND MAKE SURE I AGREE WITH THAT INTERPRETATION, THAT IT APPLIES TO ARTICLE 27, BUT THAT'S OUTSIDE THIS DISCUSSION. WELL, IT'S GOING TO BE A PRETTY BIG PACKET, AS IS ALWAYS HAS BEEN.

[03:00:08]

WE'RE GOING TO ENDEAVOR TO MAKE IT AS CLEAR AS POSSIBLE. AND WE'LL WILL CERTAINLY WORK TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL FACTUAL INFORMATIONAL ITEMS AFTER WE PASS AND HOPEFULLY ADOPT THE RESOLUTION ON THE FOURTH.

SO THAT WON'T IN ITSELF BE THE END OF OUR ABILITY TO TRY TO DEMYSTIFY SOME OF THESE CHANGES THAT THAT'S THE THAT'S THE CHALLENGE.

WHEN YOU KNOW, YOU'VE, YOU'VE GOT TO PUT ALL THE SPECIFICITY OF A GENERAL PLAN UPDATE LIKE THIS INTO A BALLOT MEASURE.

IT'S AN UNUSUAL THING FOR US TO HAVE TO DO. OKAY.

I THINK WE'RE DONE WITHIN THREE THEN. THANK YOU.

YOU GOT WHAT YOU NEED? YEAH, YEAH. I FEEL LIKE WE GOT GOOD, CLEAR DIRECTION.

THANK YOU. OKAY. CITY MANAGER ITEMS. JUST JUST WANTED TO MENTION THAT WE HAVE

[O. CITY MANAGER ITEMS]

THANK YOU. MAYOR. WE ARE DARK THAT EVENING. TUESDAY NIGHT, WE WILL BE BACK AT IT ON THE FOURTH.

GIVEN WHAT THE SCHEDULE HOLDS. I THINK WE CAN SAFELY ADJOURN TO 4:30 TONIGHT FOR CLOSED SESSION RATHER THAN FOUR.

SO THAT'S A POINT OF ORDER. AND WE CURRENTLY ARE LOOKING TO HAVE IT.

IT APPEARS ABOUT FOUR DISCUSSION ITEMS THAT EVENING.

SO IT'LL BE A PRETTY SUBSTANTIVE NIGHT. IT'LL BE FOCUSED ON THOSE ITEMS. GREAT. WELL, WE GET A REMINDER ON? WE WILL. VERSUS 4 4:30.

ON THE REMINDER WILL BE PROVIDED BOTH END OF THIS WEEK AND NEXT.

BUT CLEARLY WHAT WE NEED TO DO FIRST IS ADJOURN TO 4:30 AS OPPOSED TO FOUR AS STATED ON THE AGENDA.

THAT'S ALL I HAVE. OKAY. MAYOR AND COUNCIL REFERRALS TO STAFF.

[Q. MAYOR AND COUNCIL REFERRALS TO STAFF]

COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT. NO. NONE. AND I HAVE NONE MYSELF.

SO WITH THAT, I WILL TAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN.

MOVE TO ADJOURN TO 4:30 NEXT MEETING AUGUST 4TH.

SECOND. OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. ALL FOR? AYE. ANYONE OPPOSED? OKAY. WE ARE ADJOURNED TO AUGUST 4TH.

WHAT IS THE DATE? AUGUST 4TH. FOURTH. AUGUST 4TH, 04:30 P.M.

FOR CLOSED SESSION. 6 P.M. FOR OPEN SESSION RIGHT HERE IN CITY HALL.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE'RE JUST GETTING.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.