okay folks it's uh 12 30 time to get this show going uh good afternoon welcome to the glendale city council workshop session of january 26 2021. this meeting is called to order do we have a council member aldama on the telephone right now he's not on the phone okay when when he when he gets on the phone let us know so we can mark his attendance we will do a tenants roll call we're going to start with council member al doma is not on the phone council member clark here council member melner councilmember thomas off here council member turner vice mayor hugh yeah and i'm present so uh with that we'll move right along uh miss borrower can you introduce item number one for us please thank you council item of special interest small cell and 5g technology follow-up good afternoon mayor members of the council here to provide the staff report on this will be don bessler our chief capital improvement officer and he'll be assisted with ryan lee our intergovernmental program manager thank you mr phelps mayor wires members of council we are here today to bring back an item a council item of special interest that you first heard about at your september 22nd 2020 workshop at that workshop there was consensus for us to continue to tease out elements of this issue and then come back to the council that's why we're here today staff met with the council working group which involved uh council member malnar council member tomachoff and councilmember aldama in that effort we developed a scope of work that was approved by that group and the city manager and then we also have provided a council report and that approved scope of work in the packet as background information just wanted to give you a little bit of a visual during the september 22nd workshop there was a lot of question and a lot of um interest in what was really happening in the marketplace with this type of technology specifically in glendale and so we've put this visual in the packet today just as a some background information as of today there are 302 small g towers that are deployed within the city limits of glendale and there are another 84 that are currently permitted for installation we understand as we mentioned at the september 22nd workshop and the council members have certainly expressed that this is really a bellwether issue for how we manage our right-of-way it touches on quality of life it touches on economic development and it touches on local control issues on how we have local governance into our future today we're going to just go through the scoping statement with you and ask for your concurrence and your direction on how we might move forward i'm going to turn it over in a moment to ryan lee in that scoping statement we talk about the goals of what we would try to accomplish the deliverables the timeline under which this could occur and the administration which is essentially just the staff effort that would be involved to continue to advance this issue and with that i'm going to turn it over to ryan thank you don mayor and council let's now walk through the goals that staff is proposing today and as mr bessler noted we are seeking your feedback and ultimately we wish to receive consensus from the council to ensure that we're properly focused on the concerns of our residents and the direction from the council so the first goal from staff is to increase public awareness this goal is the greatest opportunity to address the health and safety concerns of our residents we've discussed before that the market is driving many of the decisions on where to deploy wireless infrastructure and without the public health expertise it's important that we bring the community and our service providers together to address their concerns and reduce any worries that may exist and so we're hoping to through many collaborative efforts both with staff and some plans we'll discuss later today we hope to improve and increase the public awareness the next goal is to formalize our policy agenda on this issue and so as we do each year we and as we did back in december last month we brought forth our legislative agenda and in that legislative agenda we focus on a few key issues that give us the greatest flexibility to be able to address individual items like this and so in our legislative agenda we have land use planning and this fits in really well with our agenda and so we will continue to make this a priority from the council the next goal is to engage our federal agencies to provide the most current public health information as we've discussed in the september 22nd workshop there's a lot of discussion taking place around the country regarding the fcc's involvement in wireless deployment and in the lack of standards and study regarding health and safety there are if you travel all across the country you're going to hear states sharing the same concerns we do and so our goal is to use our relationships through the u.s conference of mayors and the national league cities and also our federal delegation to engage with the fcc and see if we can get some fcc staff available so that as we receive concerns and as we try to work through issues from our residents and from the council we have the experts there available for us so that we can be a resource the next goal is to work collaboratively with the region and the state to strengthen our our control our local control and we want to be able to continue the dialogue that we need to be able to monitor and understand better the impacts of small cell and so we're committed to continue working with the west valley first and seeing if there are mutual interests and then we can expand from there and as we go through the deliverables later on we'll talk about how we would engage with our counterparts so the next slide is going to be the deliverables and this is how we would accomplish or address our goals and so the the first item is drafting a letter for our congressional delegation as i mentioned earlier that as part of this process intergovernmental programs and engineering will draft a letter to the fcc requesting that a member of their staff be available to the city as a resource for residents to express any questions or concerns about these emerging technologies the next deliverable is to engage with the west valley and determine their level of support for this and obviously if we can get a greater number of cities who have similar concerns we'll be able to have a stronger message mayor i'm going to cover the next two bullets and i would just say um this facebook live event i really liked the way brent stoddard said it back last fall when we were meeting trying to engage our residents remotely because of the pandemic and we tried a facebook live event and i don't remember the exact number but i want to say that we had about 1500 comments that were streaming through that hour and a half period that we were presenting the bond election information and and the and the quote that i remember brent is we want to meet our residents where they are and so we want to continue to move this issue forward in a timely manner so we're thinking that a facebook live event would be a great way to do that we see it as being interactive where residents can call in or email in or chat in to ask questions we see a panel of experts hopefully we have somebody from the fcc that can address the public health and safety questions that continue to proliferate we are looking at inviting experts from the industry that do business in glendale some of the various utilities and have a panel that's moderated so that we can both provide information and then answer questions for people that are trying to engage and ask questions so we see that happening it's one of the deliverables that we would propose if it's successful we certainly could repeat that as well and then we want to continue to provide transparency and information on the permits and the projects that the city approves we had one of the things that came out of the small g issue this past fall was the development of a web link on the engineering website to so residents can go in and see more about 5g technology see where permits have been issued and see the type of aesthetic that they might be experiencing if a 5g permit is issued in their neighborhood so we would want to continue to create that level of transparency for our residents and and keep it uh organic and interactive uh way for us to communicate i'm gonna turn it back over to ryan to talk about the timeline and what action we would request great thank you don and so we're here today on january 26 to present this council item of special interest to the council so we are seeking your consensus as we move forward uh we are shooting for march 21st to host a facebook live event and uh as i've spoken to several of our service providers there has been interest as i've teased this a little bit uh for their involvement so they understand that there's work to do as i spoke to one of our providers earlier today the statement was that the technology has moved forward but the pandemic has slowed down the communication and so there is an understanding and a recognition even amongst our providers that we need to remain focused on communicating with our residents so we're looking to host a facebook live event in march and then this spring we'll begin engaging with our west valley cities first and then expand through other cities to determine what their level of of concern is regarding this matter and so our request before you today is to approve the goals that we've that we've brought before you and the deliverables and to authorize the city manager to proceed and assist with this working group questions good uh yes thank you mayor a couple of questions um on the page that shows the the current cells are those all 5g capable today or those uh a range of different type of cell towers excuse me mayor councilmember malnar i'm just looking to my expert in the audience but i would say i want to say yes those are small cells that may have to be retrofitted for 5g but they were put up originally as a small cell tower is that that's accurate yes uh just a follow-up to that given that is there a permit process for converting to a 5g or can they just simply take a a 4g and convert it to 5g i'm going to say that yes they have to go back to us and talk about the permitting mark is that accurate they have to re-permit if you would sure why don't you come to the microphone normal process would be for them to go ahead and either notify us and work on the existing permit that they have to where they're just doing an upgrade it's it's not a visual upgrade it would just be a matter of updating their data service to that antenna all right thank you i'm a mayor i i i support this very much and um i know we are limited in our authority at the city level at this time but i think this is a good step to at least formalize some things for the public to be more aware of what's going on i'm particularly interested in item two on the goals engage federal agencies to provide most current public health information i think that's one thing that is lacking seriously lacking we need to provide that again if if we're putting these in we need to assure our citizens that they're safe and um and i have we were told that at our last meeting in september that there's just not a lot of information out there uh but i'd like to us to engage in the federal with the federal agencies to really push on that uh to make sure that we we can communicate the safety of these devices thank you thank you thank you mayor um is this microphone working i guess it is okay um unfortunately in addition what council member melner said fcc's ruled on microwaves and other issues but they have not ruled on 5g they've really avoided really addressing the issue safety issue period so hopefully maybe there will be a change with the change in leadership but a change in philosophy there with the fcc hopefully um i do want to ask though do we have our or are we able to determine how much more infrastructure is going to be needed in glendale in order to actually deliver 5g mayor a council member i'm not sure we're able to exactly answer that but i would say that glendale has a significant amount of fiber on the fiber side to support 5g and as you can see from this this map there is a proliferation of antenna but as you also know this is market driven so all of those don't represent necessarily one carrier and so i i couldn't give you a hard answer on that but that's something we can certainly look into but i i think you're going to continue to see the market drive speed and economy of scale and you're going to continue to see this sort of a quest for these installations mayor if i could continue so it's my understanding though that because 5g is so much more powerful that it it it requires more uh towers or small sites in order to deliver signal it you can't have things as far apart as you could for 3g or 4g is that true mayor council member i'm going to say generally that's correct the to try to connect the distance close that gap in the distance is one of the things that makes the technology at any g work better i'm not expert enough to say that 5g requires a shorter spacing i haven't heard that but we can look into that to get you an answer all right thank you mayor and i have a couple other things um do we do we i don't think we do um provide some sort of or are we able to require the contractors like we do with mac pro on transportation projects to notify residents i don't know if we're even allowed to do that i know that the that the legislature and cities came to some sort of an agreement several years ago that really cost the cost of cities 220 bucks per site a year on leases i don't know what other i don't know exactly what was you know negotiated back and forth what the result of that was i don't know one of the biggest things that i hear from residents is where did that come from it's just you know dropped into their neighborhood with little literally no notification and so i don't even know for if we're able to do that but have some sort of a mac pro you know where they put door hangers and tell people hey this is going to this is this is going to happen you know over here mayor council member tomlichoff thank you for that that was one of the big wins that we actually got out of this issue last fall when we were working it council member aldama brought up the fact that there was a very poor effort of neighborhood notification in one of his in one of his neighborhoods in his district it caused us to really peel back the onion on what we actually require and it's what you think some of the carriers and providers are very good about it and more sophisticated and some are less and then when they subcontract out their work it becomes even more distance from that good interaction that you want between the city the service provider and the resident and so we do have the ability to do that i believe we have a 10-day waiting period that notification has to be put out from when we approve the permit they have to have the door hangers out in the work site i think it's 300 feet of where the works occurring and they have to then wait 10 days so that we are able and they are able has both of our contact information for residents to ask questions should they have any okay uh mayor one more if i could um i know um some of that it did happen uh i know you're well aware of the issue at station 156 with the obsolete poll being replaced by i realized there was no actual no permit because it's an existing lease but i imagine that sort of thing is going to be happening in other locations around the city where the the pole is obsolete or it's not capable it doesn't have enough capability whether for the signal or even for the carrier to lease lease off and generate revenue with that site so i don't know exactly what whether even if there's not maybe there is a permit required but i mean and i know we did approve that i know we had to approve because it was higher so there will there still is an approval process if it's if it's in a different spot or or larger or something like that there still is an approval process the issue with the station 156 is that it was um it was on a city site so there was there was no neighborhood process so i would like to at least consider because there's possibility this is going to happen on other city sites that we follow the same notification process that we would on a on a privately owned site mayor council member i think we learned some lessons about how that project emerged through several different city departments and we we understand that airing on the side of transparency and inclusion is always the best course of action for us so we will continue to work with our new development services director to make sure that between the engineering department and his department that there's a really clear line of sight between how permits are issued it gets a little bifurcated and a little odd but it doesn't mean that we can't do better and we we will do that okay thank you that's it for me mayor mr turner thank you mayor um actually i was going to raise the same point that councilmember thomas just raised about the notification so i'll pass on that when i'm i'm satisfied with what i've heard then my other question would be about the aesthetics of these facilities i've seen a variety of different poll styles and that sort of thing what some some hardly notice a difference at all others have you know big bulbs and other things on the top what can we expect or what can our residents expect as this goes out are we going to try to standardize poll styles or anything or is it going to be the wild west mayor council member turner thank you for the question we can we can address the aesthetic to some extent but mostly as it relates to setback heights and line of sight issues that cause public health and safety the industry has proprietary solutions to their antennas these are basically antennas and so they have the flexibility and the the ability to be able to do really what they want within those broad parameters that i just described i think what you are going to see and i think if you recall back to the september 22nd workshop you're going to see the industry respond to the fact and and i'll give you an example of that in just a second but they're going to respond to the fact that they are being challenged with their impact their visual impact for the quality of life in neighborhoods not just the potential public health effects but the visual impacts mr gibson who just came up to the microphone a moment ago and myself and ryan hosted what was the first in what will be a quarterly meeting with our dry utility providers we sent out invitations to all of the people that do business in the valley and particularly glendale ranging from southwest gas to crown castle we had about i believe 11 different firm companies were represented we really got a sense from those folks that they want to do the best they can to partner and to they understand that our issue is always going to be about transparency fairness inclusion sensible those sorts of things so i think you're going to see the industry respond in you're starting to see more monopoles and less of all the peripheral stuff that goes on it i and i would just say the last part i want to say about that is that you know everything's fine unless it affects you so when you know the closer something is to somebody the more discreet we become about or discerning we become about as visual but i think you're going to see the industry and the industry has tried to embrace that to some extent here if i could just follow up and to that point at the rate these are proliferating everybody's going to have one nero it seems like and i would like the city to be in a position of on the resident side on the side of our our neighborhoods about about the design and the the appearance of these poles and their location next to you know street lights and things like that we shouldn't leave it just an individual resident or even a homeowners association to have to fight a you know communication company over this sort of thing so if we can take a more you know neighborhood positive stance on this i would appreciate it and also on the notification the other thing i was going to bring up is that it's important not just to notify the immediate residents but if they're within an hoa that the hoas and the association will get noticed too because i'm sure they get a lot of phone calls when these things start popping up in neighborhoods thank you mark thank you i have two questions that are for follow-up or clarification one has to do with the idea of notification to the city and i believe mr gibson said that when they upgrade um a site they notify us but they don't have to go through permit process so my first question has to do with when they upgrade to 5g or upgrade for whatever reason can the city is does a city have the ability to require a permit so that we know for sure what is occurring where within the city that would be my first question mayor council member clark i think it's on our list of things that we need to look into and follow up i i can't give you an answer today okay and i think it's time is of the essence because while we're sitting around talking about it more 5gs are are coming into the city and rather than being reactive i'd like to see us be a little bit more proactive my second issue has to do with spacing and not in terms of two 5g poles but spacing with regard to a 5g pole and existing homes can the city for example we did it with group homes where we but in that case we we required them to be x amount of feet apart from one another but does the city have the ability to institute spacing requirements that a 5g pole must be i'm just going to be hypothetical 300 feet or 500 feet away from a home do we have that ability to require that kind of infrastructure placing mayor councilmember clark i'm going to say in the way you described it probably we don't have that flexibility we the industry has access to the public utility easement and the right-of-way and whatever regulations we put in place have got to be considered reasonable and customary so if we will always look to try to do this with the least impact to the neighbors i don't know that we have the authority to say in that instance the way you described it that we can create minimum setbacks unless it creates a known public health and safety or line of sight issue or something like that that would be the larger overriding issue but but again that's probably going to require a little bit of legal research that's my fast answer well that that's my concern we have basically no information on the public health safety implications of 5g and if we must rely upon there being an issue of of public health or safety as a mitigator to allow us to space it would seem to me that another very urgent issue becomes the ability to gather as much information as possible on the public health issue with regard to 5g and there may be some recommendations out there that that do state that for the public health they should be x feet away from from a residential neighborhood or an existing home so i would hope that those seem to be two major issues that need to be addressed sooner rather than later thank you okay with that said we have consensus for mr lee to get what he was asking for yes there you go miss bower can you introduce adam to you presentation regarding adding city code to regulate the display of holiday decorations mayor members of the council here to provide staff report is deputy city manager rick st john mayor members of the council uh i think i created the powerpoint out of order uh so if it's okay with the council can we tackle item number three first and then move to item number two and that's my mistake okay question uh item three is holiday decorations i thought item two was just read as holiday decorations yes so uh that's the item we're going to take up now vice mayor uh council member clark i'd like to do the landscaping and whatever's attached with landscaping first and then holiday lights last if that's okay presentation regarding city codes for landscaping and palm tree regulations that's fine thank you sir so these the the presentation i'm giving today is is after much conversation with the code review committee these are recommendations from the code review committee uh on several different items today and what we're talking about really has to do with the health and public safety issues more than it does the aesthetics and so with that in mind i'd like to walk us through a couple of conversations one that we've had several times already and one of our favorite topics is palm trees and so as you know we have a current ordinance that's not enforceable we've known that it's not that it we're not able to enforce it properly through the courts since we lost the case back in 2017 we did bring some proposed language back in 2017 and we've had a couple of workshops over the last year or so talking about palm trees this conversation was had in the code review committee and the focus was on the public health and safety issues surrounding palm trees and so the 10 foot separation which is consistent with the zoning ordinance on health and safety and fire hazard is what has been recommended by the code review committee so the language would read that no responsible person of any property and that is really the component that we were looking to change from the beginning the current ordinance does not clearly identify who's responsible for maintaining the palm tree this language cleans that up and provides for an enforceable ordinance so no responsible person of any property shall allow any palm tree to have dead or try palm fronds within 10 feet of the ground structured fence wall or any other combustible other than the tree from which the fronds have grown that 10 foot separation is consistent with the zoning ordinance and is the recommendation from the code committee i know we've had conversation about 10 feet separation say from left to right but from the ground we want more separation whether that's 15 20 or 25 feet again that delves into the aesthetics of palm trees more than the safety issues and so code review opted to go with 10 feet all the way around so to speak and with that i'm happy to answer any questions and we are seeking consensus on this item questions explain to me the difference in the language between no person shall allow and no reasonable person of any property shall allow how how why does that make a difference mayor members of the council uh council member clark i believe it had to do with who's ultimately responsible and accountable from a civil standpoint because these are civil violations in a court hearing or proceeding the language that no person could mean the landlord it could mean the tenant it could mean other adults that live in the home that don't have any direct responsibility over or under a lease and so this makes it very clear that the person responsible for the property either by lease agreement or by ownership has a responsibility to maintain the palm trees might be a little thing no responsible person of any property how about for any property does that make a difference mayor councilmember clark i'll look to mr bolling he is the expert on these uh smaller pieces or smaller nuances uh thank you mayor councilmember clark again we'll we'll refer that to the law department to see if that makes a difference on the actual code any other questions any other question i do have one question uh mr saint john would so would a uh for example a property manager be a responsible person mayor council member tom chop if they are the designated responsible person for the landscape either by a lease agreement or uh some type of contract with the property owner then yes they could be the ones responsible okay so this would apply to any any scenario where there's palm fronds that are not within this guideline mayor council member donald trump that is what we're trying to accomplish okay thank you you see no questions is there a consensus on this item looking for some heads well i'm good okay okay next mayor thank you the next item we're talking about is required landscape maintenance this really has to do with right away this information was obtained from our right-of-way services division and again has been reviewed by the code review committee and they are recommending these changes the first change is in section 1910 section b which currently says the city shall accept responsibility for the maintenance and operation the review committee believes that that should be changed to the word may because there will be times that the city should not accept the responsibility and that goes to point number one under subsection b which states that arterial and or secondary street right away adjacent to single-family residential areas excluding properties managed by a homeowners association that back back onto the arterial or secondary street have a screening wall constructed on the rear property line so what we're saying is when plans come forward in the city for development it needs to be clearly indicated in those plans who's responsible for common areas or certain aspects of the right-of-way and the example that we use is 55th avenue between orangewood and northern avenue so we know there's a community that sits to the east of 55th avenue they have a common area right away that comes up to the kerber sidewalk of 55th avenue and there is a constructed block wall that creates some level of separation between that community and the actual secondary roadway which is 55th avenue it is unclear who's responsible for the right-of-way so that landscaped area between their block wall on their property and where our city right our our city begins at the curb line and this has been under dispute for quite some time now and these changes to the code help to bring some clarity at least moving forward on who's responsible for certain areas of the right-of-way and with that i'm happy to answer any questions you may have about this particular component yeah right you said at least moving forward so does that mean we're accepting the principle of grandfathering for issues such as 55th avenue mayor councilmember clark when it comes to changes in the zoning ordinance there is a grandfather clause that we have to pay attention to we can't create a situation where we have diminished the value of a property because of a decision made by the city i've spoken at length with mr bailey about these issues and these items and so while i'm i'm what i'm not saying is we can't go back and do something different than we've done in the past or change a decision that's been made in the past what i am saying is we need to be careful about doing that and making sure that we're not diminishing someone's property value in the decision that we're making and so we'll going backward we'll have to look case by case and make a determination case by case with the planning administrator and the development services director of course in conjunction with mr bailey's office about what's in the city's best interest i understand so that means this new language is no solution to the issue you identified on 55th avenue mayor councilmember clark i believe it brings some clarity to the city's position and what we believe to be right but to your point without issuing a citation and taking it to court and and having a judge make a determination it doesn't bring absolute clarity thank you thank you mayor uh just along that same line um are these changes within the zoning code or are they within the nuisance code mayor council member malnour this is the city code when you say the city code because we've talked about the planning and zoning code is this within the planning and zoning ordinance that does grandfather versus a nuisance which our attorney has provided statements that say nuisance codes don't necessarily follow a grandfathering law mayor councilmember malnar this would be of the nuisance sort not the zoning ordinance where there has been case law for grandfathering okay thank you is there consensus for this language these language changes questions first i do have a question so i'm just trying i'm trying to figure out if there's a way we could i mean if there's no agreement in place isn't the property owner always responsible mayor council member tamil chaff there are so many different scenarios throughout the city it's hard for me to answer that question with one absolute so in areas where there is no cut curb gutter or sidewalk in the right of way is an extension of somebody's property you can make one argument in other areas where there is curb battery and sidewalk and some separation between the property line and this right-of-way uh you can make a different argument and then in other situations where the city has taken on the responsibility of maintaining right-of-way maybe when we shouldn't have then that creates more of that grandfather issue that although doesn't there isn't case law that exists today on the nuisance side in conversation with mr bailey that it it is something that someone could argue even changes in the nuisance code that diminish property value you could make an argument that's similar to what we've seen happen in the past in the zoning ordinance and changes that are made in the zoning ordinance okay i guess that answers my question thank you answers on this the last component required landscape maintenance has to do with grass on the sidewalks there was conversation and i need to bring some clarity at this point there was conversation in the code review committee and i got a little ahead of myself with this one had some conversation with mr bailey came up with some language and mr bowling of course came up with some language that we thought would work added it to the presentation and then realized that it had been completely discussed and finalized with the code review committee but council member malnar has asked that i continue to bring it forward today so again focusing on health and safety not necessarily on aesthetics we would like to add language that says in subjection g of 2521 also no person owning or occupying any property fronting on any street alley or public place shall allow grass or weeds to grow in sidewalk cracks curb line openings or other areas adjacent to the property that may create a tripping hazard we believe that this is an enforceable code that allows for not only better aesthetics but a safer environment for people that are either using a wheelchair or other walking device and using sidewalks to get around our city and with that i'm happy to answer any questions you may have on this thank you thank you mayor uh does this apply to parking lots if the property if the property is on a you know i mean like say for example uh i'm thinking particular of a restaurant that's on a main arterial street but the parking lot has cracks in it and there's weeds growing up through it and i'm just wondering it's private property but the business itself is on on an arterial street so i'd just curious how that would work with this mayor council member tom chaff i believe and i'll look to mr bullington or mr bailey for clarification if the business has a parking lot that is part of public property something that we control as a city then we could we could enforce this code on that if it is part of a private parking lot where the tenant has a lease agreement for that land use and the parking use i don't believe we could use this ordinance to control that okay even if they're over six inches mayor council member tamil chaff this incorrect even if it's over six inches because what this does is deals with public space and and a private person's responsibility to maintain or for some level of maintenance even on a public space okay mayor but but to clarify on that the code still has the ability to site a private property parking lot i would think if they have weeds growing up under other ordinances is that correct mayor councilmember councilmember melnar that is correct and that's what mr bolling was just telling me it's the first part of subsection g and i apologize for the confusion i'd like you to clarify for me so if if a residential area has a sidewalk that's maybe the sidewalks four feet off of the street in the person's yard but it's a city-owned sidewalk maintained by the city the net residential citizen has to keep the sidewalks cleared so what is what this is saying mayor that's correct they have to keep it clear from anything that would create a tripping hazard okay so and i guess i'm i'm a little perplexed on this but if if the temperature makes a difference on the sidewalk and all of a sudden you have a bump in the sidewalk two inches and the city doesn't do anything about it that's the city's responsibility not the citizens mayor that is correct this is regarding landscape maintenance i i think that's walking a real fine line myself but thank you mayor um i'm wondering whether it might be then prudent to add parking lot to the to g where it says fronting any street alleyway or public place in the city including the area between the if if we're going if this is enforceable in parking lots i'm wondering whether it should say specifically that parking lots apply here mayor councilmember tom will chaff if there's consensus to add parking lots i'm happy to do that it does say any property though yeah i know but i mean there's quite a few there's quite a few parking lots around that are really uh they're they look like blight so i just think the more specific we are the easier it is to enforce and that's just my opinion i don't know maybe you know whether it makes it easier to enforce or not mayor councilmember tom chomp i think it does bring some clarity to the ordinance and as long as we're making the change it's an easy change to include yeah i i this will be a radical departure for some i think of some of the older neighborhoods that are 50 years old where residents typically have never known that they were responsible for weeds in the sidewalk all of a sudden being cited for weeds in the sidewalk i i think if we are going to move forward we have got to do some kind of educational campaign and let people know that whatever had occurred previously does no longer hold in and if it is a safety issue and the weeds constitute a tripping hazard then it's up to them to remove those weeds otherwise we are going to have a bunch of angry people who are all of a sudden cited after living in their home for 20 30 40 50 years thank you mayor census on this and as well as the change that council member tom chaff suggested with that amendment thank you and now moving on to holiday decorations the code review committee asked for mr bowling and i to look at some language that other cities use to control some of the issues surrounding holiday light and and the decorations surrounding holidays this comes from when our one of our west valley cities we did make some minor changes to what the other west valley city has in their code the other west valley city has a 60-day requirement enforcing on a 60-day requirement with no designated front or back end would mean that when we first observed the violation the person would have 60 days before they're an actual violation if that makes sense because we need to be able to prove that the lights were up for longer than 60 days and so the code review committee decided on the language that says 30 days prior to and 30 days after the relevant holiday and then of course there's language that suggests that the decorations need to be in good order so they need a good condition rather not torn soiled or faded and displayed in a manner to not constitute a hazard to pedestrian or vehicle traffic this would be new language to our code we don't have any existing language for holiday decorations it would be a new section and with that i'm happy to answer any questions you may have okay well i i have a question but i wasn't actually wasn't prepared i was just sitting here thinking so if somebody put up um [Music] american flag penance for uh president's day i don't know what the next patriotic holiday is after that if veteran's day falls in there is it possible that that same pennant could be up almost all year long and you just keep changing the name of the holiday that that pen is up for mayor yes that would be possible there is a small time period and i don't remember the exact math but i think it's sometime in september that you would have to you would be able to have someone take something down actually it wouldn't be in september because of labor day maybe it was august there was a small time period in august where you would be able to force someone to take something down under this code we don't get a lot of complaints about holiday decorations the complaints that we do get are usually about christmas lights and we get a handful of them a year and this code gives us some authority to ask someone to remove holiday or christmas lights essentially from their house when it's not during christmas season okay um so but because it doesn't specifically say christmas lists what if somebody says these are my valentine's day lights and these are my st patrick's day lights and these are my whatever other kind of lights they are i mean how do we how do we manage that so mayor council member tom chaff we did have that discussion in code review these are not complaints that we typically get okay and our response from the people that we deal with in the public usually aren't they don't go that direction i i don't anticipate getting a lot of non-compliance with this one okay thank you you looking for consensus yes sir apparently you have that too thank you if i may i just would like to take a second as a member of the of the code review committee to thank mr st john and mr bowling for their expertise and their input and their assistance on working through this with us it's been really very helpful for us and they've been very very helpful thank you elsio yep can you introduce item three in three we just zoomed right along there didn't we city manager report mayor members of the council i have three quick items to provide you in my report first as you know yesterday was a little bit different for us uh here we had a storm uh come through the area and um as you know we had some microburst in the area and there was damage done kind of throughout the city facilities has been working on repairing a number of different uh items that were identified for example the main library uh two of our skylight ridges were lost almost 50 feet of copper flashing and it's resulted in some leakage in the atrium area we've got some temporary fixes are secure now but we'll be doing some more permanent repairs our fire support building also got a chunk of roof torn off during the storm and we had to move some sensitive equipment that could be damaged by the by this and so that's been accomplished and the roof is currently secure for now but again we'll be having to address this on a more permanent basis fleet services had a leak in the fire bay and it appears to be coming from a skylight and what we're as we're getting assessment down there's likely other damage that we'll discover we know that glendale airport there were several planes that were damaged during the storm if you drive by murphy park you'll notice we have several trees that are down in murphy park and again we'll work to get those repaired as quickly as possible second news i'm i'm really excited to announce that um that our assistant city manager vicki rios has been appointed by the international city managers association to be on a new uh select committee uh regarding it's the uh it's the ac's leadership institute on race equity and inclusion and we're real excited about this uh this is one of our within our strategic planning we have a number of different goals uh in terms of inclusion and we think this is going to be a very valuable so i want to congratulate her for this and we'll keep you appeased as to the effort that she puts in and hopefully some of the good things that we'll learn we'll keep that reported back out to the council the other bit of good news is that we did receive official notification from the u.s treasury department that they reviewed our application and approved 7.7 million dollars in additional emergency rental assistant funding and so we'll be working uh now to uh to get this delivered out um we'll need to have at least 65 of the funding expended by september which we do not have any concerns on based on our past performance and needs here in the community we're doing a final review of the eligibility requirements and we'll develop a program guide to drive the the work that's there finally we're also working with the county and some of the other directly funded agencies to ensure kind of a consistent application of this program but again this is good news it'll be additional money that we can put back into the community to help our citizens that are in most need mr mayor that concludes my report thank you city attorney yes thank you mayor mayor and council uh recently council item special interest for a couple of council members dealt with uh the redistricting and just wanted to bring forward to you that the clerk's office with ms bauer mr lee and the intergovernmental relations department myself have been having regular meetings with regards to this we anticipate coming back to you in the next two to four weeks thank you okay council item special interest next on the agenda is just that members have the opportunity to indicate topics that they'd like to have discussed by this council at a future workshop council member aldom is not president councilmember clark none today thank you thank you councilmember milner uh nothing today thank you thank you councilmember thomas nothing today mayor thank you councilmember turner not today mayor thank you vice mayor nothing mayor i have nothing can i get a motion to go into executive session second motion in a second going to executive session discussion on emotion hearing none all in favor of what i aye do you oppose what name you guys have do you have a motion carries council meetings recess you