Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. The uh will the council please come to order? We're going to start the uh the meeting and let me point out that this Sergeant, could you get some quiet in the back of the room? Let me point out that this is uh will be a meeting of the city council. A special meeting held in Enino in the 11th district, Cindy Msikowsky's district. It's a regular meeting council meeting. Um there are 15 council districts in the city. The regular meeting days are Tuesday, Wednesdays, and Fridays usually at city hall. And uh our regular uh let me point out that uh these meetings are being televised on channel 35 and we're also being monitored by council phone. Those of you who are here tonight, this is being live provided live and our normal meetings that meet at 10:00 in city hall are provided live and then they repeated at 7:30 in the evenings every uh meeting day and then on Sunday all three meetings will be shown. So those of you here tonight, you can see this council meeting on Sunday. Um I' I'd like to first of all introduce uh some of the people that are involved in here. Um, uh, Hal Bernson, who is a C council member of the 12th district. Laura Chick, council member of the third district. >> Did you stand up for Laura? >> I stood up so Mike Fear, council member of the fifth district. >> Mike Hernandez, council district of the first district. Rita Walers, council member of the ninth district. And next to me is Cindy Msikowski. And I'm John Ferraro. That's okay. Was that for me or for Cindy? But I'm Councilman John Ferrell, the fourth district that represents part of the valley. Uh we do have uh next to me is Diane Titus who is our minute clerk who really runs the meetings. Next to her is Judy Clark. Mike Kerry, our city clerk is was standing over there. and Helen Ginsburg also with the city clerk and Pat Healey uh with the city you didn't put Pat Pat's name her uh uh Ron Deon our chief legislative analyst is next to Mike Kerry and uh Daryl Powell who is servicing the council on resolutions and matters is wandering around somewhere. We also have our city sitting right there. >> Oh, there he is. Our city attorney, Gail Weingart, is next to Cindy. We have uh uh three sergeant-at-arms, Ron Curry, Herman Landry, Eddie Banks. They are here to protect me from the council members. I'd also like to introduce Keith Comry, our our city administrative officer. And I'd also like to introduce somebody that served the city many years as a uh a law enforcement officer. He was a deputy chief in the police department, then became chief of the highway patrol. Harold Sullivan, a good friend of many years. Harold, good to have you here. Uh Mark Ridley Thomas is uh not sitting in a seat yet, but we'll get him there. He's a councilman of the eighth district. And just let me point out that there are >> and Ruth Gander of the sixth district just arrived. >> Hour and a half. >> Uh let me point out that the agenda tonight's agenda is in the back. Uh and it gives uh the basic council rules and you might might be helpful to follow the tonight's proceedings. Uh the council members will cons consider the items on the agenda in order. Some of the me me uh items will be approved without discussion. However, if there are an item called special by council members uh that will be held on the desk until we go through the agenda. Members of the public who wish to speak on any items that are requested should complete a speaker card and the speaker cards are scattered around and and hand them to the sergeant- of- arms and he'll are you lobbing me. Uh we also will have a public comment period which will you can speak on any matters that deals with that deals with the council's jurisdiction. When the debates of the items are completed, the chair will instruct the clerk to take an oral roll call. If a member is silent, that is considered an I vote. If they say no, of course, it is a no vote. For tonight's meeting, council members requesting to address the council will raise their hand and I'll try to rec recognize them in the order that they raise their hand. They are allowed three minutes to speak and then the next person will be able to speak. So we'll first start out by everyone standing and we'll pledge allegiance to our flag and I'll ask council member Cindy Msakowski to lead us in the pledge and then I'd ask her to say a few words. >> Everyone put your hand over your heart. 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. >> Let me uh thank uh Cindy for arranging this meeting and I'll ask her now to make uh some remarks. >> Thank you, Mr. President. I'm very pleased to welcome the council here tonight and all the incredibly distinguished people who are in the audience. We have a number of people who represent a number of organizations in the valley, not only in the 11th district, uh, but through the mid valley and out through Wooden Hills. And so it's I'm pleased to see everyone here. And I think one of the tremendous benefits actually of having these council meetings out in the community and particularly in the evening is uh the council gets to experience a lot of the situations that the citizens who live in various areas experience and in particular I think the council has just experienced something we've had a lot of notoriety about and that's the interchange of the 405 and the 101 freeway. So uh perhaps when that motion is brought back in by Councilman Alakcon and myself we'll get some very swift action. Uh there are some people I'd really like to thank as well tonight who helped with this. First uh in the at the Enino Community Center. This is a city facility and we have Lee Marx and Cindy Verdamotti who are here. I don't know there they are still over in the other chamber office. So I appreciate their being here. Obviously Helen Ginsburg and her staff in the city clerk's office did a good job of getting this all set up. And uh for those of you who were here earlier and were able to walk next door to the Encino Chamber of Commerce, the Inino Chamber of Commerce helped host the uh incredible food and meal and reception that was done before we started. So I hope I really would like to thank very much the chamber and that's David Lynn who's the executive director and his staff Judy Block and Stephanie Levit. Thank you. And particular thanks to Shell Mendy uh who is the um president of the Incino Chamber and the entire board. And for those of you who don't know, I think the council might find this interesting. We talk an awful lot about public private partnership. And this building that we're in is exactly that. It was a building originally built by a nonprofit center called the Enino Community Center. And they built it. They raised funds for it. The chamber was very active in raising the funds. And in the 1970s, the building fell into disrepair. Uh needed a lot of work, needed about $100,000. And the community, the nonprofit group said, "Well, let's see if we can interest the city in buying it." And the city in buying it, if we turn it over to them, would agree to put money in to continue to operate as a community center and continue to uh lease long-term the office next door to the Inino Chamber of Commerce. So, what you have here is a is something that did occur in 1970. The city took it over, put some money in. The chamber continues to be there and the chamber's putting money in. In fact, the reception tonight was held in a new office that the chamber built on this city building. So, public private partnerships work very well in the city and I'm glad that we're all here tonight to have a a sense of feeling that. I'd also like to thank uh my staff. I think uh there are a number of them here, but in particular the valley staff who helped organize this get out a lot of the notices. That's Rosalyn Stewart, Ron Blau, Sandy Block, Cheryl Fallon, and Kathy Lunbeck. And for the rest of my staff, just raise your hands in the back. Thank you. Okay. In the front, too. Thank you, Mr. President. >> Okay. Um we're we're going to start usually the public comment period is at the close of the meetings and tonight we're at this special meeting we will start with the public comment at this time and I will call on Gerald Silvers first and then John Rogers would be uh take the microphone there Mr. Silvers. >> Yes. Thank you. I'm I'm Gerald Silver, president of Homeowners of Enino. Good evening. Um there are two items that need to be addressed tonight. One of them I'm going to speak just briefly on the problem at Vanise Airport. I'll wait till I have everyone's attention and the room's quiet. The second has to do with uh a valley vote position. So if Don Schultz and um Richard Laner come up, then they can address that. Let me say tonight it's quite quiet outside because the airplanes are arriving uh to the north and taking off to the north so you don't have that horrendous noise. Let me tell you we have a severe serious noise problem from Vanise airport and ultimately the responsibility is going to rest with you in terms of prop five in terms of what department airport is has not done. We must have a phase out of the noisy stage 2 jets. I'd like to ask of those people in the audience, how many of you that live in this area find Vanise Airport noise objectional? I'd like to see a show of hands. All right. Thank you. You can see that there's a and this room has people from all over the city. So, we ask you please to move promptly and aggressively to uh insist that Department of Airports phase out the noisy stage 2 jets, put in an effective non- addition rule so there will not be more noisy jets coming in. And finally, deal with this horrendous noise problem. I was awoken this morning at 5:26 a.m. by these helicopters. That's right, Miss Tom. 5:26. and then thereafter. So that's an this is a severe problem has to be dealt with. Finally, let me say standing behind me is Richard Laner and Don Schultz. Um and what I'll take a moment and then they'll may want to speak to this. The board of supervisors recently pass in the last day or so passed a motion that supported AB62, but more importantly uh asked that the issue of valley secession be brought to the vote of the public and we're asking you to take a similar action. So with that, let me uh ask Richard or Don, do you want to fill us in on that, please? Thank you, Mr. I think our time is up, so we'll just step down. >> No, go ahead. You you >> Thank you, John. In addition to what Jerry said, Mr. Liner, and I would really like yourself, Don, to the public. >> My name is Don Schultz, president of Vanise Homeless Association, and also a director with Valley Vote. Um, council members, we're asking for your support to take the same position that the board of supervisors uh took yesterday, an official position with a 50 unanimous vote to change the period of time that is currently law of 90 days for the gathering of the petitions to submit to LAFCO for signatures gathering signatures for the petition to LAFCO. Uh currently, as you know, the rest of the state of California has 180 days to submit these signatures. So, we're asking that you take the same position as the board of supervisors took yesterday. And of course, we want you to do it with your own wording. Thank you very much. >> I just want to echo Don remarks. My name is Richard Laner, Cino Chamber of Commerce, United Chamber of Commerce, and Valley Vote. I would just like to echo the remarks of Don and request that you also uh give us the opportunity to have 180 days to gather the petitions. It would only equate that in which the rest of the state is granted. Thank you. >> Thank you. Okay. John Rogers wants to be heard and then uh Robert Rhodin. >> This is some Good evening, Mr. President. My name is John Rogers. I live in Alama, California. I am the legislative chairman for the aircraft pilots of the Bay Area. Uh I'm the person who wrote a letter on September 19th to Susan Kurlin challenging the legality of your entire noise ordinance going all the way back to 1981. um simply because you made agreements with the federal government to allow the right of access to the Vanise airport to any aircraft that is legal to fly under federal law that you have no grandfathering rights. Now, with regard to the noise issue, uh you got a lot of hands up here and I picked up this flyer that I presume was I don't know who had it out and big noise complaint file. I would like to uh print up a thousand of these and come out here on a Sunday and find all the open houses and uh pass these out to everybody who's going to go in and look at an open house. And I hope that you people who raised your hand and said that you can't live around the Vanise airport because because it's our fault uh will think about that when it comes time to sell your house. And I hope you fill out lots of noise complaints and I'm going to refer them to Councilwoman Msikowsky's office because she's supported Mr. Silver and all of you in your efforts to say how bad it is to live out here. and uh new buyer. It's only fair that people who are buying property understand that we don't need to have them coming down to the Vani Citizens airport citizens advisory council 6 months after the fact and acting like Mr. Silver and and everybody has acted all these years and I can't buy the fact that that a housing project is going on on Nordolf Street about a mile 1.4 four miles from the airport. We're approaching aircraft are going to be less than 500 ft over the project and the noise issue has been put on hold by the proponent. So for the convenience of the product and he says there's no noise issue over there. So what's we got some we have some things to resolve but along with that what you're really asking us to do or demanding that we do through a noise ordinance and fines and threats and intimidations and so on and so forth is to solve these people's problem by shifting it off to somebody else. Now could you imagine if I was at another airport and they tried the same thing we shifted everything over to you. I would I would be on these people's side. I wouldn't go for that at all. Now, my challenge to you is to make up a proactive disclosure program with the board of realtors so that people understand what they're buying cuz we don't need to have I I'm sure there's going to be some buy sellers that might not like to see this buyers coming in and ask them about the airport because they might not buy the house and the property value goes down because they can't sell it. Okay? But I also want to challenge you. If you think we should go fly someplace else, you identify the airport and you take Mr. Silver and his constituents and all these people who raise your hand and I'll guarantee you there's people around those other airports that are just like these people and ask them if they're willing to receive transferred noise on the basis that it's reasonable here and see how far you get. We have other people who want to be heard and we appreciate you coming down from an Amita to >> my challenge to you >> is to put it on your challenge make your statement >> is to is to abolish that noise ordinance >> because it's in violation fraud. >> Then uh Harriet Bilford would be next. >> Thank you, Mr. President. I'm Robert Roodin. I'm a member of the board of the Mid Valley Chamber of Commerce and I chair the airport committee for the Mid Valley Chamber of Commerce. The chamber is opposed to the Vanise airport stage 2 non-addition and visitation limit ordinance that is supported by some of the council members. If that ordinance, as is currently proposed, is adopted during 1998, it will cost 350 to 400 jobs, not just at the airport, but throughout the entire valley and will have an adverse economic impact of 85 to $100 million. That is a one-year economic impact. In 1999, there will be an additional loss of 350 to 400 more jobs. That's a total of 700 to 800 jobs cumulatively and another 85 to$100 million of economic activity lost. And that will continue until there will have been wiped out 1750 to 2,000 jobs when all the stage 2 aircraft are gone and the economic impact will have been $425 to$500 million. There will each year be an opportunity cost of approximately $und00 million a year for perhaps 10 to 15 years. And for for those of you on the council who represent areas outside the San Frernando Valley don't think that your physical remoteness will protect you. a a respected economist who wrote a study for the Department of Airports, Wilbur Smith and Associates, indicated that 60% of the jobs that result as a res as a result of the business activity of Vanise Airport are held by Valley residents. But the other 40% of those jobs come from your districts outside the San Franando Valley. And therefore, you are at risk as well. We we hope that you won't inflict this ordinance on 1.3 million Valley residents to accommodate 13 residents who account for 85% of all the noise complaints in the San Franando Valley at Vanise airport. That is now let me carry this one step further for you. You folks are the ones who are fiscally responsible for the city of Los Angeles. The adoption of this ordinance will in a given year result in a loss of tax revenues to the city of Los Angeles of approximately $2 million. And and and I don't know what budget that comes from or how you intend to offset it if you adopt this ordinance, but but I really don't think that at this point in time the city of Los Angeles can afford that kind of an economic hit. Thank you for the opportunity to speak, >> Harriet Bilford. And then uh Lois Laura P. >> Good evening. My name is Harriet Bilford and I've lived in Los Angeles almost my whole life and I've practiced law with my husband in the San Frernando Valley for the last 18 years. I appreciate you having this meeting held here today. Um, for the last four or during the last four years, I've appeared at city council several times concerning the city's nuisance revocation proceedings, and I've since become a regular viewer of um the hearings on channel 35. Several articles I've written have been published in the paper about my observations. um somewhat embarrassed because up until four years ago I had very little knowledge about politics or our local government. But that changed in 1994 when uh Vanise's police uh captain uh who's since been promoted and transferred in the then and the council person of the district at that time blamed a doughnut shop for and I'm quoting from a notice of hearing for quote prostitution, illegal drug activity, lewd conduct, arrests, and the social and physical deterioration deterioration of the adjacent community. Um the the thought the thing is is that I knew that the owners of that donor shop for the last 10 years and I also was a customer at that shop and the allegations and accusations I found to be ludicrous. So I tried to help them and since then several other small business owners who I feel have been accused for criminal activities that occur in their neighborhood for from no fault of their own. But I'm not really here to talk about the nuisance actions. I'm here to talk about my frustration with the city council hearings in downtown. Um the first time I appeared I was shocked because I had at by that time spent nearly hundreds of hours preparing. I had documents this thick and nobody had read anything and nobody was listening. It didn't seem like anybody cared. Um, I found that in the last four years, nothing has changed and that I'm not alone. But in watching these hearings, it seems to occur in in every case. Um, I've I come here and other people come here talking about important issues that impact their lives and it seems like they're not being given the attention they deserve. Uh it seems like it doesn't matter what we say because the council usually votes in the manner in which the council person of the affected district wants. Uh on a personal le level, I've come to know several of the council people and I respect them. I respect all of you. I've um I just don't know what happens when you get in city hall in the chambers and it just seems like things go crazy. Um, I find it very frustrating in that it takes seems to take years and a tremendous amount of effort and anguish to get anything done and very little seems to get done. I'd like to close by just quoting from um reading the last sentence of a letter that I wrote in response to a Daily News question of what is needed to reform city hall. And I wrote, "What we need is for our politicians to implement basic values. Honesty, integrity, open-mindedness, courage, compassion, and just plain simple respect and common courtesy. That's all we want. Thank you. >> Thank you. That's a very good formula." Lori Pate and then Leonard Shapiro. Hello, I'm Lori Pate and um I'm a member of the Inino Balboa Women's Golf Club which is known as the Sepulva Golf Club. And um this issue of who is awarded the concession at my golf club affects me personally and I feel very strongly about um the bidding process that is to blame for the problems that we're having here. And um I question how many times a bid has to go out and be uh awarded to one company and be denied um the contract. Today, for the third time uh downtown, a company was recommended by a staff and um denied the contract. It baffles my mind that this could go on and that the city could conduct business this way. And I just urge you to please take a strong close look at this issue and please take charge of it because it affects the golfing public and I know there's many of us that need your assistance. Thank you. I think I think there's a motion that was uh introduced that will be acted on Tuesday I believe uh on this item that you spoke to Miss P Leonard Shapiro and then Rob Gushon. My name is Leonard Shapiro. I'm a gadfly >> don't please. >> I'm also a newspaper writer. I'm here to talk today about the condition of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority to which the city has four appointees including two council people. It just recently concluded one of their most horrible campaigns to indicate how they've been operating over the past years. We finally decided that they have a six-month break. We're not going to build subways anymore. They're going to concentrate on the bus transportation. But that brings up the point of buses. How can people operate the way they did? For example, they just bought 330 methanol buses, methanol fueled buses. They were told that methanol fuel is a good alternative fuel, better than gasoline, doesn't pollute so much. So in co in cooperation with the clean air act of this country, they decided we're going to use methanol. Well, they found out later that methanol polluted just as much with carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and aldahhides. But they didn't bother to look it up. But one thing they did find out after they got these 330 buses, they were breaking down all the time. And they found on average they were engines were burning out in 45,000 miles. So some genius told them, "Take these methanol buses and convert it to ethanol buses and that'll take care of your troubles." So they converted the entire 330 buses to ethanol. And what happened? The engine started to burn out in 25,000 mi. With methanol, it was at least lasting 45,000 mi. Now they're talking about going back to diesel. But you know, when they were buying these methanol buses, why didn't somebody tell them there were only 800 methanol fueled vehicles in the entire world, of which 600 had been purchased by the state of California a year ago on an experimental basis. So in the face of this, they go out and they buy 330 buses and now they found out millions of dollars later that it's not working. And I say this is one point that we ought to keep in mind when we realize that there's four people from the city council and the mayor's office operating this place. Five people from the board of supervisors and then four people from the various cities. We can't quite be in a position where we allow people like this who don't know what's going on to run a system where they're going to put in million billions of dollars worth of subways and continue running a bus system that in the way that people want them to do this. I say it's time that we understand that we Mr. Good people elected to do a job. Why don't we get good people elected like you got facing us today? AT LEAST THEY'RE FACING US TODAY. >> I think I think you should uh go to the MTA board and tell them that story, Mr. Shapiro. We we have other people who want to be heard tonight. >> That's a very very good suggestion. But I'm glad you're facing us this time instead of turning your backs to us like you do every day in city hall. Rob Gushon. >> Thank you, Mr. President. I think some of the people that came out here tonight were here to not just see all of you in action, but to hear Leonard since you have to hear him three times a week. And uh Leonard always has something uh intriguing to say. Um I'm I'm proud to represent this community on the elected city charter reform commission. There are two of my colleagues from other valley districts here tonight that I would like to introduce. I see Dennis Zin over there from the third council district and Marcos Castinada over here from uh the seventh council district. Um in looking at the charter and I'd just like to make some brief remarks to you on it is it's interesting. You look at the city charter there's 157 pages that talks about functions of the city council. There's about 57 pages roughly that talk about the functions of the mayor and there are hundreds of other pages of that document that describe the functions of city departments and other city officers. Nowhere in that constitution of this city does it talk about the community. Nowhere in that document does it provide a framework for the kind of community participation that many of you do have in your districts and that work very well but which is lacking in terms of true u decision-making authority with appropriate checks and balances. And so when I heard someone tell me uh this morning that in response to you coming out here that uh it's pure window dressing, they don't really care. And I felt that I tried to express the view that this is a very historic opportunity for people not just in Anino but in the valley to come participate and and and watch all of you uh hopefully participate in this process. people who don't have the opportunity to do it, travel downtown during the day. Uh, and it's also an opportunity to tell you that as communities throughout the city, we want a voice. And I think that the true test of your commitment to the communities in your district and throughout the city will come in the months ahead. The council is looking at neighborhood councils uh right now, which is encouraging. the appointed commission is and our commission is. And I hope that in the months ahead that notwithstanding a lot of the bickering and and uh uh other personalization of these charter issues that we can put that aside because it's not about this council. It's not about this mayor. It's about the future that we will have in this community and our city in the years to come. And I ask that you work together with the people from this community and your communities to provide as part of the framework of city government community councils that have true decision-making authority over matters of local concern. Thank you. >> Richard Robinson and then Hank Workman would be next. Mr. President, members of council, the elected considered ch uh pardon me, uh the elected city charter reform commission meets tomorrow night at 6 in the water and power building at 111 North Hope Street. Thank you, >> Hank Workman. And then uh Jeff Bloom. My name is Hank Workman and I've lived in North Hills for 38 years and I'm retired and uh like to read a statement. I agree with Mr. Silver here that secession is the only way for the valley to get representation. As a as a case in point, I am one of 680 petitioners against the construction of 30 condominiums in Nata Nursery at the corner of Nord Hall Street and Havenhurst with Mr. Ted Stein who ran for city attorney and failed being the buyer. We received notice of this project on January 7th, 1998 with only 28 days to file opposing views. Yet the city council approved on November 25th, 1997 at the request of Councilman Hal Bernson and Councilwoman Laura Chick, quote, "A deviation from the adopted periodic review schedule is appropriate because the plan amendment is needed to avoid financial loss or extreme hardship. The true financial loss will be the surrounding property owners who will see their value of their properties plummet if this project is allowed to go ahead. The hearing by the advisory agency was scheduled in downtown Los Angeles, thereby precluding most all of the 600 petitioners from attending. According to Councilman Hal Bernson's office, this was done at the convenience of the advisory board. The representation we get in the valley is of the government, by the government, and for the government. Thank you. Uh Jeff Jeff Bloom, Mr. President, members of the city council, um my name is Jeff Blum, and I am a director with the Santa Monica Mountains Fund, uh which works with the national and state parks in the Santa Monica Mountains. And I came here tonight to just inform you and officially about an event that we're putting on uh April 19th of this year called Hands Across the Parklands uh where we're going to celebrate the 20th anniversary of the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area. Uh the recreation area, as you know, runs from the Hollywood Freeway to Point Magoo. And what we're planning on doing is uh linking a human chain in celebration across the backbone of the Santa Monica Mountains. actually the long molan and I just wanted to like I said officially uh invite you all to uh celebrate with us the this anniversary and also the entire city of Los Angeles. So thank you. >> Thank you. Uh that's all the cards we have. So the public comment period will be closed. Will will you call the role? Alakone Bernson Chick Furer Galanter Hernandez Makowski Ridley Thomas Walters Ferraro 10 council members present and a quorum Mr. President >> okay the first order of business >> approval of the minutes >> miss Mr. Sakowski move Mrs. Boulder second. There's no objection. Unanimous vote. Next item, >> commenatory resolutions for approval. >> If there's no objection, unanimous vote. Next item. >> Items 1 through nine are items of which public hearings have been held. >> Um, we do have a couple people that want to be heard on nine. Normally, we would not open that hearing up, but in as much as we're in their territory, uh, why don't we call that special and we'll have a hearing on that. Is there any objection to that? >> Okay. Number five is call special. Number nine is called special. Any other specials? >> If not, uh prepare the role on one through uh uh nine with the exception of five and uh nine. Al Bernson, Chick Furick, Galanter, Hernandez, Mscowsky, Rizzy, Thomas, Walters, Ferraro, >> 10 eyes. >> Those are approved. Uh the ordinance on item number one will go over one week. Ordinances uh have to be approved unanimously with at least 12 members present uh on the first reading. If they fail, uh that fails, then it goes over one week and the next meeting uh next Wednesday, it'll only need eight votes. So well then we'll move ahead to the next items. >> Items for which public hearings have not been held are 10 through 13. >> Uh we have cards on 13, but we also have a request to continue that until Friday. Uh >> 13A >> 13A. I'm sorry. 13A. Uh we don't have cards on 13A. It's on 13 C >> and 13. And I'd like to vote 13 D and 13 E special >> 13 E also. Okay. >> 13 D >> D E and C. Okay. Um if there's no objection 13A will be continued until Friday hearing. None. That'll be the order. And we have 10, 11, and 12 before us. Any specials there? If not, >> Mr. President, I need a motion from the floor to adopt the recommendations of the Los Angeles Housing Department on item 10. >> All right. Mr. Hernandez moves prepare the role to tabulate the vote. >> She's at the door. Who's at the door? >> Call roll. >> Alakone Bernson, Chick Fury, Galander, Hernandez, Missky, Ridley, Thomas, Walters, Ferraro. >> 10 eyes. >> Those are approved. Okay. The next item, >> the items called special. Item five. >> Mrs. Walters, you call five special. >> Yes. Uh, Mr. President, I did call item five special, and I would uh ask uh the council members to look at page two of the report, paragraph three on that page. Uh, this came to committee and I refused to vote for it because it had a bill attached to this for $3,2624. That was a bill for eight trips to city hall for from um Orange County. Um, I felt they were billing at a rate of $45 per hour uh and showed 8 hours for each trip. Um, I think this is exorbitant and I don't think the city ought to pay it. The uh CRA uh administration has indicated it should be uh paid and to me they have made it worse. They approved a cost adjustment for six of the eight trips, but it's still $3,2624. And I think this ought to be a disallowed cost. it comes to the council without recommendation from the committee. >> Mr. Hernandez, >> you know, I I I I tend to agree with Mr. Walters. I But there are a few other things I want to point out and you know, I I think a lot of times when the public criticizes government, they have the right to do that. Uh the reality is this project was approved by council I think it was November of 96. And for those eight trips, it took a year for the contractor to get the permits for a project that was for the city in the first place. And so it was the question uh you know the wasting of time. Imagine the public trying to take out a permit to do work on your house and it takes you a year to do that and you have to make eight trips and each trip spend 8 hours at city hall. So, I'm not sure we have to blame the contractor for this, but rather we should be looking at how the city functions. And why is it that it takes eight trips to take out permits to do plumbing work, to do re- roofing, to create a handicap ramp now? And it took a year to just to get the permits to do the work. And I think that's where the criticism should be looked at. But the bottom line is now it's before us. And I think we have a bill that has to be paid and I just recommend that we pay it before the bill goes up. Mrs. Walders. >> Um, it's my understanding that these trips were required because the contractor did not conform with the building codes of the city. Uh, and he build at $45 an hour, which was the top pay. Uh, and it seems to me that for somebody going to stand in line, you don't send a $45 an hour person to drive from Orange County to stand in line to get something corrected that you should have done right in the first place. Uh, talk to that point because my understanding was there was disagreements in terms of the issuing of the permits, the work that had to be done by the contractor. >> Maybe Mr. Maloy can shed some light on this. Was Mr. Malloy is the uh executive director of the community redevelopment agency. >> Mr. President, me members of the council, I'm John Mallaloy with the redevelopment agency. The contractor in question was the low bidder on this project. Uh his bid was $12,000 uh below the next low bidder. Uh there were several change orders that we did negotiate during the course of the project. Uh and also the uh uh um hourly rate that was build was the hourly rate which was agreed upon with the contractor in the initial contract. Uh we've checked with the public works department and this hourly rate is uh pretty much a standard for contracts of this nature. Uh we have attempted to negotiate in good faith with the contractor the best we can to get the price down. Uh and this is the negotiated price that we are recommending. Uh could you address the reason why it took eight trips? >> The uh there were uh several significant problems with the uh the permit process processing particularly with respect to getting the necessary sewer and water permits. Uh we have checked uh the uh repeat visits to the building permit uh section. As with all of these kinds of issues, uh there are uh typically uh blame uh flowing in either direction with respect to uh arguing with the people at the front counter and the permit office, but on balance, we think that the uh the uh trips were necessary and that the contract price is a fair price. >> You know, and I don't know if there's anybody out there in the public who serves as a contractor, but if you've had the same kind of experience, please raise your hand. But I think it's common experience dealing with the building and safety department sometimes. >> Okay, we have item number five before us. Call the role. >> Alakone, Bernson, Chick, Fury, Galanter, Hernandez, Ms.ky, Ridley, Thomas, Walters, >> and Ferraro. >> Did she say 10 eyes? >> No. >> Nine I one no. >> All right, that is approved. Next item. >> Nine called special. We have James Stewart and Don Schulz. >> Yes, my name is James Stewart. I'm on the member of the board of directors of the Mid Valley Chamber of Commerce in whose area the San Fernando Valley Civic Center sits. Our chamber has a long history of trying to get the Civic Center redeveloped and we're glad to see that it's actually going to happen. We ask for your unqualified support of this measure. There has recently been started a business improvement district just south of this area. So far, it is self-funded, but it is asking for targeted neighborhood initiative money, which we will hope you will grant it. This will be the cornerstone to the redevelopment of the entire central Vanise area, and as I'm sure you're aware, it badly needs it. Thank you. We hope you give this your qualified support. >> Thank you, Donald Schultz. Council members, Don Schultz, president of Anni Homeowners Association. Uh, we'd like to commend our councilwoman Ciney Msikowski for moving this forward and Mr. Furer for seconding this motion. And believe it or not, we agree with the Chamber of Commerce and we'd like to see it move forward quickly. Thank you. >> Is that a first, Don? >> I call the role. >> Oh, Mr. Mr. uh Mr. Kowski, I'm sorry. >> I I just wanted to explain a little what this is. Uh, as many people know the Vanise area in the civic center, we have buildings owned and operated by the city, the county, the state, and the federal government. But there is really no serious cooperation between these entities in terms of providing parking, in terms of providing landscaping and really doing a coordinated effort on the buildings. So although the city has jumpstarted an initiative to do something at the at its city building and the city owns the predominant number of buildings in the 25 acre complex, what this is is is asking for the creation of a task force of city personnel to then coordinate with the state and the county and get the advice of the federal government so that we can put together some projects together in a comprehensive coordinated way so that everyone will benefit u mutually all the visitors coming to the various government levels and I've had the support and in fact uh assemblyman Bob Herzburg's staff person Miriam Jaffy is here today willing to move forward on the state level and I talked this afternoon with supervisor Yeroslovski and he too indicated that he would bring in whatever is necessary uh at the county level to get the cooperation so that we can get this started with our respective staffs. >> Mr. Thomas, >> Mr. President, members of the council, I I simply want to um lend support to this effort uh and remind uh the council and inform the audience of the fact that uh the council has by way of policy uh adopted the view that uh constituent service centers uh helps uh will help to make sure that services are delivered in a more convenient uh way. Uh this is uh one of uh approximately uh six or maybe seven such centers that will be developed citywide. Uh Miss Makowski has uh taken up uh the uh responsibility along with other members um who represent uh the valley to make sure uh such a center um is developed in um uh this part of the city of Los Angeles. And it seems to me that this is something that can and should be embraced uh by all members as we are earnestly uh earnestly attempting to make sure that we can more creatively and directly and an accessible and a more convenient way provide the services that uh people throughout the city seek. So Miss Mr. I'm I'm enthusiastically supportive of moving this forward. Okay, Mr. Hernandez. >> Um, yes, Mr. President, members council. Um, I just also want to inform the public that the business improvement district, the formation of the district was a very crucial step in coordinating these kinds of efforts. Uh, the mayor in the proposed block grant has submitted to Vanise area as the new targeted neighborhood initiative. Uh, it's the only one being submitted being considered by the council at this time through the committee process. Uh, and we anticipate that that'll be passed. However, uh in speaking to Secretary Pandrew Cuomo yesterday and today as well as Under Secretary Salvador River, uh they indicated to us that HUD might be getting additional block grant monies if the Congress approves the budget. And an important component in that is the public works component because it would allow for infrastru infrastructure improvements in terms of ste streetscapes, in terms of trees, in terms of sidewalks and long-term improvements. Uh and that is a a portion that I think business improvement districts will be ripe for applications. And uh the reality is we're depending on Congress approving the budget submitted for by the president in regards to the housing and urban development department for those funds to become available for the city of Los Angeles. Don't tell Richard we only have 10 here. Uh >> anyone else want to be heard on this item? Call the roll. >> Call the roll. >> Mother Cole, Burnson, Jake, Fur, Galanter, Hernandez, Miss Cowsky, Ridley Thomas, Walters, Furrow, 10 eyes. >> That is approved. Members, on item 13, we have cards on C and E. Did somebody call D special? >> I did. >> Yeah. Okay. And so, u, we'll take up uh C first. Leonard Shapiro. Start the time. Mr. Ferraro, this is Leonard Shapiro again. I'm sure you'll remember me on your twoe trip in Asia. I'm talking on item 13C. We're talking about this fact that Alakon and Aliatory Motion, they want a new sewage generation factors to be taken into consideration for various commercial customers of the city and that the factors that were established to calculate sewer generation factors for the laundromat industry. Well, that's a great idea. I'm for it. But I'm also for the general calculation of how we calculate the sewage for the entire city especially here in the San Franando Valley. The formula that they have used is that the amount of water and sewage that goes down the sewage line is the basis for how much you should pay. But instead of doing that they take the into cons they do not take into consideration the fact that there's most of the water in the valley is going to watering lawns and watering trees and plants and no matter how much is discussed and I've heard it discussed here the past two years nothing seems to be done about it the such a situation continues everybody feels we cannot CHANGE IT WELL IT CAN be changed and here somebody showing you how it can be changed for the laundromat industry And if it can't be changed for the laundromat industry and other industries, it certainly can't be changed for the ordinary homeowners of the San Fernando Valley. And there's a heck of a lot of them. And that's why we call to you to look into this matter and do something about it. Mr. President, uh, Mr. Alakan, Mr. Alakan, council members, I agree with Leonard Shapiro. Um I I would like to explain um uh what I didn't say which part I agreed with but I do agree. Um with regard to this uh particular motion all this does is referred to committee uh the discussion about whether to consider adjusting the sewer um uh rates for sewer uh sewage generation uh rates for the laundromat industry. And the the reason I introduce this motion is really because uh because of the rates the structure that we have uh the laundromat industry has really uh been strapped um and and and yet uh they are providing uh tremendous service by way of of uh they are they are using the latest state-of-the-art technology to u uh to uh launder clothes. The bottom line is that they are good for the environment. Uh the fact is they use large machines, less water, less detergents, um less uh power. Uh and to the extent that people use laundromats, they are contributing to to the environment. Uh the fact of the matter is that uh because they use recycled water, they're getting uh they're they are not getting charged a rate that is consistent with their um with uh with the fact that they use um uh recycled water. And I think that that we need to look at the entire industry to see if if we can encourage this industry. By the way, and one of the one of the outcomes is that they are not reinvesting in new the old laundromats are not reinvesting in new technology to produce uh better environmental outputs. So this is really uh to inspire uh reinvestment in uh of those existing laundromats who have older machines that could do better with better technology uh toward the environment and reduce the outflow into the sewage system uh as well as to stimulate new opportunities for um industry to establish themselves in Los Angeles because they have stopped investing in Los Angeles. So, um, I want this to go to committee to see if we can find a more appropriate, uh, rate for this particular industry. And Leonard, if you have any other ideas about other industries that can provide other those kinds of benefits, I I want to hear about it. >> Mr. Ganter, >> there obviously are a number of >> Am I on here? Yeah. There obviously are a number of us who've been thinking about the same thing. Let me just tell you because it just happened yesterday that I um actually I've been talking with the Department of Water and Power for a while now about ways to uh build on the success of the lowwater use toilet program because the retrofit program with toilets is saving us so much water that we are going to wind up not having to invest money we would have had to in in new water supplies if we could find them. Um and the the next major technological innovation is in fact in the new generation of washing machines which use both less water and less power, but it does cost money to buy them. So we've been talking with the Department of Water and Power about creating a program, some kind of an incentive program. If we ever get through the the initial struggles over downsizing, we'll be working on that program. Um at the same time yesterday I had a meeting of with the general manager of the department of water and power and of the Bureau of Sanitation which is the outfit that deals with the water at the other end of the pipe and the one that for whom we have to collect the uh sewer service charge in order to upgrade the sewer system. And for the same reasons that we want to try to in avoid having to invest in new sewage treatment facilities we're looking for ways to reduce the amount of water that goes into the system. So the two departments are actually going to be working together which I think may be a historic moment in our city's history to uh try to come up with a program with some kind of an incentive program that will help to do that. And the the the most promising first effort is in fact the commercial uh laundromats because that is where you get a lot of machines at once and you can make a tremendous difference. So, their water bill should go down, their sewer service charges should go down, and their electric bills should go down, and your clothes still get clean. >> We just want to make sure the two departments don't mix their product. >> Yeah, that's true. We do want to do that. And what what I'd like to suggest, I don't know which committee this was going to go to, but it would be helpful, John, if we could have this at some point pass through the commerce committee so that we can make sure that both those departments are working on the same thing. public works, but we'll then after we'll send it to uh commerce. Uh Mr. Bernson. >> Well, I don't have any problem with trying to help out the laundromats or any of the other businesses and they have some legitimate problems, but uh frankly, I'm more concerned about some of the homeowners. Um because uh I don't know how many of you looked at your water bill recently, but my sewer service charges are running higher than my water bill this year. And uh that takes a little explanate explanation, but apparently they're using last year's water figure to estimate our sewer charges. Uh we in the valley are double penalized because we have yards and and we and we use water uh that doesn't go into the sewer. Uh we also pay a higher rate for water than the rest of the city does for the most part because there's a two-tier system. uh as unfair as it is, if you want to talk about one of the reasons of inequity for the San Frernando Valley, for some of you secessionists, there's a pretty good place to start. So, we really need to look at some of these water issues. Uh Councilman Wax and I introduced a motion two years ago asking for a independent audit of the U sewer service charge uh uh system and the and the fund. Nothing's happened on that. We haven't had a report back. I'm really very very concerned about it. So, this is an area that really needs some scrutiny. Uh, and I hope that the committee when it gets to Miss Galanter will take another look at the entire city and particularly the relief that's needed for some of our San Frernando Valley residents. >> Mr. Hernandez, um, you know, Mr. President, members of the council, one, I want to commend Councilman Alcoen for bringing this item up. uh several commercial laundry facilities have closed down particularly at the first consummatic district because of the industrial sewage rate that they have to pay. And the reality is they've come time and time again to us to prove to us that the water that goes into their plant is dirtier than the water that leaves their plant. And the reason it's dirtier is because it's coming from basically upstream. It's coming from other municipalities who don't have the same regulations that the city of Los Angeles has imposed on laundromats and aren't cleaning their water uh sewage as much as the city of Los Angeles is cleaning it. And so basically they are taking that water processing it and cleaning it out at a better higher level it's being produced but because we are charging them extra to do that they've had to leave and it's cost the city already thousands of jobs. It's a reality and I can name plans, vouchers, industrial laundry and so forth, uniform cleaning and so forth. And so it's something that we should be looking at, but it's also something we should keep in mind because the reality is it's not something we can control in terms of the regulations being imposed by other municipalities. And I'm talking about cities like Burbank and Glendel and Pasadena who also have industrial waste and also are sending it downstream and the city of Los Angeles happens to be between them and the ocean. >> Mrs. Mrs. Chick. Yes, I just wanted to go back and address the issue of um our sewer service rates since uh I was at the lead of uh a 2-year endeavor that uh ended up in quite a lively debate in council, but did result in changing the way that we figure the sewer service charge. Uh originally it had been an estimate um just kind of assuming that every household uh put about 60% I forget which way the break went 60 or 40 but a percentage of the total amount of water that you used a year was estimated to be water that went into the sewer system. That means inside water because the water you use outside for watering lawns or swimming pools or a variety of outside uses th that water does not go back into our sewer system. The council voted to change to what is used by some cities in other parts of the nation. uh and that is looking at the rainiest months of the year and assuming that you are not doing a great deal of outside water usage and therefore those rainy months are the best way to estimate how much of your total water usage is indoor usage going back in the sewers and that's what we base the sewer service charge on. Um, I have been hearing news, if anything, that uh quite a number of households in the San Franando Valley are starting to see their sewer service charge go down. I'm very interested and dismayed to see so many of you nodding that that isn't the case when Mr. Bernson was making his comments. Um, so it is something I want to follow up on. uh but it certainly seemed to be a more scientifically accurate way of estimating. The very best way to do it requires us to pay a little bit of money at the front end and for those who live in single family homes uh for about several hundred but easily recouped in a year, you can have a separate meter installed that totally accurately measures your outside water. uh and then you get build for exactly what you're using. But that is a significant amount of money um to lay out to have such a thing installed. The households that have done so have been very pleased with the results and the accuracy of their bills. There is no way to measure more accurately than these kinds of estimate ways that I'm describing unless you have a separate meter. And in addition in terms of the water rates, we did reconvene um the um blue ribbon panel on water rates about three or four years ago and again a recommendation was brought forward to look at things such as temperature etc. in figuring out rates and those changes were made. So I I I think that the council is trying to come up with fair and equitable ways and to make sure that there are not geographic parts of the city uh that are paying unfairly and I believe that we have made great strides to towards that. If we need to keep looking at it then that's something that um certainly uh there are those of us who have spoken tonight who want to make sure that that happens. >> All right. Thank you. Anyone else want to be heard on this? If not, prepare the role on 13 uh C >> C. >> How would you like to vote? >> Alone, Bernson, Chick Pure, Galanter, Hernandez, Missowski, Ridley, Thomas, Walters, Ferraro, >> 10 eyes. >> That is approved. 13D was called by Miss Cindy Msakowski. We'll call on her now. 13. >> Thank you, Mr. President. I just wanted to explain for the audience uh what this is. Uh in 1987, the Los Angeles Unified School District established something called a primary center, which is a specialized kind of educational focus uh for no more than 300 children from kindergarten through 2 grade. It's a very uh education intense unique learning experience for kids who are just starting out. And uh the city has the Unified School District has four centers in the city. And in June of last year, Mayor Reen and um Superintendent Ruben Zacharias uh put together a task force to help identify other centers where would be able to benefit from this. And that task force was looking to identify surplus city property to try to put these centers on. And again, it uh we found a site in Vanise Boulevard where there is a water and power building that has been declared surplus on Vanise Boulevard. And this is a motion to expedite the sale of that surplus property to the unified school district. It's will be paid for out of funds that were already uh approved by the voters with Proposition BB. And it's uh specifically to do the kind of thing that I think the the community and the people who voted for BB meant. So this is a motion to expedite that action so that the primary center can be up and operating by uh fall of this year uh at that DWP site on Vanise Boulevard. >> Mr. Con. >> Yes. I want to commend the maker of the motion um for this particular activity. First of all, one of these primary centers is in my council district. Uh but I think that it's important for us to recognize that as we um reduce the class size in our schools that one of the negative impacts of that is that we are literally pushing some of the primary centers off of campuses because they're using that space to for uh uh elementary school classes. And so as everybody supports the concept of reducing class size uh but at the same time we can't do it at the expense of uh primary care. And so um so I I'm very much in support of this motion uh not just because it benefits primary uh mcclelay primary center but because I think it's good public policy. >> Anyone else want to be heard? If not call the role. >> Alicon Burnson check fear Galantern Hernandez Mowsky Thomas Walters Barro >> 10 eyes. >> That is approved. The next item is 13E. >> Yes. And we have cards on that. Don Schulz and Jeffrey Sandival and David Green. Thank you, President Pro. Don Scholes, president of Vanise Homeers Association. Uh again, we'd like to thank Cindy Msikowski, uh our council woman, for bringing forth a very important motion to us and Van Eyes and probably most of the central belly of the San Franando Valley. We have been inundated with adult entertainment senders for the past probably 5 to 10 years with a heavier concentration coming within the last 2 years because of certain flaws on first amendment rights interpretation by the city attorney's office and certain losses uh in the courts. What Cine is bringing forth tonight, and I know you all have a copy of the motion, is something that is sorely needed, I think, throughout the city of Los Angeles, not just the community of ANI's, but all throughout the city of Los Angeles. And I see you nodding, Mr. Hannis. I know you're looking for something like this in your district. You brought something like this forward about a year or so ago in your own district. We implore you to move this quickly in the wording that you see before you because we know it's going to be challenged by attorneys in the $1 billion adult entertainment industry in this in this nation. They are going to be sending lawyers are going to be challenging this from the time it gets the next hearing at the next committee. If you could pass it tonight, it can move through the city council and become an ordinance tomorrow. I think we'd all be better off. But we know that isn't going to happen that way. So we ask you please support this and fight for it when it comes back to you again. Thank you. >> Jeffrey Sandival. >> Hello. My name is Jeffrey Salivar. I'm president of a residents association called the Rampart Rangers from the other side of the hill. I'd like to thank the council members in particular council member Msikowski for recognizing the need to improve the permit process regard regarding adult entertainment uses. The current police commission licensing process is clearly inadequate. Nevertheless, I'd like to encourage caution in the modification of 1270 in committee so that no loopholes be inadvertently commit be created. I last appeared before the council regarding a sexual encounter establishment called the barracks. The barracks is now closed and the building sits vacant, but the residents of East Hollywood and Silverlake are concerned about four other similarly illegally operating clubs in the same area. Enforcement is a slow process and the clubs are fighting 1270 every step of the way, testing it for any weakness. We had a a twoe trial in municipal court that finished up only a few weeks ago that ended up it's a criminal trial that ended in a hung jury. So, uh, about closing this one club in particular, we don't know what's going to happen next, but please don't give those illegally operating sex clubs an opportunity to escape prosecution by inadvertently creating any weaknesses within 1270. Thank you. Um, David David Green, thank you for hearing me. Um, I thought, uh, when I heard this brought forth, I thought it was kind of an interesting thing. I just for the fun of it looked up on the internet a guy runs a local site about that reviews various adult clubs and he had a site about uh what's required to open one of these. I just thought this would be interesting background for you guys. Uh he suggests hiring a guy named John Weston in Beverly Hills who's supposed to be a huge uh lawyer great at getting these sites and stuff. Runs around 30k to get him. Uh you have to do deal with the zoning ordinance which is already in effect. So you have uh schools, churches, residential housing, daycare things to already um look after. you have uh permits you have to obtain. Now these people have already rented these facilities or in many case they're leasing or bought them. They haven't even moved into them, haven't even started their business operating and they're looking at a period from 4 months to two years before they can even open their doors. Uh if they want to serve alcohol, they have to deal with constant harassment by ABC. Um in short, they're looking at 300,000 to 500,000 to open a business a lot more if they want to buy one. Now you guys are talking about uh whether or not these businesss are proliferating. What they're not doing is proliferating. what you've done is created a system of survival of the fittest. The ones that are out there now have big big bucks for advertising and uh you know basically there are chains they're owned around the country and they're going to be very hard to stomp on. Um my concern and I think something that really the council needs to address and look at is do we really want to be involved in the regulation of business when this is something that's more or less a consensual situation. This is this is adults not hurting one another going into these places. it's no big deal. Um, and do we want the LAPD, who supposedly um doesn't have enough staff as it is, to spend time in these clubs getting lap dances trying to get uh ladies to commit illegal acts? I mean, I think it's I think it's insane. There was a a situation uh I think it was just like last week where a a sex therapist and internet public uh access woman named Susan Black had like this sting pulled on her and her private residence. It just it makes no sense. It's nuts. Thanks, Okay, the public hearing is closed. Miss Makowski. >> Yes. Thank you, Mr. President. This is a motion. I wanted to thank uh Don Schultz, who president of the Vanise Homeowners Association, and Rob Gluchon, the Inino uh property owners association, uh who did some work, Rob is an attorney, to look at some, uh cases that had been brought forward and where and how the city's current laws um do exactly what Mr. Salivar was concerned about and that is there are certain loopholes now in the law and this is an emotion attempting to close those loopholes. What we are finding is what we have defined in the code isn't as inclusive as I think what is happening out there and particularly in the adult entertainment industry people are coming up with things that now are not in the code and therefore are allowed to have a permit no matter where they want to go and I think there are some serious problems with that. So, this is attempting to ask the city attorney, the police department, and the planning department to work closely with reviewing the language in this u proposed motion to close the loopholes that now exist and the kind of businesses that are coming in and allowed to get permits without any review and without any kind of discretionary notice to the community and participation by the community. So, this is a meant to close those loopholes with the new kinds of things that are springing up. >> Thank you, Mr. Bernson. Uh yes, I uh I certainly support the intent of these uh of these motions. U as the author of the original uh legislation a number of years ago, we enacted the uh toughest legislation that we were told would survive in court. uh including a uh an amortization ordinance which required some of the uh existing businesses that were within the 500 ft to go out of business after a certain period of time. Uh we were sued. I have many contacts with Mr. question that somebody mentioned because we've been on opposite sides of the table a lot of times because this is a land use issue and um we lost in the in the US Supreme Court and we had to settle with them and allow some of their locations to remain. Uh I'm perfectly willing to uh do anything that uh that we can support in court. I just hope we don't get any of our existing ordinances invalidated in so doing. Do we Is Cora Smith here from the uh building code section of the city? Cora, can you come up? I know you don't want to, but I think it's important uh uh for because there are a couple questions that need to be addressed here. I know we're going to do this in committee and the city attorney, but u can we in your opinion, and I'm going to ask the city attorney the same question, I'm perfectly willing to uh to extend that conditional use permit on the anything beyond the 500 ft. Uh originally when we did this, we adopted an ordinance that had already survived a cal a US Supreme Court uh test and I believe that was the Detroit ordinance back in 1981 82 something like that when we passed this. >> Yeah. Right. >> Uh can we uh in your opinion use the conditional use permit on anything beyond the 500 ft? Well, currently right now the um zoning administrator has authority under uh adult entertainment for massage parlors or sexual encounter establishments >> with massage parlors. Right. >> Right. And sexual encounter establishments in the commercial industrial zones. However, they have to comply with all the conditions of 1270. So they are controlled >> under conditional use. Right. Now, >> the problem is that when you're talking about massage parlors and sexual encounter, you're not talking first amendment. >> That is correct. >> When you talk about bookstores and you talk about movie theaters and things of that nature, then you're dealing with First Amendment, >> right? First amendment covers your bookstores, your videos, etc. And they are allowed to go in your commercial industrial zones, but they do have distance of requirements from your your uh schools and parks and playgrounds and between establishments, which are thousand feet. When we originally did the original ordinance, we had to identify a map of the city that literally showed locations where they could legally locate. Otherwise, we would have been uh shown to be in restraint of first amendment rights and allowing them to operate. We we the planning department did an extensive map at that time so we could support our ordinance. But I I'm I I certainly want to go forward with this and I commend Miss Msakowski for bringing it in. I just want to make sure that we uh we're on sound legal ground because Mr. Weston will be filing a lawsuit against this, I'm sure, the first time we try to uh we try to enforce this and we're going to have to be able to defend it. Maybe the city attorney wants to comment on that. >> I I just want to say, Mr. that um our office is going to look at the ordinance as it stands and the case law, any new cases and explore any other ways that we can um adjust this ordinance and and keep it within the >> Okay, I want to thank both of you. I just want to say to the gentleman who said that it doesn't bother anybody, let me tell you about the impact that these types of businesses have upon business and residential communities. they are a very much of a detrimental impact on those types of of of business of communities and and uh I recognize the fact that uh people have independent rights but their rights do not have the right to step on the rights of other people and that's one of the situations we're dealing here with. We have to hit a happy medium where we can enforce it. But I certainly support the concept and I would hope that we could get back with some kind of a firm legal opinion that we can move forward with this. Thank you. Mr. Hernandez, did you raise your hand? I didn't. I I just uh I just want to also explain regarding the ordinance the caution we're we continue to display because if we're found in violation of first amendment rights the court could dictate exactly how large the area has to be or the reality of how much land mass has to be set aside for this kind of purpose. Uh our realities right now is in putting together the council plan initially in which is the locations and the zoning in which it is allowed. uh there hasn't been an overall study done as to how much land mass that abides by and whether the courts are willing to see that as justification for us setting aside parts of the city for that purpose. And unless that study is concluded, unless funding is provided by to the planning department to make that determination, we're kind of shooting in the dark. And um these court exposures basically are exposing the city to the reality that the courts might dictate where they can go and not take into account the kinds of considerations that we have to take to account. So that's why we have to be very careful as to how we threat. >> Mr. Ridley Thomas, >> Mr. President, members of the council, um uh I think we have to remain uh focused on uh those tools that we can uh employ to uh protect uh the quality of life um in neighborhoods throughout uh the city. I interpret this motion as an effort to do that. Obviously, we do not wish to uh violate uh anyone's rights. Uh nor are we uh interested in allowing uh activities that um uh diminish uh uh the quality of life and generally accepted uh standards uh in communities. We uh shouldn't permit to them to prevail. Regardless of what ordinances we promulgated, it seems to me that all of us have to be attentive to this uh simple um admonition. There is no replacement for the uh vigilance of communities to protect their interest otherwise things that shouldn't happen will happen. And I think you all agree that that is something uh uh that we must pay attention to otherwise uh the deterioration of the quality of life and uh things that uh we wouldn't think uh uh would take place will crop up all around us. Uh eternal vigilance against such uh negative land uses is the only thing that I think is going to uh finally uh hold the day. Mr. Alakan, >> I don't know how eternal we'll be, but uh as long as we're here, we'll be vigilant. Um I the the gentleman that made the comments about uh consensual I I don't remember your name and I apologize, but I >> uh but I do remember it was the gentleman that didn't get any approach. >> That that's how I remember. Um, you know, this I think what what um uh what what we have to recognize and and the beauty of this particular motion is that um uh it recognizes not just the issues of of of creating a a conditional use process for a particular business, but it it recognizes that indeed um this particular kind of business has different impacts on different communities and you can't make decisions uh in a peanut other kind of way about this kind of industry. You have to be very careful uh about where you do locate them if uh you can't stop them any other way uh because of constitutional issues. Uh and so you have to locate them uh in areas where there aren't high concentrations of other negative factors going on in the community. Um, but there's also there was interesting that um I would like to to add an amendment u that would somehow um address a problem I have uh in my district with a particular establishment. Um I think most of you know it if you've been on Sepova Boulevard in North Hills. Um, but about two doors down, if not right next door, there's a McDonald's with a playground right in front of it. And and it's right next to a a major strip joint. And and um and I if there was a way we could we could u uh expand the uh thousand ft uh requirement to include uh businesses that attract a lot of kids. um uh not just schools and parks. I I think it would it would be uh I think it would withstand uh constitutional scrutiny. I think that uh um uh if we if we do it carefully uh we can u u well I don't know about family oriented but but businesses that attract uh children um I think we it would much improve this particular ordinance. I I'm aware of I'm aware of the uh uh the constraints we have. Uh city attorney, I see your your panicked look, but but I think we ought to push the edge uh to the extent that we can. We've had tremendous success in the area of reducing uh liquor establishments and it's because we use the conditional use process. But we had, and Mark Gley Thomas knows this very well, we had the we had the uh the benefit of a study that demonstrated that high concentrations of of liquor establishments deteriorate a community. And I'm sure that if we had a compatible study uh out of USC or accidental like the studies that we we use to solidify our position, um that we could we could go further. And so I would I think this is something where we do need to push the edge uh even though it may be subject to constitutional challenge. Cindy, Mr. Kowski, >> as the maker of the motion, as the maker of the motion, I'm very happy to consider the amendment that uh Mr. Alicon suggested uh be included to add uh businesses that are predominantly children attraction or children attractive to this uh consideration right now by the city attorney. I did want to clarify for Mr. Bernson that that this is this was drafted to uh avoid the issue of the free speech material uh whether whether video um printed material or the like and is much more akin to the issues that we now control such as massage parlors and and that those kind of um businesses that are now defined. The problem is that that people in this industry are finding ways to uh create some businesses that really deal with activities there that are very much akin to massage parlors or the like but don't specifically fall within that definition. So this is broadening our definition to deal with those kinds of activity related uses and and deal with them the same way that we do with these others that were defined in the code already. So I think uh we will work very carefully with the city attorney with the advice of the police department who has brought this to our attention and has been attempting with the communities to be vigilant with some of these uses but because they are now not specifically defined in the code we need to make those changes. >> Okay. Anyone else want to be heard on this? If not uh >> 13E as amended by Councilman Elicone. >> Yeah. Call the role. Alicone, Bernson, Chick, Fur, Galanter, Hernandez, Miss Kelsey, Willie, Thomas, Walters, Ferrari. >> I that is approved. >> The next item, >> motions for posting and referral. >> If there's no objection, unanimous vote. >> Council member Chick has a request to be excused. City business to leave 11:30 a.m. March 18th meets council policy. >> Unanimous vote. >> The desk is clear. Mr. President, >> if I could, >> Miss Mr. Sakowski, >> I I forgot to mention earlier that I would also like to thank those in the audience who came from the valley offices of a lot of city agencies and city bureaus we have here today and I think talking to the citizens earlier people from the public works department, Bureau of Engineering, Bureau of Street Use, obviously we've had uh the captains from West Valley and Van I here with us tonight, the fire chiefs uh and the battalion chiefs serving the the greater valley area, particularly Vanise and Enino. And I would like to thank all the city staff who is here and those who are willing to stay and perhaps talk afterwards. And in particular, I would like to point out that we have uh Mr. Bob Kennedy here from the street tree division. And this community in particular, just a few blocks from here, members of the council suffered a loss of a cultural treasure about a week and a half ago when the Lang, the thousand-year oak tree that we built a street around to save, uh, was lost in an El Nino storm about a week and a half ago, and Mr. um Bob Kennedy from Street Tree will be meeting tomorrow with my office. We have already we are going to reconstitute the oak tree advisory committee the citizens advisory committee to decide and take input from citizens as to what we should do with the site look at replanting some trees. We've also already had oak trees offered and uh in addition to that we want to determine what is the best use of the existing tree and the tree trunk which is being salvaged. It's being taken under protective care and uh I'm looking forward to a lot of suggestions from the citizens as to what we should do with that treasure. Thank you. >> Yeah. Thank Thank you, M. Mr. Kazy. Uh >> anything else on the agenda? >> Any adjourn motions? >> Oh, you going to put you on that committee? >> Wait, >> are there any adjourning motions? I have one, but we can do it later. Okay, I want I want to thank all of you for coming tonight and uh we this meeting is not as long as it normally is because Nate Holden was not here. If Nate Holden had been here, but I do I do want to thank you all for coming and I hope you en enjoyed uh the experience with city government. This meeting is ajourned. Heat up Heat. Heat.