[0:00] [AD] City Council members are seated at a curved dais.

[0:02] [AD] City Council members are seated at a curved dais. [CC] Mayor and council, we are live.

[0:03] [CC] Mayor and council, we are live.

[0:06] Okay, good evening, everyone.

[0:09] Welcome to the August 3rd, 2026 meeting

[0:12] of the Pasadena City Council.

[0:14] We'll start with the calling of the roll.

[0:16] Thank you, Mayor.

[0:23] Council member Cole is not in the room yet.

[0:25] Council member Hampton has not joined the meeting

[0:27] yet he's going to join for just cause

[0:30] reason to announce.

[0:32] Council member Jones.

[0:34] Council member Lyon.

[0:35] Here.

[0:35] Council member Madison.

[0:36] here counselor Masuda here vice mayor Rivas here mayor Gordo here there's a

[0:43] quorum the council present okay miss Rivas will you lead us in the pledge of

[0:47] allegiance please

[0:49] [AD] Council members and audience rise for the Pledge of Allegiance.

[1:05] [AD] Council members and audience sit down.

[1:16] in the interest of time we are going to take the agenda

[1:23] out of order and take item 3 up first given the level of public interest so

[1:31] we will jump right into item three.

[1:36] I'll turn it over to the city manager, Mr. Huxworth.

[1:39] Thank you, Mayor.

[1:40] Good evening, Mayor, council members.

[1:44] We are coming back this evening seeking council's actions

[1:48] to adopt the resolutions and other required documents

[1:51] to place a parcel tax on the ballot for November.

[2:03] We've shared this slide before that the only thing

[2:06] that we did add is it was asked

[2:10] what were our final deadlines relating

[2:13] to putting something on the ballot and if we had to make a change so we just

[2:16] wanted to share that this week August 7th is the last day to place a measure on

[2:20] the ballot and August 12th is the last day to amend or withdraw the measure.

[2:28] I'm not gonna read this. This is the ballot question. This is the same

[2:31] ballot question that we shared in the staff report. I will highlight that

[2:37] this provides for an annual levy of 19 cents per square foot of improved

[2:42] property that is a level 19% there a 19 cents sorry there is no escalator and

[2:48] then we took council's comments from the last meeting and the provision does

[2:53] include include incomes for low-income seniors and others that mirror the

[3:01] language in the code currently for the exemptions of the library parcel tax

[3:07] and and that's what this slide does it's these two sections and again

[3:12] and these are the same sections

[3:14] that are in the library parcel tax.

[3:15] [CC] So it would mirror those.

[3:16] [AD] Section D and E highlighted. "Senior Citizen or disability exemption" and "Very Low Income Limit" [CC] So it would mirror those.

[3:16] [AD] Section D and E highlighted. "Senior Citizen or disability exemption" and "Very Low Income Limit"

[3:19] We do wanna point out that in the proposed ordinance,

[3:24] that would be approved by voters.

[3:26] There is one correction.

[3:28] The draft that was in the staff report,

[3:30] it starts within the first fiscal year

[3:32] and it should have said for each fiscal year.

[3:33] So that's one change that we wanted to point out

[3:37] if the council moves forward

[3:38] with the staff recommendation.

[3:41] And then the financial model.

[3:43] So the proposed parcel tax structure,

[3:48] we reviewed a number of different scenarios

[3:51] across the board, lower amounts, higher amounts

[3:55] with inflationary growth without that.

[3:59] And here's what we have landed on.

[4:01] 19 cents per square foot of improved property.

[4:05] We're proposing that it's assessed annually

[4:07] until ended by voters.

[4:09] By doing this methodology,

[4:11] it does meet the current strategic plan goals for the 10 year for both

[4:15] operations and capital.

[4:18] This financing mechanism would fund the capital on a pay

[4:23] as you go method. We could certainly issue debt and accelerate that but we

[4:28] wanted to make sure that this methodology worked for either and it

[4:32] does. And then we believe that this financing mechanism will provide viable

[4:40] operational revenue for approximately at least 15 years.

[4:45] And then we would certainly have to evaluate it

[4:46] in the future based on what the growth is,

[4:51] based on a developed property and whatnot over the years.

[4:57] So here's a couple of graphs to show the spend.

[5:01] And so this first graph, the first charts on the left,

[5:04] first five years, second five years,

[5:06] third five years, what it looks like.

[5:08] So you can see that a significant amount of capital

[5:11] gets done in the first 10 years and then as the capital ramps down the

[5:16] operational costs ramp up and take over what the revenue is covering covering

[5:22] each year and then on the right side this graph shows how a pay as you go

[5:27] model we would build up fund balance and then appropriate that money to do

[5:32] [CC] the various capital projects and I'll flip to the next slide which will

[5:36] [AD] Slide: "Implementation Timeline for Parcel Tax" with a Gantt chart. [CC] the various capital projects and I'll flip to the next slide which will

[5:36] [AD] Slide: "Implementation Timeline for Parcel Tax" with a Gantt chart.

[5:36] [AD] Slide: "Implementation Timeline for Parcel Tax" with a Gantt chart. [CC] show how that timing is so of course we debate men brush clearance that

[5:39] [CC] show how that timing is so of course we debate men brush clearance that

[5:41] kind of stuff would happen every year going forward.

[5:45] The lower ones in the red highlight the capital projects.

[5:50] And so under this proposal and working with the fire chief,

[5:52] we looked at facilitating the training center first

[5:57] with a hope of construction that that would be

[5:59] at the start of probably year two.

[6:01] Station 33 we built ideally would start at year three.

[6:06] Station 37 would the ideal part would be to start reconstruction of 37 as soon as

[6:14] 33 was done because in talking to the chief it would probably be challenging

[6:18] to have two stations fully under renovation at the same time so we we do

[6:22] them consecutively and then in this model as a pay-as-you-go the ninth

[6:27] station the new ninth station would be would be done after 37 is rebuilt of

[6:33] Of course, if we explored issuing debt

[6:35] and doing it through a debt issuance,

[6:37] we could likely accelerate the night station

[6:39] earlier in the process,

[6:41] but this is what it would look like as a pay as you go.

[6:44] And then as I noted in the prior schedules,

[6:47] by using pay as you go and doing this methodology,

[6:50] we would need to ramp up the operational

[6:52] for the additional rescue ambulances,

[6:53] fire suppression company and ladder truck

[6:56] toward the later in starting from year six through year 10.

[7:04] And then the last one here is,

[7:07] So the proposed partial tax structure,

[7:09] it would be $304 on a 1,600 square foot.

[7:13] We were asked last week if there's

[7:15] any way to come up with an average of what somebody

[7:17] might pay in town.

[7:19] So we did look at some various things,

[7:21] and we were able to come up with the one

[7:23] at the bottom, which is a single-family residential

[7:26] home with a SES value of about $750,000.

[7:31] Their current property projected annual tax

[7:34] is around $9,600 if you included this $304 assessment

[7:38] into their property tax.

[7:40] I'm sorry, before you include this $304 assessment

[7:44] in their property tax.

[7:47] So with that, we will answer questions

[7:52] and proceed from there.

[7:54] And before we get in trouble with the fire marshal,

[7:57] if we could have some of you guys

[7:59] that are in front of the exits,

[8:02] there's plenty, there's a few seats,

[8:04] like I just would like to clear the doors

[8:05] just to make sure that we could get guys, anybody out.

[8:08] I just don't want the fire marshal to close us down.

[8:23] Okay,

[8:25] thank you, Mr. Clerk.

[8:31] Okay, we have 12 public comments.

[8:34] And if you, the clerk will call out names.

[8:37] If you hear your name,

[8:38] please form a line in the center aisle.

[8:46] Yeah, let's hear from the public first.

[8:52] [CC] Carlos Javeira followed by Lee Wallace,

[8:53] [AD] Public Speaker Carlos Javolera approaches the podium. [CC] Carlos Javeira followed by Lee Wallace,

[8:56] [CC] Carlos Javeira followed by Lee Wallace,

[8:56] then Jackie English, then Ida Demesian, Chen Vu,

[9:03] David Kissinger, Christian Miller, Rafi Bachachian,

[9:09] Jesus Rojas, Claire Bryan, Adam Breali,

[9:12] and Christina Terrazas.

[9:14] Those are the cards that I have.

[9:16] I'm sure we'll get a couple more.

[9:19] Two minutes, Mayor?

[9:22] Yes.

[9:23] Two minutes.

[9:25] And I'll ring a bell when you have 30 seconds left.

[9:27] So when you hear the bell, it's 30 seconds.

[9:28] Go ahead.

[9:30] Good evening.

[9:31] I'm Carlos Javellara, president of West Pasadena Residence

[9:34] Association and representing WPRA viewpoints

[9:38] on the Pasadena Fire Department's

[9:40] 10-year operational and organizational plan.

[9:44] As we've seen with the Eaton conflagration,

[9:47] fire can obliterate a community.

[9:49] The Pasadena Fire Department has delivered a plan

[9:51] that mitigates fire danger while also improving fire

[9:55] suppression capabilities.

[9:56] and the WPRA supports it.

[10:00] This plan would improve emergency response times,

[10:04] address environmental change

[10:06] and growing wildfire risk locally,

[10:08] develop a long-term plan

[10:10] to address critical infrastructure needs

[10:12] for fire stations, improve operational efficiency

[10:16] and community safety,

[10:18] fund a comprehensive vegetation management program.

[10:22] The WPRA supports the fire department's continued research

[10:26] into thermal imaging technology as part of the city's early warning strategy for wildfires.

[10:33] As we saw with the Eden Fire and the Palisades Fire, wind-driven wildfires can move faster

[10:38] than traditional detection systems can keep pace with. No technology can guarantee prevention

[10:45] under those conditions, but earlier detection can shorten the gap between ignition and

[10:50] fire response. And in a fast-moving fire, minutes matter.

[10:55] We can't put a price on what we could lose

[10:58] if we don't act now.

[11:00] Fire doesn't wait for budgets to catch up.

[11:03] Thank you for your time.

[11:09] Thank you.

[11:09] And I would just ask for Council Member Hampton

[11:13] to, since you've joined the meeting,

[11:16] if you could announce your Just Cause

[11:21] accommodation request.

[11:24] Yes, I am participating in the meeting

[11:27] under just cause provisions for child care purposes and I guess is there

[11:37] anyone under the age of 18 over the age 18 sorry no one over the age 18 here

[11:44] with me in this room okay thank you and then the

[11:53] [CC] sorry the next speaker is Lee

[11:54] [AD] Public Speaker Lee Wallace approaches the podium. [CC] sorry the next speaker is Lee

[11:56] [AD] Public Speaker Lee Wallace approaches the podium.

[11:56] [AD] Public Speaker Lee Wallace approaches the podium. [CC] Lee Wallace.

[11:57] [CC] Lee Wallace.

[11:59] Mayor Guardo and members of the City Council,

[12:02] my name is Lee Wallace,

[12:03] representing West Pesting and Residence Association.

[12:06] I'm also here to support

[12:07] the fire department's expansion plan.

[12:10] And if you approve a vote on this with parcel tax,

[12:13] I will be voting for it,

[12:15] even though I will be paying a lot more

[12:17] than what you saw up there on the screen.

[12:20] If we do not modernize

[12:22] and make our fire department even more effective,

[12:25] home and business fire insurance costs

[12:26] are very likely to increase.

[12:29] And for some homes and businesses,

[12:31] they may face cancellation

[12:32] and having to obtain lower quality insurance coverage

[12:36] at higher rates.

[12:38] WPRA has devoted a lot of time and effort

[12:40] to research and educate our residents

[12:42] about what our high wildfire risk status means

[12:45] in terms of getting and keeping

[12:47] affordable home insurance.

[12:49] Insurance companies determine whether or not

[12:51] to insure a home based on two separate evaluations.

[12:54] Of course, the insurance companies evaluate an individual home for its risks.

[12:59] They include tree trimming, location of combustible materials, the nearest fire hydrant, the nearest

[13:04] fire station, et cetera.

[13:06] Insurance companies also weigh the fire risk in an entire community.

[13:11] The single most important factor in determining a community's fire risk is the effectiveness

[13:16] of the fire department.

[13:18] If Pasadena fails to provide the resources to modernize our fire infrastructure and

[13:23] up new, more effective methods and technologies that will send a clear signal to the insurance

[13:29] companies that we are not serious about reducing our high fire risk.

[13:35] Insurance companies can draw only one logical conclusion.

[13:38] Fire risk and passive need will remain high and only get higher.

[13:42] Higher risk means higher insurance costs and insurance cancellations.

[13:46] So the real question is not simply whether we pay more taxes.

[13:48] The question is whether we invest in our own fire department or risk paying more later through higher insurance

[13:56] Bills with no improvement in public safety to show for it. Thank you very much. Thank you

[14:02] [AD] Public Speaker Jacqueline English approaches the podium.

[14:02] [AD] Public Speaker Jacqueline English approaches the podium. [CC] and then Jackie English followed by

[14:04] [AD] Public Speaker Jacqueline English approaches the podium.

[14:08] Ada Demigian and then Shin Boo and if you heard your name, please come forward

[14:15] Go ahead. Hi y'all

[14:17] My name is Jacqueline English and I'm with the WPRA

[14:22] I'd like to begin with a simple question.

[14:25] How lucky do you feel today?

[14:28] How lucky do you feel?

[14:31] I'm asking that is because our community faces

[14:34] several significant risks that require immediate attention.

[14:39] According to a report cited by the Los Angeles Times,

[14:42] the U.S. Geological Survey has warned

[14:44] of a substantial likelihood of a major earthquake

[14:47] in the Los Angeles region by 2045.

[14:52] If a major rupture occurs, particularly near Cajon Pass, the consequences could be devastating

[14:59] for communities throughout the region.

[15:00] We're talking 6.7 or above.

[15:03] 6.7 was the Northridge quake, okay?

[15:07] The geological survey is very worried right now about the San Andreas Fault.

[15:14] We cannot predict when that's going to happen.

[15:18] So we have to focus on preparedness.

[15:20] One of our most urgent needs is ensuring that our fire stations can withstand a major seismic

[15:27] event.

[15:28] Several stations, I think two, have not yet been retrofitted for earthquake safety.

[15:35] If a significant earthquake were to occur before these improvements are completed,

[15:39] we risk losing critical facilities, emergency vehicles, and potentially the firefighters

[15:44] who serve our community.

[15:47] The longer we delay, the greater the risk.

[15:50] Whether the solution is constructing new facilities or strengthening existing ones, we need to

[15:56] begin the process immediately.

[15:59] Design, planning, and construction take years, and every year of delay leaves us vulnerable.

[16:06] Earthquakes are not our only concern.

[16:09] Lucky us.

[16:10] Our community is also surrounded by a high fire hazard area.

[16:14] Experts have warned that the extreme wind conditions experienced in early 2025 are

[16:19] run a one-off. Powerful Santa Ana winds. Miss English, your time is expired? Pardon?

[16:26] Your time is expired? I thought there was going to be a bell. I rang it. I didn't

[16:30] hear it. Sorry. Can I finish my sentence?

[16:35] Okay, we need to reduce the fuel load in

[16:40] the Arroyo, retrofit or replace vulnerable fire stations as quickly as

[16:44] possible, strengthen our fire response capabilities, install sirens and

[16:48] folks evacuate and invest in infrastructure before a disaster

[16:53] [CC] occurs not after. Thank you. Thank you. Aida Demagian followed by Chen Vu, then David

[16:59] [AD] Public Speaker Aida Demagian approaches the podium. [CC] occurs not after. Thank you. Thank you. Aida Demagian followed by Chen Vu, then David

[17:00] [AD] Public Speaker Aida Demagian approaches the podium.

[17:00] [AD] Public Speaker Aida Demagian approaches the podium. [CC] Kissinger, then Christian Miller, then Rafi Bajachian. Good evening Mayor Gordo,

[17:02] [CC] Kissinger, then Christian Miller, then Rafi Bajachian. Good evening Mayor Gordo,

[17:05] council members. My name is Aida Demagian. I have been a resident of the

[17:09] city of Pasadena for over 50 years and I'm the current president-elect of

[17:14] Pasadena Association of Realtors. I urge you not to put this parcel tax on the

[17:20] ballot and the reason is public safety is one of the most fundamental

[17:24] responsibilities of local government. Fire protection and emergency medical

[17:29] services benefit everyone who lives, works, shops or visits our great city.

[17:35] They are not services used exclusively by property owners yet this proposal

[17:40] places the financial burden primarily on homeowners,

[17:44] including many who are least able to absorb

[17:46] another recurring expense.

[17:48] Many of our senior citizens

[17:50] purchased their homes decades ago.

[17:53] They are asset rich, but income limited,

[17:56] living on fixed retirement incomes

[17:58] that do not increase with inflation and rising taxes.

[18:03] They are already facing higher costs for insurance,

[18:06] utilities, health care, and everyday necessities.

[18:10] Another annual tax may seem modest on paper,

[18:14] but many seniors, it becomes one more bill

[18:18] that they must struggle to pay.

[18:21] Before asking homeowners to shoulder another tax,

[18:24] I encourage the city to explore

[18:25] many reasonable alternatives,

[18:28] including pursuing state and federal grants,

[18:31] improving operational efficiencies,

[18:34] strengthening economic development,

[18:35] and identifying new revenue resources that spread the cost more fairly among everyone who benefits from these essential services.

[18:44] We all agree that our firefighters and first responders deserve the resources they need.

[18:50] Believe me, I experienced that firsthand. My son's house burnt down in the Eaton fire.

[18:55] The question is whether homeowners, especially our seniors on fixed income,

[19:00] should bear a disproportionate share of that responsibility

[19:03] when these services protect the entire community.

[19:07] Thank you.

[19:08] Thank you, Madam.

[19:09] Chen Wu, followed by David Kissinger,

[19:11] [CC] then Christian Miller.

[19:12] [AD] Public Speaker Chen Yu approaches the podium. [CC] then Christian Miller.

[19:12] [AD] Public Speaker Chen Yu approaches the podium.

[19:15] Good evening, Pasadena Council members.

[19:17] My name is Chen Yu.

[19:18] I'm a part of the Pasadena Fire Department.

[19:21] I'm here as a member and as a loser in the EEN fire.

[19:29] I want to advocate for this, for you guys to let the people decide if they should approve

[19:35] the attacks.

[19:36] And I hope you guys do, because I don't want anybody to go through what I'm going through

[19:42] and continue to go through and there's, I think we're kind of a little late behind

[19:46] on this game because me as a survivor, it feels like people have moved on and it's

[19:51] the next thing.

[19:52] So hopefully we can get this out there and have the people decide.

[19:56] Thank you.

[19:57] Thank you, sir.

[19:58] Thank you. David Kissinger, followed by Christian Miller, then Rafi Bachachian.

[20:05] [CC] Sure, welcome. Welcome. Go ahead. Good evening Mayor Gordo, members of the City Council,

[20:07] [AD] Public Speaker David Kissinger approaches the podium. [CC] Sure, welcome. Welcome. Go ahead. Good evening Mayor Gordo, members of the City Council,

[20:10] [CC] Sure, welcome. Welcome. Go ahead. Good evening Mayor Gordo, members of the City Council,

[20:11] David Kissinger with the Pestate Foothills Association of Realtors. Thank

[20:15] you for having this discussion tonight. Every first responder standing

[20:18] behind me in this room and in the department deserve to have the best

[20:21] resources available for protecting the community. This measure is not it and I

[20:27] to urge you to send it back. It needs more work. It needs more tension, more focus and a better

[20:32] financial plan so that the financial backing for the department can be made available. So what's

[20:38] wrong with what's wrong with the proposal right now on the table? The cost is actually so the

[20:43] the voters in Pasadena have been asked a number of times since 2020 to pay a little bit extra

[20:47] on their property taxes bringing the total cost according to our calculations of closer to $1,700

[20:53] over $1,700.

[20:54] For some families, that is as many as one to two months of groceries.

[20:59] The proposal as it stands now is unbalanced and it is unfair to property owners.

[21:05] The burden is almost entirely, we believe, on homeowners.

[21:10] While there is a provision for landlords and housing providers to pass it through

[21:15] to tenants, that is at best a Byzantine complicated and poorly documented process

[21:21] that a landlord would need to apply for again and again

[21:23] every single year forever,

[21:26] because this item does not have a sunset.

[21:28] We do not have faith respectfully in the rental housing board

[21:31] to process these requests in good faith,

[21:33] and so it is a deep concern for us.

[21:36] What I one again ask you to do is send it back,

[21:39] rework it, come up with a financial plan that works

[21:41] at a minimum, provide something like a sunset date,

[21:44] add for a more equitable and balanced pass-through,

[21:48] make it apply equally to all residents

[21:50] in all businesses of the city, come up with a better financial plan, something that doesn't

[21:54] necessarily need to go to the voters or to property taxes to make this plan work.

[21:58] Thank you all very much.

[21:59] Thank you.

[22:00] Thank you.

[22:01] [CC] Christian Miller, followed by Raffi Bajacian, then Jesus Rojas, Claire Bryan, Adam Bray

[22:03] [AD] Public Speaker Christian Miller approaches the podium. [CC] Christian Miller, followed by Raffi Bajacian, then Jesus Rojas, Claire Bryan, Adam Bray

[22:06] [CC] Christian Miller, followed by Raffi Bajacian, then Jesus Rojas, Claire Bryan, Adam Bray

[22:07] Ali, Christina Terazas.

[22:11] Hi, Mayor, Council, thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak.

[22:14] I come here representing the city as a resident, I was born and raised here, born in Huntington

[22:19] hospital and as a Pasadena Fire Management President and a 21-year

[22:23] employee of the city. I wanted to address a couple of things. First of all, this

[22:28] this is something that we've been known about for a long time. It's been part

[22:32] of our strategic plan for over 20 years. I found some old documents from

[22:35] the 90s that are addressing these concerns that we have right now and

[22:39] I also recognize and appreciate that it's part of your top five priorities.

[22:43] So it's something that we need to address. Time is of the essence. If we

[22:47] addressed it 15 years ago, probably half the cost. So

[22:50] every year that goes by inflation and money just

[22:52] becomes more. I don't like paying a lot of taxes. Our

[22:56] citizens probably don't either, but they're willing

[22:58] to refurbish the library. I think they're going to

[23:01] be willing to refurbish and put money into public

[23:03] safety. The fire chief and the members behind us are

[23:06] responsible for evaluating risk. We evaluate risk for

[23:10] the lives and the citizens of Pasadena. We risk

[23:13] a life to save a life. We did that most recently at

[23:16] Eaton incident the members behind here as I was responding in as my family was

[23:19] evacuating were texting me saying where do I go well we all came in and that's

[23:23] what we want to do we want to continue to come in to serve this community and

[23:27] we can't do that if we don't have a sustainable future this provides us

[23:30] with a sustainable future it provides us with the ability to provide

[23:33] coverage to the city and it allows us to respond when we have emergencies

[23:37] like the Eaton incident thank you for your time thank you

[23:44] [AD] Public Speaker Raffy Bitchakdjian approaches the podium.

[23:48] Raffi good evening mayor council I want to thank you for your time and as

[23:51] always I want to thank the community for all the love and support they give us

[23:55] every day. I would be remiss if I never, if I didn't say that every meeting, uh,

[24:00] look around you in this room,

[24:01] every one of these firefighters that are here today represents one of your

[24:04] districts or works in one of your districts. Believe it or not.

[24:07] I know hopefully none of you have ever had to call nine one one,

[24:11] but this is our nine one one call. This is our call to the community.

[24:14] And what we want to do is give them the opportunity to vote and give them

[24:19] opportunity to help us be sustainable in the future. We want to leave this place

[24:24] better and we found it just like Christian said, been close coming up

[24:29] close to 20 years and all we have been doing is talking about it and we have

[24:32] not taken action and I think the longer we take the harder it is to be

[24:36] able to accomplish this. We've definitely kicked the can down the

[24:40] road far enough and before I retire and I leave this place I want to make

[24:45] sure that we leave it better and we found it for the future firefighters

[24:47] are in the back room. Their safety is my priority. I know it's the priority of the

[24:52] community too and we want to do the best we can and we need to be able to be

[24:56] sustainable and the chief has done an amazing plan putting this together the

[25:00] capital improvement plan to keep this place sustainable grow so that way we

[25:05] could lower our response times get there faster mitigate danger and help

[25:09] everyone that's out there in the community. So please again let's have a

[25:13] vote and let's get this measure on for November and keep this place

[25:18] sustainable and and and and take care of our firefighters and our safety and

[25:24] their families. Thank you very much. Thank you.

[25:28] [CC] Hey Zeus, Rojas, followed by Claire, Brian, then Adam Bray Ali, then

[25:34] [AD] Public Speaker Jesus Rojas approaches the podium. [CC] Hey Zeus, Rojas, followed by Claire, Brian, then Adam Bray Ali, then

[25:34] [AD] Public Speaker Jesus Rojas approaches the podium.

[25:34] [AD] Public Speaker Jesus Rojas approaches the podium. [CC] Christina, Torazas, then Pete Cutzer. Welcome. Hi, good evening. My name is

[25:37] [CC] Christina, Torazas, then Pete Cutzer. Welcome. Hi, good evening. My name is

[25:40] Jesus Rojas. I'm from the apartment association of Greater Los Angeles. I

[25:44] understands and believes that the fire services are vital for the entire

[25:48] community and should be a top priority as a core city service. However, Agla

[25:54] strongly opposes the parcel tax resolution as it is unfairly placed a

[25:59] financial burden solely onto property owners. Fire services are enjoyed by

[26:04] the entire community including renters, residential and commercial workers including

[26:09] non-residents, tourists, business, and social visitors.

[26:13] A sale tax, also known transactions and use tax,

[26:17] would be far more equitable and will face no opposition

[26:21] according to the city's finance committee report.

[26:25] If the need for additional funding is urgent,

[26:28] then the tax with the lease objectives

[26:30] should be utilized to secure passage,

[26:33] which is a sales tax and not a parcel tax.

[26:36] This is a rushed resolution that uses doing a proper mechanism as of a parcel tax instead

[26:44] of the proper mechanism of either a permanent or temporary sales tax so that everyone not

[26:49] just property owners who benefit from fire services will pay their fair share.

[26:54] Once again we urge the council to reject the parcel tax resolution and instead use

[26:59] a sales tax either permanent or temporary.

[27:03] Instead, if the council moves forward with the parcel tax, we request that all multifamily

[27:08] properties be excluded from it.

[27:11] Thank you.

[27:12] Thank you.

[27:14] [CC] Claire Bryan followed by Adam Bray-Ali, then Christina Terraza.

[27:15] [AD] Public Speaker Claire Bryan approaches the podium. [CC] Claire Bryan followed by Adam Bray-Ali, then Christina Terraza.

[27:18] Let me say I have the deepest respect for our city firefighters and for those across

[27:22] the state and country that risk their lives to keep us safe.

[27:25] But let's be honest, this parcel tax is being promoted as including a comprehensive

[27:31] wildfire prevention plan.

[27:34] It does not.

[27:36] Less than 5% of the money is directed

[27:38] to wildfire prevention throughout the entire city.

[27:42] And that paltry amount is stretched

[27:44] to include litter control and work program development.

[27:48] Not a single dime is earmarked

[27:51] for the dire fire hazard presented by the Arroyo Seco

[27:54] with its decades old buildup

[27:56] of dead trees and ladder fuel.

[27:58] This 227 million dollar plan misses the point.

[28:03] All fire experts agree that firefighters are basically

[28:07] helpless in putting down high wind driven wildfires

[28:11] unless until hundreds of thousands of people

[28:14] are dead and houses are burned.

[28:16] The best defense against a wildfire

[28:18] is vegetation management.

[28:20] Clearing away the dead fuel that feeds the flames.

[28:24] The Arroyo Seco with the steep slopes

[28:26] and North-South orientations, ready-made pile of kindling

[28:31] or even a spark from a campfire can set up a conflagration.

[28:36] I don't know whether the fire department needs

[28:38] all the new equipment they're asking for.

[28:41] I'm not sure that a comprehensive city-wide fire risk

[28:45] has been done and has analyzed how these news changes

[28:49] will affect things.

[28:51] But with respect to fire prevention in the Arroyo Seco,

[28:54] I do know this, it's urgent.

[28:56] I'm asking you to take immediate steps to address the dangerous accumulation of brush

[29:00] and vegetation.

[29:02] It's not a landscaping or maintenance issue, it's a wildfire safety issue.

[29:07] The city has recognized this in approving vegetation removal and goat grazing near

[29:12] Arroyo Seco.

[29:13] Pasadena cited the sequoia exemption for actions necessary to prevent or mitigate a

[29:18] wildfire emergency, yet significant areas of the Arroyo remain heavily overgrown.

[29:24] Miss Brian your time is expired. I didn't hear a bill one paragraph

[29:32] One paragraph the City Council is designated. You have the money. We want to be fair to everyone. So if you could

[29:38] [CC] If you'll

[29:40] [AD] Claire Bryan hands papers to the sergeant-at-arms. [CC] If you'll

[29:40] [AD] Claire Bryan hands papers to the sergeant-at-arms.

[29:45] hand it to the sergeant arms, thank you. Thank you

[29:52] Good evening mayor members of the City Council and more importantly the incredible men and women I see all around the room behind me

[30:01] Thank you for the opportunity to speak to this.

[30:03] I really wanna start by making one thing crystal clear.

[30:06] I strongly support our firefighters

[30:08] and the essential life-saving services

[30:09] they provide to our city every single day.

[30:13] However, I strongly oppose this parcel tax measure.

[30:17] The amount being discussed, the $22 million,

[30:20] represents less than 1.5% of the city's budget.

[30:23] Bringing this forward is a last minute,

[30:25] truly the last minute of this opportunity

[30:27] to put something on the tax measures,

[30:29] It feels like a Hail Mary designed and calculated to create division in our community, rather

[30:36] than fostering smart, disciplined budget decisions.

[30:40] It is deeply discouraging to see the General Fund priorities manipulated to create a false

[30:44] narrative, essentially making it appear as though the new tax is the only way to fund

[30:49] core services.

[30:50] Fire protection is a primary municipal responsibility.

[30:54] It should be prioritized directly within the General Fund, not held out as an excuse

[30:58] for an additional tax.

[31:01] Beyond the process, the structure of this tax is really fundamentally flawed. It never ends.

[31:07] There's no sunset to guarantee long-term oversight or accountability.

[31:12] It is unfairly distributed. It places a heavy burden on residential income properties and commercial properties

[31:18] without recognizing that all community members benefit from the fire protection and should share in funding it. For housing providers,

[31:25] this burden is especially compounding. Between the rising rent stabilization

[31:30] department fees and this proposed tax, owners will face at least $500 per year

[31:36] in additional fees in voted debt since 2022 per unit. These costs cannot be

[31:41] passed through or accounted with under CPI rent increases. In short, this

[31:47] last-minute Hail Mary should be adjusted and or rejected. Thank you.

[31:51] [CC] Thank you. Thank you. Christina Terrazas followed by Pete Kutzer. Welcome. Good evening Mayor,

[31:53] [AD] Public Speaker Christina Terrazas approaches the podium. [CC] Thank you. Thank you. Christina Terrazas followed by Pete Kutzer. Welcome. Good evening Mayor,

[31:56] [CC] Thank you. Thank you. Christina Terrazas followed by Pete Kutzer. Welcome. Good evening Mayor,

[31:59] good evening Council. My name is Christina Terrazas and I am a Pasadena firefighter. I've been with

[32:04] the city for 25 years and I'm currently assigned at station 37 which is one of the projects that

[32:08] would be put out on this measure to be enhanced and current to today's age. Ever since I've been

[32:14] here a lot of these conversations have been part of our discussion and we have not yet

[32:19] seen them fulfilled. I don't have much longer here and I would also like to advocate for

[32:25] the future of our fire department and better serving the community in which we do every

[32:29] single day. All of these members, our brothers and sisters answer the call phenomenally every

[32:35] single day regardless of the circumstances and the things that are up for this measure,

[32:38] but we are asking for a unanimous vote and your support so that we can have the

[32:45] of Pasadena go out and make this decision and just as we care for them

[32:50] we're asking that we give the opportunity to educate them and discuss

[32:54] this with them so that we can have a better city altogether that we serve.

[32:59] Thank you. Thank you.

[33:05] [AD] Public Speaker Pete Kutzer approaches the podium.

[33:07] [AD] Public Speaker Pete Kutzer approaches the podium. [CC] Mr. Kutzer. Good evening Mr. Mayor, honorable members of

[33:08] [CC] Mr. Kutzer. Good evening Mr. Mayor, honorable members of

[33:10] the City Council and city staff. My name is Pete Kutzer and our firm is an

[33:14] active investor and developer in Pasadena primarily of commercial property.

[33:19] Thank you to the City Council and the staff for doing this difficult work of

[33:23] assessing the city's deferred maintenance and capital needs. This

[33:26] responsibility is as crucial for our long-term resilience as it is unglamorous.

[33:32] From what I've seen, however, in the current ballot measure, this tax as

[33:36] designed will not be successful. I have the following concerns. This tax

[33:41] does not sunset. It's perpetual. It's good practice to come back before the

[33:45] voters every 10 years or so to update them and renew the tax.

[33:50] This parcel tax is not a flat amount per parcel

[33:53] as traditional parcel taxes are, but it's

[33:56] assessed at $0.19 per buildable square foot.

[33:59] Therefore, it's designed to more heavily tax

[34:01] commercial buildings and apartment buildings.

[34:04] This parcel tax has no requirement

[34:06] for actually spending on the crucial capital projects that

[34:10] are the main reason for it, only that they be prioritized.

[34:15] The annual amount raised, approximately $22 million,

[34:19] appears to be about 30%

[34:21] of the current fire department budget.

[34:23] That's a big percentage,

[34:24] and so being more specific would behoove us all.

[34:27] The fire department's about 8% of the city's overall budget,

[34:30] and so I would ask, what are the expectations

[34:32] for future new taxes to help fund the capital

[34:34] and operating needs of the other 92% of city operations?

[34:40] As an example of the impact on businesses,

[34:42] I would highlight that virtually every tall office building

[34:45] Lake Avenue has recently gone through foreclosure in the last year or will in

[34:49] the next couple of years. This represents about a 10% increase in property taxes

[34:54] for every business and apartment building in Pasadena and that's a big

[34:58] increased burden with everything that's going on with inflation and

[35:01] spiking costs of insurance and utilities.

[35:05] The fire department is at the

[35:06] heart of our resiliency as a community and our firefighters put their

[35:09] lives on the line for us. I would fully support a flat rate per

[35:14] parcel tax that sunsets thank you very much thank you thank you

[35:22] that completes

[35:23] public comment on this item okay we've had previous discussions related to this

[35:30] matter are there any questions or

[35:35] requests for more information or comments

[35:36] from my colleagues I'll start with mr. Hampton who is in the queue he had his

[35:48] do we need to vote for me to participate no no okay purpose you want to make sure

[35:55] all right um i appreciate all the public commenters um for and those that want us to clarify things

[36:01] um when this came out of uh finance originally mayor i had mentioned that you know there should

[36:07] be some sort of sunset um whether it be 10 years eight 10 years i don't know um what the

[36:13] that the deadline would be but having a parcel tax on the ballot i mean having a parcel tax on

[36:18] without any sunset doesn't give a the opportunity for residents to to re-vote it

[36:25] up so I would be in support of this going on the ballot ultimately it's

[36:30] really up to the voters so I don't want to take away their opportunity if they

[36:35] believe that we need more fire services I believe that we do but I do

[36:41] think that there should be a sense that so we could have a check-in you

[36:43] know for the next council I probably will not be on the council with this

[36:48] sunset comes back up.

[36:50] But I do think that it's an opportunity

[36:52] for checks and balances.

[36:53] So I would be in favor of this with a 10 year sunset.

[36:58] Thank you, Mr. Hampton.

[37:01] Mr. Masuda.

[37:02] Thank you, Mayor.

[37:03] And I appreciate all the speakers that spoke today

[37:06] and no matter what side you're on.

[37:09] But I wrote down the comments that,

[37:11] especially the people that supported the parcel tax

[37:14] and they said to modernize our fire department

[37:16] and to reduce risk, better fire preparedness.

[37:24] Don't have people divided on this.

[37:27] So we can respond to emergencies and respond better

[37:32] and firefighters to get to the fire quicker.

[37:36] And I believe that and I'm gonna support having this

[37:40] on the ballot this year.

[37:43] Thank you.

[37:44] Thank you Mr. Masuda. Ms. Rivas followed by Mr. Jones.

[37:51] Sorry. I have a question for

[37:52] Matt. We chatted a little bit earlier about this kind of the philosophical

[37:56] different approaches to focusing on capital versus operating. I think the

[38:01] case for the capital improvements has been very clear for decades now. We got

[38:06] to rebuild two stations. We've got to build another station. We've got to

[38:10] the training center, I think that the case,

[38:15] or for me in my mind, I wanna hear funding

[38:19] ongoing operating costs by this method.

[38:21] What are the alternatives?

[38:22] Why is this the best way to do it?

[38:24] Because in my conversations with residents,

[38:27] it's a very easy conversation to have about,

[38:29] you know, these one time capital expenditures.

[38:31] There's no other way to fund them.

[38:32] But the operating costs, I mean,

[38:34] it aren't those things we should be figuring out

[38:36] how to fund in other ways and planning

[38:39] for decades down the road instead of just relying on this measure so if you

[38:45] can shed any light on that. Sure I I would say is as a couple the the

[38:51] firefighters noted earlier that that this has been part of the plan for

[38:55] quite a long time and and I would say that the city has been prioritizing

[39:01] fire improvements where we can we recently added a six rescue ambulance to

[39:06] response we recently added a second battalion chief shift for all three

[39:13] shifts so we have been making incremental gains but looking in the

[39:19] forecast of all of the other things that we need to make we don't believe

[39:23] that we'll be able to achieve all of these within our current operating

[39:27] structure in terms of the general fund being primarily property tax sales

[39:33] tax, utility users' tax growth, most of those are,

[39:38] I mean, you've heard for the last many, many years

[39:41] we've been challenging, we've been challenged

[39:43] with balancing the budget, and so the city is,

[39:47] we've had a parcel tax for the library

[39:49] for quite a long time, and yes, that's had a sunset

[39:52] and the voters have approved extending that sunset

[39:55] for many years, but in working with the chief

[39:58] and the other parties involved, we believe

[40:01] that things like adding another truck unit,

[40:04] another fire suppression unit,

[40:07] opening up a ninth fire station,

[40:09] those are things that we're just not gonna be able

[40:10] to absorb the operating costs

[40:12] within our existing revenue structure long-term.

[40:16] And that's why we have been trying to maximize

[40:18] our return on billables for emergency response

[40:22] for our rescue ambulances.

[40:23] And I think the chief and the firefighters in the room,

[40:26] they've doubled that revenue,

[40:27] I think in the last six, seven years.

[40:29] and that's how we've afforded the six rescue ambulance

[40:32] and things like that.

[40:33] So we have been doing as much as we can

[40:35] and we think we're at the point where our budget

[40:37] won't be able to support it under the status quo.

[40:40] I appreciate that explanation.

[40:43] I'm also interested in having some sort of sunset

[40:46] or giving voters an opportunity to re-up

[40:49] or to continue on with the tax.

[40:54] Does staff have a position on the timing of that though?

[40:57] I believe Council Member Hampton mentioned 10 years

[40:59] in your presentation you mentioned

[41:00] that the current proposal would fund operational needs

[41:02] for 15 years, is there a preference

[41:05] or do you have a suggestion on the timeframe for a sunset?

[41:08] Sure, I mean, if the council did desire to put a sunset,

[41:12] this is why we offered up the model

[41:14] which had the getting everything done

[41:16] within the first 10 years

[41:19] and purposely looking at a pay as you go method

[41:21] in case we couldn't issue 20 or 30 year debt.

[41:25] And so we do believe that we could achieve

[41:26] all the results within that 10 year window if the council so choose chose to

[41:31] put a 10 or 15 year sunset on it that's why we built this model is so that it

[41:37] could accommodate a sunset if the council wanted to go that route okay

[41:41] so the model could accommodate a 10 or 15 year sunset and I'm assuming a 15

[41:46] year sunset would be more preferable give you more breathing room it it

[41:50] it would still go back to voters right right but rebuilding two fire

[41:57] in building a new fire station.

[41:59] We will work earnestly on that,

[42:01] but yeah, the extra years gives us a little more runway,

[42:05] but I mean, we believe we can do it in the 10 years as well,

[42:08] if that's what the council wants to do.

[42:09] Okay, thank you so much, Mayor.

[42:10] I'm supportive, but I would prefer a sunset

[42:13] to give voters the chance to revisit this

[42:15] in 10 or 15 years.

[42:17] I think I'd have a slight preference for 15,

[42:19] but open to both.

[42:21] Thank you.

[42:22] Thank you.

[42:23] Mr. Cole.

[42:26] Thank you, Mayor.

[42:28] Three things. First, my appreciation to everyone who spoke.

[42:37] This is not the ideal way to make

[42:41] this decision. I think we could all acknowledge that. What is true is that there is a rush

[42:47] to put this on the ballot because we have a limited timeframe. This will have to wait

[42:53] two years if we don't move tonight.

[42:56] What's not true is that this is new.

[42:59] Our fire chief, since he arrived here,

[43:02] has done an extraordinary job of really analyzing

[43:09] what the needs of a 21st century fire department

[43:12] for the city of Pasadena needs to be

[43:15] in order to protect every single one

[43:17] of the people in this room.

[43:20] And we have done the studies.

[43:21] We have done the analysis and we have done the hard work

[43:29] of recognizing that it can't be accommodated within our,

[43:33] we're going to have a struggle to balance our budget, period,

[43:36] given all of the challenges facing cities with inflation.

[43:42] So, this, a lot of work has gone into this

[43:46] and that's why I'm prepared to support it.

[43:48] Like my colleagues, I think that a forever tax

[43:54] is understandably a concern to folks in the community,

[43:58] and all of us are concerned about the various taxes

[44:01] that have been piled on by the school district,

[44:04] by the community college, by us, by the county.

[44:08] And this is yet one more.

[44:10] So on the timing, could we issue 15-year finance?

[44:18] Certainly we have in the past.

[44:22] Yeah, that's long enough that we could certainly issue debt on that kind of timeframe.

[44:27] So I'm more comfortable with a 15-year, because I do think we want to accelerate that.

[44:33] I also believe, Mr. Mayor, and I'll make this as part of the motion, whoever ends

[44:38] up making the motion tonight,

[44:41] that we have actually a guarantee that we are going to

[44:49] unsound and we are going to build a ninth station. I think to prioritize that

[44:54] I understand why people are concerned. That is our priority. That should be our

[44:59] commitment to the voters that if they are willing to make this investment

[45:04] that they see the tangible results.

[45:09] And finally this may not make a

[45:15] in how a person votes, it may make a difference

[45:19] in how people prioritize their finances,

[45:22] particularly people who we know out there will struggle.

[45:27] I am more comfortable with the original 17 cents

[45:31] we talked about, we talked about a range,

[45:33] 17 to I think 24 cents.

[45:35] 19 is a reasonable number in terms of financing

[45:39] all of the things we want to do.

[45:40] But I think the citizens who've raised concerns

[45:44] and their legitimate concerns tonight about,

[45:46] well, what is the city doing?

[45:47] Where's the city prioritizing this?

[45:50] And you've made the point, which again,

[45:52] we need to make clear to the community

[45:54] that we have found additional resources.

[45:57] The last three years running,

[45:59] we have added over and above the existing staffing

[46:03] and operations of the fire department.

[46:07] And we've done that through the budget process.

[46:10] but I think I would be more comfortable with the 17 cents. It's a small adjustment

[46:17] but I think that puts us in a better position for us to make some hard

[46:23] decisions around this table and that's what I think citizens are asking us to

[46:27] do.

[46:31] Mr. Lyon. Thank You Mayor. I also want to thank everyone who came out to

[46:37] I was I've been talking all weekend about this and about the development in

[46:44] my in my neighborhood back and forth and have heard from a lot of people that I

[46:50] I and heard a lot of what you had to say today I'm particularly sensitive to

[46:55] mr. Cutzer's comments about the burden on commercial buildings which I hadn't

[47:01] really fully appreciated in the formulation of this tax and it you

[47:05] South Lake is in my district and I have we are still reeling from those

[47:10] bankruptcies we are an expensive place to live I say all the time we're also an

[47:14] expensive place to do business and we're gonna have to reckon with that

[47:18] and all of that said I am highly convinced of the need here it as

[47:24] people said very well today it goes back many many years a few people

[47:31] have said like this is all sort of a rush to judgment after the Eaton

[47:34] I think the Eden fire just demonstrated for us the urgency of this work but we

[47:40] knew certainly clearly before that this work was essential. I also appreciate all

[47:44] our firefighters coming out. Y'all I hope we don't have a big fire tonight

[47:48] because I'm worried about it. But thank you for being here. It's good to see

[47:52] all of you in one place. We don't get to do that very often.

[47:57] So the things

[47:57] I think we're all leaning toward putting this on the

[48:02] it and and I thought Rafi said very well like ultimately this is a question for

[48:07] the people to decide and we should let the people to decide I think we do need

[48:13] to give it the best chance of passing and what I heard all weekend were two

[48:17] things one it needs a sunset to a person every person said to me I would

[48:24] feel much more comfortable if I knew it stopped the second thing were

[48:28] variations on the theme of some guarantee that the money actually goes

[48:32] to what we say it's going to, whether that is citizen

[48:35] oversight or a firmer promise in the ballot language

[48:42] than we have.

[48:43] So that's my question to you.

[48:46] How do we shore up the, because certainly we

[48:48] have had measures in the past, whether at the county,

[48:51] I don't know if we have in this city,

[48:53] but certainly at the county and state level

[48:56] that didn't fund what we thought

[49:00] they were going to fund.

[49:01] right so how do we meaningfully convince the public that that these funds are

[49:08] going to go to these projects and in 10 years or 15 years or whatever sunset we

[49:12] decide on we're going to see these two stations

[49:14] rehabbed and a new station built sure so in the big picture this is a

[49:21] special tax and so it doesn't go into the general

[49:24] fund it's not part of the broader general fund

[49:28] and the city as mentioned earlier had a library tax for

[49:32] many, many years of parcel tax,

[49:34] and I'm not aware of us ever being challenged

[49:36] on whether or not we appropriately use

[49:37] the library tax for library purposes.

[49:41] So it is a special tax, it just can't get lumped in

[49:44] to everything else that we do.

[49:47] The proposed language that would amend the municipal code

[49:50] does establish a baseline,

[49:52] so we can't just pull money out of the existing budget

[49:57] and supplant it with this money,

[49:58] because it establishes a baseline

[50:00] based on our current deployment and things like that.

[50:03] And then the other thing is if the council wants to,

[50:07] there is the language, as you mentioned earlier,

[50:10] about capital improvement

[50:12] and capital improvement prioritization.

[50:14] I think that if the council would like,

[50:16] it says capital improvement is currently,

[50:18] it says capital improvements for the fire department,

[50:19] including stations, training centers, fire headquarters,

[50:22] essential safety, infrastructure, rescue,

[50:24] ambulances, fire apparatus, and equipment.

[50:27] We can bolster that to specifically call out

[50:31] fire stations 33, 37, and a new fire station

[50:34] if the council would like to more firmly highlight

[50:38] what those are, and that would be in section 4.110.150,

[50:45] which is the purpose of it.

[50:47] We can bolster that section.

[50:50] Okay, I would like to see some language firming it up.

[50:52] I think these are the things that I'm hearing,

[50:54] and I also would support a sunset.

[50:56] And with that, I'm supportive.

[51:02] So before I, oh, Mr. Jones.

[51:05] You wanna go?

[51:06] No, go ahead, Mr. Jones.

[51:07] Thanks, Mayor.

[51:08] And then thanks to the firefighters

[51:11] that turned out here today and also to our residents.

[51:15] You know, first I wanna say, like,

[51:17] I'm very supportive of our fire department.

[51:19] I also understand that the financial realities

[51:23] of our working class residents,

[51:25] Every dollar counts towards medication,

[51:28] towards groceries, towards gas.

[51:30] And I'm not just speaking this, you know,

[51:31] obviously from my own experience,

[51:33] but from talking to the residents

[51:34] over these past few weeks,

[51:36] since we started to initiate this discussion.

[51:39] With that said, I do think we need to move forward

[51:42] with supporting this ballot measure

[51:45] and place it on the ballot and let the voters decide.

[51:49] And I think ultimately, you know,

[51:51] we need to make sure that we retrofit

[51:54] our stations, we need to make sure

[51:56] that we have a new training facility

[51:58] for our fire department, have a new battalion chief.

[52:02] I think we approved one last year

[52:03] and didn't have a third one.

[52:05] And I would say that this has been around

[52:06] for quite some time.

[52:07] Ever since I came on the city council

[52:09] when I met with the chief,

[52:12] after he asked me how much weight did I deadlift,

[52:15] he brought up the 10-year plan.

[52:20] He brought up his vision for the fire department.

[52:23] And I think we have a world-class fire department.

[52:25] And so that requires, you know,

[52:27] obviously world-class thinking,

[52:28] and it requires resources for us

[52:30] to keep our community safe.

[52:32] And I heard today, and I heard also

[52:34] these past couple of weekends

[52:35] about sunsetting this parcel tax.

[52:38] So I'd be interested in evaluating

[52:40] the 15-year sunset.

[52:43] I'd be open to discussing a 10-year sunset as well.

[52:47] And also the, as my colleague has said,

[52:50] some firmer promise to the voters

[52:53] on what this money will be used for.

[52:56] Just making sure that there's a guarantee

[52:58] that the money's gonna be used to retrofit the stations.

[53:01] I don't know if I'd go as far as, say,

[53:03] Fire Station 33 and Fire Station 37,

[53:05] maybe just saying retrofit the fire stations.

[53:09] And also, I guess, for the city manager,

[53:12] for the interim city manager,

[53:14] as he whispers to the finance director,

[53:16] can we spend this money on other items

[53:22] so in calling the election there's a

[53:26] resolution and in the resolution there's a whole slew of where as's and then

[53:31] there is the amendment to the municipal code if it's not in that document we

[53:36] can't spend money on it that document also provides the guardrails of what

[53:41] we can spend money on and so while for example fire stations 33 and 37

[53:46] aren't currently in the draft municipal code amendment, they are in the where as's.

[53:51] And in the where as's, it's very explicit. It says including reconstruction of fire station 3337,

[53:58] construction of an additional fire station, etc. are the things that we've talked about. So

[54:03] if we want to put any more guard rails, it should be in that resolution document.

[54:07] I see. Okay. That's helpful. And then I did hear about the burden on commercial properties

[54:14] on Lake, I mean, could you just opine on that, Matt?

[54:22] I'm not sure what, I'm not gonna disagree on the burden.

[54:26] The burden is on everyone.

[54:29] We evaluated a number of options in approaching it

[54:34] and the reality is is we didn't believe

[54:38] there was any perfect model.

[54:39] We believe this was a good model to approach to do this

[54:43] in trying to take an approach to fixed income

[54:48] and low income and size of properties

[54:51] and size of residences because while one person

[54:56] might say, well, you should do it on parcel type

[54:58] or parcel size, somebody else will come and say,

[55:00] that's not fair because then the single family

[55:03] residential property of 25,000 or 40,000 square feet

[55:07] that lives on an acre pays the same as a bungalow

[55:11] that's 600 square feet or 800 square feet, right?

[55:14] So there is no perfect science.

[55:16] We believe that this is a fair and equitable way

[55:21] to apply it across the board.

[55:23] We understand that the commercial market

[55:24] is challenging right now.

[55:31] But that's the method that we went with.

[55:34] I don't have, unfortunately I don't have a magic answer

[55:37] that will make everybody feel exponentially better.

[55:40] Yeah, I mean, and that's helpful.

[55:42] So, I mean, I'm prepared to support it

[55:44] and I'm also prepared to make the motion

[55:46] which would approve this to place on the ballot,

[55:49] but also to have a sunset of a 15 year

[55:53] or a re-evaluation for the residents every 15 years,

[55:57] and then also provide the firmer language

[56:00] that you mentioned.

[56:03] Thank you, Mayor.

[56:05] So a check-in?

[56:06] A check-in, yeah, I think a check-in to the council

[56:09] on year 15, perhaps, or.

[56:13] I think a sunset is gonna be

[56:15] what people are gonna ask for.

[56:16] Yeah, so I

[56:20] think likely what would happen is if the council goes with the 15-year sunset

[56:25] and this is approved, it's probably prudent to have a check-in at year 9 or 10 to see

[56:32] did we hit our 10-year plan, and then you have five years to strategize what's the

[56:38] next appropriate thing because maybe it's putting it to the voters at year 10.

[56:43] Maybe it's taking it back to the voters in year 14.

[56:46] So I think that a check-in with the council on the year 10 with yeah, or maybe it's your eight, right?

[56:53] But but like I mean, I imagine there's gonna be a check-in every year with the council

[56:57] Those are gonna progress that we're happening, right? But but a 15-year sunset. I wouldn't in my seat today

[57:03] I wouldn't recommend waiting till you're 15 to go

[57:05] Should we keep doing this or not? Right? Like we should be checking in every year to see are we make by the motion?

[57:12] To check in every year with the City Council

[57:15] I believe there's some language that every year

[57:17] you have to audit.

[57:19] And so that would be, so if we could have a public hearing

[57:22] on that every year, that would give residents

[57:25] an opportunity to actually have the transparency

[57:29] and accountability that we're doing the right thing.

[57:32] I'd be supportive of that.

[57:34] So if your motion is a 15-year sunset, I second that.

[57:37] Well, before we get to motions,

[57:41] let's go through everyone

[57:43] and give everyone an opportunity.

[57:45] Mr. Madison.

[57:48] Thank you, Mayor.

[57:49] I'm supportive of the staff recommendation

[57:52] and I'm concerned about some of the sort of hedges

[57:58] that I'm hearing about guarantees

[58:00] and sun setting and the like.

[58:03] Let me ask staff, Matt, I agree with your earlier statement

[58:10] but I just wanna confirm that we haven't ever had a case

[58:14] where we haven't followed our promise

[58:18] in terms of a special tax or assessment.

[58:24] I'm not recalling any, are you?

[58:26] No, not for a special tax.

[58:29] I have, yeah, that's the short answer.

[58:32] No, not regarding a special tax.

[58:34] So the two words I've heard are guarantee and sunset.

[58:41] I'm not sure, guarantee always makes me

[58:43] little squeamish because there would be so many actions required by future city

[58:48] councils to actually execute and implement the plans even for a rehab

[58:55] which I have no doubt we've already rehabbed numerous fire stations I mean

[58:58] our commitment on that is clear these final two are more substantial because

[59:04] they require demo and rebuild but like what does that guarantee actually look

[59:12] or is it just window dressing?

[59:16] And I would, this is Michelle Bonnerice, the city attorney.

[59:19] I would note that as the city manager,

[59:22] the interim city manager referenced,

[59:24] the proposed ordinance does specify,

[59:28] and I found some of the sections where there are limits

[59:35] and it's limited to what it can be spent on

[59:39] in sections 4.110.140 and 4.110.150.

[59:48] And that sets forth the bases for spending the funds

[59:57] and the limitations set forth in the code.

[1:00:03] So is it your assessment Michelle that those are guardrails? Yes, I would say that's what they are in the ordinance in various places

[1:00:10] and then in terms of

[1:00:14] the sunset

[1:00:16] Matt could you help us?

[1:00:19] Is the idea that with a sunset in 15 years the assessment would stop

[1:00:28] Well another election by the community the council putting it on the ballot for another

[1:00:34] round of expensive elections and a two-thirds requirement that it that it

[1:00:41] continue if there was a sunset then yes it would be it would require to go back

[1:00:46] to voters for a renewal or an extension and you may want to look at oh I'm

[1:00:53] sorry this is Michelle you may want to look at the time frames I mean I don't

[1:00:59] 15 years from 1986 I don't know where that puts you in an election

[1:01:06] cycle so you should probably look at that if you're looking at those kinds of

[1:01:13] sunset time frames I would think right and so that's how I land on 10 or 14 well

[1:01:24] I don't support a sunset because I think if a future council were in the

[1:01:29] position that we got all the work done and we'd satisfy ourselves that we

[1:01:35] the fire department that we need in terms of the infrastructure and staffing and

[1:01:41] remember part of this proposal is for staffing so if you're funding ongoing

[1:01:46] staffing needs which is proven and appropriate with this assessment you'd

[1:01:55] really be facing a cliff that the city would be driving off of if it

[1:01:58] automatically sunset it and we'd either be looking at massive changes to

[1:02:04] budget to be able to continue those operations or a reduction of service, which I don't think anybody

[1:02:11] would support. So I don't support either the quote-unquote guarantee or the sun setting.

[1:02:18] Obviously, if we were in a position where we could essentially walk this back,

[1:02:25] reduce the assessment, do whatever it took to terminate it, great. But I wouldn't want to

[1:02:35] automatically going I mean let's take a reality check at 19 cents I remember Matt

[1:02:41] at the last meeting you showed us what that would look like and if I recall it

[1:02:47] was $150 something like that for an average home in Pasadena first you're

[1:02:54] looking at about three hundred and four dollars okay thank you for that so I

[1:02:59] also don't support reducing the amount that's in the recommendation

[1:03:02] Because I think those pencils were pretty sharp when staff worked them up in terms

[1:03:07] of what the real costs are going to be.

[1:03:09] And, of course, our experience is not that these costs tend to go down.

[1:03:13] They often go up.

[1:03:15] So I'd be nervous about reducing it and trying to do half a loaf.

[1:03:20] In terms of the commercial stakeholders, obviously, I'm gravely concerned about the

[1:03:28] of vacant buildings that one sees as one drives around

[1:03:31] and what in a post-COVID world, you know,

[1:03:34] what office space and bricks and mortar retail,

[1:03:38] all of that, what it looks like.

[1:03:40] But I totally agree with the city manager

[1:03:43] that it's sort of like what Churchill said

[1:03:45] about democracy is the worst form of government possible

[1:03:49] except that it's the best anybody's ever been able

[1:03:51] to come up with.

[1:03:52] And this too is the case that none of us likes

[1:03:58] putting an additional tax burden on our residents

[1:04:05] and property owners.

[1:04:07] But this is the fairest,

[1:04:10] the most appropriate way to do it.

[1:04:11] We had many commercial establishments

[1:04:13] that were lost in the Eaton fire.

[1:04:16] Those businesses are gonna be affected

[1:04:19] as well as our residents.

[1:04:21] Obviously our residents are our primary concern,

[1:04:23] but the business community

[1:04:26] in our commercial fabric is right there as well.

[1:04:31] So I think it's appropriate and fair.

[1:04:33] And so I'm prepared to support the staff recommendation.

[1:04:36] And if there's a motion,

[1:04:38] and I don't know that I heard the motion

[1:04:40] to be exactly that, but I would second that motion

[1:04:44] if that were the motion.

[1:04:45] Thank you.

[1:04:46] Thank you, Mr. Madison.

[1:04:49] Yeah, you know, the issue of fairness is important

[1:04:54] and for so many years are the way we tax residential property

[1:05:02] versus commercial property in my view hasn't been fair.

[1:05:07] And, you know, I'm very sensitive to commercial property,

[1:05:11] but it's a fact that upon reassessment,

[1:05:14] commercial properties often are exempted

[1:05:17] to the higher tax rate.

[1:05:19] And so this is a, what I believe to be

[1:05:23] a fairer approach to development.

[1:05:28] Again, not being insensitive to the arguments that

[1:05:31] are being raised, and we'll have to double our efforts

[1:05:37] than we have on economic development.

[1:05:40] And we'll continue to do that.

[1:05:42] In terms of the need, I'm not going

[1:05:49] to repeat what we all saw during the Eaton fire,

[1:05:51] because it was not only tragic,

[1:05:53] but physically and emotionally scarring to this community.

[1:05:59] But I am concerned about not just fire,

[1:06:05] certainly that's top of mind.

[1:06:07] But I'm concerned, and I think Jackie pointed it out,

[1:06:10] the earthquakes.

[1:06:14] If we, on the day we last discussed this matter,

[1:06:20] Two days before that, the Santa Andreas Fault

[1:06:23] saw two earthquakes in very close proximity to our city.

[1:06:31] Each of them over 4.2, I believe.

[1:06:35] And you know, that's a concern

[1:06:39] because what we saw in the fire

[1:06:42] was not only that the fire can move swiftly,

[1:06:50] and assistance doesn't arrive as quickly.

[1:06:55] You know, we had to wait, we count often on mutual aid.

[1:06:59] And mutual aid is important and it's,

[1:07:02] you know, we should continue that.

[1:07:04] But if we were to have a regional earthquake

[1:07:08] impacting more than just, you know,

[1:07:12] one geographic part of the valley, for example,

[1:07:17] the San Gabriel Valley other you know mutual aid I don't think we could

[1:07:23] rely upon like we do in an isolated incident in a couple of communities because fire departments

[1:07:32] appropriately not being critical will be focused on their own community they'll be focused on

[1:07:38] helping their own residents in an earthquake.

[1:07:43] And so we have to be prepared to help our own residents

[1:07:48] in an earthquake situation before mutual aid arrives.

[1:08:01] And we're now seeing more development,

[1:08:05] particularly because of changes in state law.

[1:08:07] We're seeing more intense development in the downtown

[1:08:12] and soon in other outside of the downtown.

[1:08:16] And we have to be prepared to respond to all emergencies,

[1:08:23] including medical emergencies, you know,

[1:08:25] and what a lot of people don't realize is, you know,

[1:08:29] firefighters can't take an elevator upstairs.

[1:08:32] I'm sorry, up to second, third, fourth,

[1:08:36] fifth floor, sixth floor,

[1:08:38] they have to take the stairwell for safety

[1:08:40] because they also wanna make sure

[1:08:43] that they arrive to provide the assistance needed.

[1:08:45] And that's gonna take more time

[1:08:47] and it's gonna be a bigger burden on our fire service.

[1:08:54] You know, in terms of investment,

[1:08:56] we have invested tremendously

[1:08:58] in our fire service and fire department,

[1:09:01] including, I would point out,

[1:09:03] what many cities don't provide,

[1:09:05] which is a four-person response.

[1:09:08] We invested tremendously to ensure

[1:09:10] that when our fire department gets that call,

[1:09:15] whether it's commercial or residential,

[1:09:17] that we have the best staffed department and response

[1:09:22] to an individual call.

[1:09:24] And a lot of cities, including Los Angeles, don't have that.

[1:09:30] and we've invested in equipment, trucks, ambulances.

[1:09:36] And what we're saying to the voters is

[1:09:39] we wanna continue to provide that service.

[1:09:42] They've responded to calls in my family

[1:09:45] and I've appreciated the assistance and friends,

[1:09:50] the assistance they've given my family and friends.

[1:09:53] So thank you to our firefighters and all those involved.

[1:09:57] And in the end, what we're asking the voters to review

[1:10:05] is our record of service.

[1:10:08] And what we're asking them is to look at our plan

[1:10:13] for continuing that level of service

[1:10:18] and doing so safely for the people who we count on.

[1:10:25] Because remember these fire stations

[1:10:26] aren't just housing fire trucks,

[1:10:30] they're housing people, families,

[1:10:33] and the people we will rely upon

[1:10:34] to come to our aid in an emergency.

[1:10:37] So I'm prepared to move forward

[1:10:42] with asking the people if in fact,

[1:10:46] our record of service and our firefighters

[1:10:48] record of service and the need to keep them safe

[1:10:52] so they can keep us safe is something

[1:10:54] they want to support.

[1:10:55] and I think that they will.

[1:10:56] It's not going to be easy because it is additional cost.

[1:11:00] You know, I personally, my family owns,

[1:11:03] we own a number of properties

[1:11:06] and we're going to have to pay

[1:11:08] on all of those properties in Pasadena.

[1:11:10] But I think keeping our commitment to family,

[1:11:14] friends, residents, and visitors to Pasadena

[1:11:18] is important and making sure that we're there

[1:11:20] when they need us is important.

[1:11:22] I don't wanna look back and say,

[1:11:25] well, if we'd just done things differently,

[1:11:27] we could have helped more people

[1:11:28] or provided a better response in an earthquake,

[1:11:31] in a fire or any other emergency.

[1:11:40] Mr. Hampton, you're back in the queue.

[1:11:45] Yeah, so I appreciate everyone's comments.

[1:11:48] I do, once again, we talked about this

[1:11:51] at the Finance Committee.

[1:11:52] I did think that a 10-year sunset would be most ideal.

[1:11:57] I think it gives the opportunity for the residents

[1:12:00] to vote on again.

[1:12:01] I appreciate Councilman Madison's comments

[1:12:04] about not having a sunset.

[1:12:08] I would say that I don't yield to him at all.

[1:12:11] I mean, as far as a supporter of public safety,

[1:12:15] since I've been on the council,

[1:12:16] Councilman Madison has been one of the biggest supporters

[1:12:19] he would give every dollar that we'd have

[1:12:21] to first responders if we could.

[1:12:24] So I appreciate his comments,

[1:12:26] but I do think that we need a 10-year sunset.

[1:12:30] And so I would make a motion for a 10-year sunset.

[1:12:34] That's the only way I'd be able to support this

[1:12:36] if we're looking for unanimous support.

[1:12:39] This is uphill battle.

[1:12:41] The responses I've received from residents

[1:12:44] that were even affected by the Eden Fire.

[1:12:47] There's only two districts in the city

[1:12:48] that were affected by the Eden Fire.

[1:12:50] There was one in four.

[1:12:52] And we were all affected, don't get me wrong.

[1:12:54] but I think as far as homes being lost we're one in four and even those uh that lost their homes

[1:13:01] are I've sent me communications that were not favorable for the outcomes of of this at least

[1:13:09] within my district boundary so I think giving more um assurances uh as mentioned you know the

[1:13:18] the fire stations that are in dire need 33 and 37 and also having a ninth fire station

[1:13:26] be identified somewhere but definitely having a sunset would be of 10 years would be

[1:13:35] where I stand and so that's the motion I'm making and that's that thank you did I get

[1:13:43] a second on my motion you did so there was already a motion so you're making a substitute

[1:13:49] motion.

[1:13:52] The second on your motion was for 15 years and I was going to call out

[1:13:56] that our elections don't happen in 15 year cycles or odd cycles I'd say.

[1:14:06] So

[1:14:06] yours was ten years? Ten years. I mean I like to hear what my colleagues have

[1:14:11] to say about it.

[1:14:14] Mr. Cole?

[1:14:16] I am very committed to the

[1:14:19] petrofit of the two fire stations that we worry reasonably would not withstand a major

[1:14:26] earthquake. I think that that is one of the reasons why I'm willing to move forward and

[1:14:32] not wait two years is, as Mr. Madison said, there's a lot of pieces that go into that.

[1:14:38] But I think that we have no excuse to not initiate as quickly as possible the reconstruction

[1:14:50] of two fire stations that will be, as the mayor has just pointed out, will be critical

[1:14:55] to emergency response in the case of a major earthquake.

[1:14:59] So how would we how would we make sure within a 10-year window that we could

[1:15:10] be able to finance those two stations would that mean postponing some of the

[1:15:17] other operational augmentations or are there ways in which we could finance

[1:15:23] this or partially finance this through a 10-year paper?

[1:15:29] So I will start by saying, if that's the council's direction,

[1:15:34] we'll find a way to make it happen.

[1:15:37] The other thing I will say is that the outline

[1:15:41] that we provided earlier today frontloaded the training

[1:15:44] center.

[1:15:45] It might mean that the training center doesn't

[1:15:47] get frontloaded.

[1:15:49] One of the renovations gets frontloaded.

[1:15:52] We'll still have the challenge,

[1:15:53] and the fire chief is here.

[1:15:55] if you may wanna comment on it,

[1:15:56] but one of the conversations about

[1:15:59] it would be challenging to have two stations

[1:16:01] being rebuilt at the same time,

[1:16:04] but we'd work on that too.

[1:16:08] The other thing which this draft ordinance does provide

[1:16:12] is the city could advance funds

[1:16:15] that the tax could repay.

[1:16:17] So the city could advance funds if it wanted

[1:16:20] from reserves or somewhere else

[1:16:22] and get repaid from tax collections

[1:16:24] if the council did want to accelerate something faster

[1:16:28] than we could generate the revenue through Pay As You Go.

[1:16:30] So I think there's enough opportunities in there

[1:16:33] that we could certainly shift those earlier in the priority

[1:16:36] if that's the council's direction.

[1:16:37] There was an amendment or a substitute motion offered

[1:16:40] by Mr. Hampton which,

[1:16:42] so far as I know, has not gotten a second.

[1:16:46] We are colleagues around this table

[1:16:48] and I respect everyone's view

[1:16:53] and we don't have unanimity on every aspect of this.

[1:16:56] And so I think all of us will need

[1:16:58] to be flexible in some ways.

[1:17:01] I'm willing to be flexible to gain Mr. Hampton's support

[1:17:04] by going with a 10-year sunset, as we've heard.

[1:17:09] I also strongly believe, and would

[1:17:11] ask that it be incorporated into the motion,

[1:17:13] that we guarantee at least that we

[1:17:15] retrofit the two fire stations.

[1:17:17] I think that's a tangible commitment to the folks who live there 24 hours a day and to

[1:17:29] the folks that would be served by those fire stations post an earthquake.

[1:17:36] And I will drop the 17 cents recognizing that in 10 years we're going to have an

[1:17:46] opportunity to revisit this.

[1:17:49] Mr. Madison is right that we would face a cliff.

[1:17:52] But I think we need to prove to the citizens that this

[1:17:58] insurance is worthwhile.

[1:17:59] And we have 10 years to do it.

[1:18:00] We have 10 years to show that every single penny of

[1:18:04] this is augmenting what we already have.

[1:18:07] We have a fantastic fire department today, but in a

[1:18:11] hotter and drier climate, one where we have the

[1:18:15] present risk of earthquake, one where inexorably medical response calls go up year after year

[1:18:22] after year.

[1:18:24] This is less than a dollar a day for the average homeowner.

[1:18:29] It is an investment that I think we need to give them the opportunity.

[1:18:34] Not everybody buys insurance,

[1:18:38] but boy, we found out a year and a half ago what not

[1:18:42] having insurance is like.

[1:18:44] this is insurance for all hundred and forty thousand people who live in our

[1:18:49] city so with the permission of the person making the motion those would be

[1:18:55] my points to include in the motion yeah I'd be willing to modify the sunset

[1:19:02] to ten years to accommodate unanimity as you as you've mentioned you what

[1:19:12] What else did you say?

[1:19:14] That we guarantee that we will retrofit the two fire stations

[1:19:20] that are seismically unsound today.

[1:19:25] Yeah, I mean, but you're already

[1:19:26] saying that's already included in the resolution.

[1:19:31] Yeah, once we get ready, I can offer up

[1:19:36] some revisions to the language that further

[1:19:38] clarifies that, if that's what the council wants to hear.

[1:19:41] The two stations are in there, but it

[1:19:42] say that we're going to do it within 10 years and I think we should say we're

[1:19:46] going to do it in 10 years. Are we able to do that within 10 years and do the

[1:19:54] training facility? Yeah that's that's the timeline is we've built and we

[1:19:59] believe we can do all of the things incorporated in the plan within 10

[1:20:02] years but we can certainly highlight in the capital improvement proposed

[1:20:07] municipal code section under the capital improvements we can highlight

[1:20:11] including reconstruction of fire stations 33 and 37

[1:20:14] within the first 10 years.

[1:20:17] Yeah, as an additional statement

[1:20:19] within that broader statement.

[1:20:20] We can absolutely do that.

[1:20:21] I'm willing to amend my motion

[1:20:23] to include those two things.

[1:20:26] I would say if there's a sunset,

[1:20:28] it would just be before the sunset.

[1:20:31] Yeah.

[1:20:34] You know, if we head in this direction,

[1:20:39] I would work in there that the council,

[1:20:42] whoever's sitting around this dais in five years,

[1:20:46] start the work of assessing and evaluating how it's,

[1:20:52] we avoid that financial problem that occurs

[1:20:59] when this goes away.

[1:21:00] Because we are going to need equipment,

[1:21:05] we're going to need to up staffing for fire stations,

[1:21:09] particularly a new one.

[1:21:11] All of these issues need to be worked on in advance

[1:21:16] so that an education campaign can be undertaken.

[1:21:21] And if the future council thinks they need to go

[1:21:25] to the voters, there'll be sufficient time to do that.

[1:21:29] And so at five years, if not before,

[1:21:34] no later than five years, I would say,

[1:21:35] the work has to start.

[1:21:36] Ms. Rivas?

[1:21:37] Mary, yeah, my comments are along similar lines

[1:21:39] when I just wanna make sure we're considering

[1:21:41] all the logistics of the 10 year versus the 15 and the timing of our election. So

[1:21:45] if we're looking at 15 years and we want to put it to the voters to re-up

[1:21:50] or you know continue it we'd have to put it in back on the ballot 14 years

[1:21:55] from now. So we'd have a one-year leeway. If we're looking at 10 years

[1:22:00] we'd have to put on the ballot eight years from now. So we'd have a

[1:22:03] two-year leadway but that you know fewer time will have passed.

[1:22:10] We may not

[1:22:10] completed projects and I'm still I feel more comfortable with the 15 year

[1:22:15] timeline and going to the voters in year 14 then going to the voters in eight

[1:22:20] years and then having it sunset in 10 I don't know I guess I'm looking to staff

[1:22:24] or there's any other timing considerations we should be looking at

[1:22:29] when it comes to elections and perhaps other considerations that we

[1:22:33] haven't brought up yet sure why I would say that although it would

[1:22:38] sunset in ten years because it's a parcel tax, the council could still put it on the

[1:22:42] ballot in ten years and it wouldn't sunset, it would still keep going if voters approved

[1:22:47] it.

[1:22:48] So it wouldn't have to go in year eight, it could go in year ten.

[1:22:53] Well, actually no, in year

[1:22:56] ten.

[1:22:56] Correct.

[1:22:57] Yeah, it's another consideration wanting to time it to certain elections over others

[1:23:00] potentially.

[1:23:01] Right, and that's why, that's why we were looking at ten or fourteen were the

[1:23:06] two out years that made the most sense.

[1:23:09] and you know and I would hope you know with the residents of Pasadena had

[1:23:15] invested tremendously not just in infrastructure and services and there's

[1:23:19] been a tremendous benefit to real estate and values of real estate in Pasadena

[1:23:24] and I would hope that our friends at the Pasadena Realtors and

[1:23:29] Department Association owners understand we want to maintain that

[1:23:35] level of service and continue to ensure that you know Pasadena is a safe and

[1:23:42] attractive place for people to live work visit and play and so that's a part of

[1:23:47] why we're doing this this is not something any of us want to do but it

[1:23:52] really is a desperate need at this point.

[1:23:58] Mr. Lyon then Mr. Madison. Thank

[1:24:00] Mayor so I will echo the Vice Mayor I for me the point of putting the sunset

[1:24:08] in the measure is first and foremost to give this thing the best shot of

[1:24:13] passing but second relatedly to demonstrate to the public that that

[1:24:21] this is not a grab we're trying to do something very important and very

[1:24:25] specific. That said, I'm not sure that 10 years versus 15 years or whatever number we

[1:24:35] pick in between is is materially different for the public. I think the point is having

[1:24:41] a sunset is saying this this stop so you'll get a chance to look at this again no matter

[1:24:46] what. And I'm sensitive to Councilmember Madison's point that we we want a little

[1:24:52] a runway on this thing right and and it wouldn't be bad to have some operational dollars at the

[1:24:57] back end of this even if we get it all done at the front just to for the for the transition

[1:25:02] into whatever comes next so i i want us to speak with one voice on this i hope that we will be

[1:25:08] unanimous wherever we land my preference would be for the for the longer sunset

[1:25:17] Mr. Madison.

[1:25:21] Thank you, Mayor, very much.

[1:25:22] And I too am very concerned about a 10-year sunset.

[1:25:29] I don't love a 15-year sunset

[1:25:32] for all the reasons I've already stated,

[1:25:33] so I won't repeat myself,

[1:25:35] but especially if we're still contemplating

[1:25:38] operational budget as part of the use of this revenue,

[1:25:44] it would really be imprudent

[1:25:46] to have such a short termination date.

[1:25:50] And let's be clear, when we're talking about sunsetting,

[1:25:53] that means it's gonna go away.

[1:25:56] And unless a future council goes through

[1:25:59] this entire process again, puts it on the ballot.

[1:26:04] And I had a question for staff on that,

[1:26:06] actually a couple, one is,

[1:26:08] presumably that would require also

[1:26:10] two-thirds majority at that point.

[1:26:13] Yes, sir. To pass.

[1:26:14] Yeah, so, you know, again, we've talked about the challenges of an initiative like this

[1:26:20] when we have other jurisdictions adopting new taxes sort of left and right, and then

[1:26:26] taking funding away from us at the federal level currently.

[1:26:31] I think those are the reasons why I'd be happy to have check-ins or even guarantee

[1:26:36] that we would discuss agendizing and considering a termination of the

[1:26:44] assessment, but to require us to go through this all

[1:26:48] over again, especially if we're going to use the funds for operations.

[1:26:52] Again, for three hundred dollars an average parcel,

[1:26:57] it's a lot for a lot of families. I get that,

[1:27:00] but I don't think it's the best practice.

[1:27:04] But Matt, in the limited work that we've been able to do,

[1:27:09] and I should just say that I do disagree

[1:27:12] that this has been a rush to judgment or what have you.

[1:27:15] We've been talking about this for a long time,

[1:27:17] and certainly after the Eaton fire,

[1:27:20] those conversations have intensified and increased.

[1:27:23] So I don't feel rushed at all,

[1:27:26] other than what Coach Wooden said,

[1:27:29] be quick, but don't hurry.

[1:27:31] And in the work that we've done

[1:27:33] terms of outreach has this sunset thing been a topic that's moved the needle

[1:27:39] one way or the other

[1:27:45] it it's a topic that we've wrestled with for sure staff

[1:27:50] landed on the proposal that didn't have a sunset but we certainly

[1:27:55] recognized that the council had asked us prior to build a methodology that

[1:28:00] would work with a sunset and that's why we approached the methodology that

[1:28:03] we did so yeah well just from where I said I would not have the sunset I would

[1:28:10] I'd be fine with committing to have a discussion set the agenda right now for

[1:28:18] a council meeting you know eight ten twelve years whenever it is yearly even

[1:28:23] someone said absolutely we should be talking about this and I expect we will

[1:28:27] you know this isn't going to self execute right we're gonna have

[1:28:32] Contracts year over year. We're going to have approvals of

[1:28:36] construction and the likes

[1:28:37] So this will be top of mind for all of us and I'm not I am not concerned that the staff or this council is

[1:28:43] Not going to keep its promise

[1:28:46] and then

[1:28:48] Just procedurally. I'm a little confused because I heard a motion that had a 15-year sunset and

[1:28:56] Mr. Clerk, can you remind me who seconded that?

[1:28:59] It was made by Councilmember Jones, seconded by Councilmember Cole, but then it was modified

[1:29:06] after Councilmember...

[1:29:07] Well, hold on.

[1:29:07] No, no, but you're getting ahead of me.

[1:29:10] The next thing that happened was not a modification.

[1:29:12] There was then a...

[1:29:14] Substitute motion.

[1:29:16] It did not have a second.

[1:29:17] It was made by Mr. Hampton.

[1:29:19] I thought I heard Mr. Cole second that motion also, and I don't know if that's...

[1:29:22] No, he did not.

[1:29:24] No.

[1:29:25] Okay.

[1:29:26] That was the...

[1:29:26] That motion...

[1:29:28] Sorry.

[1:29:29] yeah that motion then dies for lack of a second correct the 10-year no he had a

[1:29:36] substantive motion for 10-year it died it did not get a second but then okay

[1:29:42] council member okay that motion died for lack of a second yes sir okay so

[1:29:50] then we're back to the original motion and the maker then has amended that

[1:29:56] motion? Yes, sir.

[1:29:59] Okay. Well, I would really.

[1:30:01] or just to, as I've heard some of my colleagues indicate,

[1:30:05] to not make that modification respectfully,

[1:30:10] but rather to keep the mushing where it is.

[1:30:13] Thank you.

[1:30:19] Okay, I just want to put us in the best position

[1:30:22] to be successful.

[1:30:24] And if we go down the route of a sunset,

[1:30:31] it has to be firmly rooted and stated.

[1:30:35] and I, you know, I'm hearing 10, 15.

[1:30:42] I think if we're going to say to the voters

[1:30:46] that it is a sunset, it should be a hard sunset

[1:30:51] with a check-in and a commitment for us

[1:30:53] to work immediately at five years.

[1:30:56] The 10-year, I think, delivers that message

[1:31:01] with the five-year check-in.

[1:31:09] I would prefer-

[1:31:11] or 15 I would I would prefer not to have one but you know I can see that a

[1:31:21] majority of the council is headed in that direction so I just want to make

[1:31:25] sure that if we do it that it's you know doesn't that it feels real to the

[1:31:32] voters and that our commitment to come back to them is real so is your point

[1:31:37] you think that 10 is more persuasive than any other number I think it would

[1:31:41] I think otherwise it looks and you know, but we have to follow it up with a real commitment to

[1:31:51] Start the work at five years if not before not later than five years

[1:31:58] I have a strong preference for 14, but same or 15. I feel like we're good

[1:32:04] It's a such a short time line it to come back at eight years

[1:32:07] I worry that even if things are going well, it's just gonna be a harder case to make to the voters

[1:32:14] I don't know.

[1:32:16] Yeah, I concur Mayor because also these projects

[1:32:18] won't happen overnight and it may be the case

[1:32:21] that those who say that they're in favor of this

[1:32:24] but actually aren't out in the community

[1:32:28] that they would have an opportunity then to say,

[1:32:31] see the work hasn't happened yet

[1:32:32] and you shouldn't go down this road.

[1:32:35] Can I ask the city manager

[1:32:36] if that's the direction we're headed?

[1:32:39] Like how much operational expense

[1:32:41] are we planning on funding?

[1:32:49] Ultimately, we're funding two new rescue ambulances,

[1:32:56] a new fire suppression or fire engine, a new fire truck,

[1:33:00] and year-round weed and brush clearance abatement.

[1:33:04] Yeah, that's the truck.

[1:33:06] And then year-round brush abatement, weed abatement.

[1:33:10] Those are all operational costs that are ongoing

[1:33:15] with the current financial model of 19 cents

[1:33:20] essentially that I think it's in year 12 or 13,

[1:33:24] all of those dollars are going towards

[1:33:26] covering the operational cost,

[1:33:28] because the capital would have been paid for

[1:33:30] if we did the pay as you go plan.

[1:33:33] And then that would essentially be what the need is

[1:33:35] for all the operating costs 12 years or so down the road,

[1:33:40] depending on inflationary pressures

[1:33:42] and everything else of course.

[1:33:44] Really we'd be essentially calling a referendum

[1:33:47] in 10 years as to whether we wanted to continue

[1:33:50] as enhanced services and the capital work would be done

[1:33:54] is at least a plan.

[1:33:58] I think that's probably the conversation in any sunset.

[1:34:04] And the other thing I wanna point out,

[1:34:07] I can hear the chief reminding me in my ear,

[1:34:09] even though he's not really,

[1:34:12] is this is a 10-year capital plan.

[1:34:15] In year 12 or 15, there are gonna be other stations

[1:34:18] that are gonna need to be remodeled

[1:34:20] or they're gonna be other apparatus

[1:34:21] or fire suppression is gonna look different in 12 years

[1:34:26] or we don't know what will happen.

[1:34:28] This is our 10 year capital plan

[1:34:30] and then staffing plan going forward.

[1:34:35] But with any good plan,

[1:34:37] we will revisit that plan and create a new plan.

[1:34:42] Okay.

[1:34:44] So Mayor, I just wanna chime in

[1:34:45] that I too would be more comfortable with,

[1:34:48] let's say 14 year quote unquote sunset.

[1:34:52] Again, it's really problematic to anticipate

[1:34:57] this amount of operational expense and take that on.

[1:35:03] And I know we talk about trucks and ambulances,

[1:35:06] but what the city manager was just describing

[1:35:08] is the men and women, the firefighters

[1:35:11] who are gonna be staffing those initiatives.

[1:35:14] And it's not prudent to commit to the community

[1:35:18] that we're gonna be adding that level of service,

[1:35:20] which we should do, but also say that the funding

[1:35:23] is gonna go away for it in 10 years,

[1:35:26] absent another expensive time-consuming election

[1:35:31] where we'd go back to the voters.

[1:35:34] But I've said my piece about that.

[1:35:35] I think 14 years is much more preferable.

[1:35:41] Could I just inquire the maker?

[1:35:43] Would you accept a friendly amendment to 14 years?

[1:35:46] Yeah I would accept 14 years if that's what my colleagues want but it also

[1:35:53] sound like there wasn't a clear plan if the voters did turn this down after 10

[1:36:00] or 14 years and that's a concern as well because if there's operational

[1:36:06] costs that we're gonna be relying on the what is it 22 million or what is

[1:36:15] by year 12 you're at over 22 million you know so it's closer to 25 million by

[1:36:22] year 15 of those operational costs with all the capital already funded. Does the

[1:36:28] council have the authority to I guess stop the tax or you have to go back to

[1:36:36] the voters?

[1:36:39] No I'll look to the city attorney but as far as I know the

[1:36:45] Council could always assess a lower tax.

[1:36:49] But you can't go back up once you lower the tax.

[1:36:53] So the council could terminate the tax or lower the tax.

[1:36:57] But that would end it.

[1:37:04] Yeah.

[1:37:04] Yeah. I just inquired if the second would also

[1:37:04] I just inquired if the second would also

[1:37:06] support the friendly amendment to 14 years.

[1:37:12] I think we need more discussion on the sunset,

[1:37:14] to be honest.

[1:37:17] So I'm in the queue.

[1:37:18] I've been asked by one of my colleagues

[1:37:20] what my position is.

[1:37:21] I'd like to be heard.

[1:37:22] Mr. Cole.

[1:37:24] So my colleague quoted Coach Wooden,

[1:37:27] I will do the same, which is don't let the perfect

[1:37:32] be the enemy of the good.

[1:37:36] For all of the people who came out here tonight,

[1:37:39] they're probably wondering, why are we fixated

[1:37:42] on this one point, right?

[1:37:44] For those who think that this is an absolutely urgent need,

[1:37:49] why would we put a sunset on it?

[1:37:51] We're going to need this ongoing.

[1:37:52] And for those who are skeptical of it, even though a few said

[1:37:56] if you're going to go forward, at least put a sunset on it,

[1:37:59] this all seems like a very small concession to their concerns.

[1:38:05] So I want to take a step back.

[1:38:08] When I was mayor, the library director

[1:38:13] came to the city council asking for the entire library

[1:38:18] budget to be taken off the books.

[1:38:20] because in order to protect police

[1:38:22] and fire during the recession of the early 90s,

[1:38:26] we severely cut the library

[1:38:29] as we did all other departments besides police and fire.

[1:38:32] And we were at the point of having to close a library.

[1:38:34] And one of the things that's been a hallmark

[1:38:36] of our community is that every child is

[1:38:40] within one mile of a branch library.

[1:38:43] And what library would you close?

[1:38:46] Which neighborhood didn't deserve a library?

[1:38:50] That was the issue.

[1:38:52] So Ed Zanacca, who was library director,

[1:38:54] said, let's just take the library out.

[1:38:56] But that would have required a $12 million tax.

[1:38:59] And I just felt that was never going to pass.

[1:39:03] And so he's never forgiven me.

[1:39:06] But in order to pass the library parcel tax,

[1:39:11] I made the motion that we simply restore the funding

[1:39:15] that we had cut, which was about $3.5 million

[1:39:17] at the time.

[1:39:18] And we got 82% of the vote.

[1:39:21] And so I repeat, let's not make the perfect

[1:39:23] be the enemy of the good.

[1:39:26] I agree with Mr. Lyon.

[1:39:27] I think without a sunset, getting to 2 thirds

[1:39:30] is going to be extraordinarily difficult.

[1:39:33] And so if we're talking about $22 million or zero,

[1:39:39] I much prefer $22 million.

[1:39:44] The perfect is we have everything

[1:39:47] that we think we want.

[1:39:50] But the voters have it within their power

[1:39:52] to give us nothing.

[1:39:55] That's entirely within their authority.

[1:39:58] In fact, it's only a third of the people

[1:40:00] have to decide that.

[1:40:01] And this thing goes down in about, say, flames.

[1:40:12] But so I think that's, and I would

[1:40:16] like to see this be unanimous.

[1:40:18] So, before answering the question about 10 or 15, I would point out that the library

[1:40:24] tax was a 15-year sunset, and the voters have twice re-upped it because they saw that

[1:40:34] our library provides an extraordinarily valuable service to every neighborhood.

[1:40:39] And I think if we spend this money to augment our fire service, to retrofit to

[1:40:45] fire stations, and to deliver better service to our community, I have no doubt that the

[1:40:53] voters will continue to support this in the future as they have with the library.

[1:40:58] I can live with 10 years, I can live with 14 years, I can live with 15 years, I would

[1:41:04] like to have a unanimous vote.

[1:41:06] So I'd ask Mr. Hampton, who has made clear up until this point that his support

[1:41:12] for this is contingent on a 10 year sunset,

[1:41:14] whether he would be comfortable in the spirit

[1:41:17] of getting us to unanimity of either a 14 or 15 year sunset.

[1:41:29] I appreciate that.

[1:41:30] And I think the discussion is an important one.

[1:41:35] I am firm in the 10 years.

[1:41:38] I think that what we're asking of our residents

[1:41:41] at this time when everything is the most expensive

[1:41:45] to say, you know, we're going to do it for 15 years.

[1:41:47] 15 years is an eternity, 10 years is more palpable.

[1:41:52] And so I think, you know, asking the voters again

[1:41:54] in 10 years or eight years, if they want to continue this

[1:41:59] after we show our work is the most or in my opinion,

[1:42:04] the best way to go about it.

[1:42:06] And I think a 10 year, I also think, you know,

[1:42:10] is psychologically 10 versus 15 or 14 for anyone

[1:42:16] who's voting on this that reads it's going to be 14 years

[1:42:19] or 15 years.

[1:42:21] 10 years is just more palatable.

[1:42:24] So I want to see a pass.

[1:42:28] I would like to see this on the ballot.

[1:42:30] It's a need.

[1:42:31] It's a need that we've been talking about for years now.

[1:42:34] So I appreciate my colleagues for having this long discussion

[1:42:38] dialogue on these about 10 years is where I'm at. Thank you. So Mayor, just a

[1:42:46] point of order. Am I hearing then that in that light Mr. Cold does not accept a friendly amendment?

[1:42:51] Hold on. Mr. Mayor, it's a point of order. Do we have agreement from the

[1:42:56] second to my friendly amendment? I don't think that's an appropriate point of

[1:43:00] order, Mr. Madison. I'll answer in due time. That's your opinion, but I'd like an answer to my question.

[1:43:05] hold on one second mr. Madison the city manager has a response that he'd like

[1:43:10] to give so it when we were talking about when councilmember Cole brought up the

[1:43:17] 15 year of the library and and the importance of that I was just asked to

[1:43:22] pull it to the library tax the library tax from now needs to be renewed

[1:43:29] in ten years so not saying right or wrong I'm just saying there's a

[1:43:36] that if it's a 10-year sunset both taxes would potentially have to be on the same

[1:43:44] ballot which is for me convincing that you know we don't want this to pit

[1:43:52] libraries against our fire service and fire department and so I'm prepared to

[1:43:58] support the 14 I'm prepared to support the 14 and I would bring up that you

[1:44:06] Although we won a unanimous vote it's obviously not required and we didn't have one for the

[1:44:12] library just what two years ago so I think that's correct yeah so I I'm prepared to

[1:44:20] amend my motion to to 14 years

[1:44:25] prepared to support that change okay

[1:44:30] Mr. Masuda mayor I'm prepared to support the 14 year thank you okay

[1:44:40] So let's call the roll.

[1:44:43] So the motion is to approve the staff recommendation with a 14-year sunset and to guarantee seismic

[1:44:50] retrofits for the two fire stations.

[1:44:54] Councilmember Cole?

[1:44:55] Yes.

[1:44:56] Councilmember Hampton?

[1:44:57] Abstain.

[1:44:59] Abstain.

[1:44:59] Councilmember Jones?

[1:45:00] Yes.

[1:45:01] Councilmember Lyon?

[1:45:02] Yes.

[1:45:03] Councilmember Madison?

[1:45:05] Yes.

[1:45:05] Councilmember Masuda?

[1:45:06] yes vice mayor Rivas yes mayor Gordo yes motion is approved seven in favor one

[1:45:13] abstention so if it's okay I would just like to clarify for the council that

[1:45:19] the ballot language that's in your staff report will be revised because it

[1:45:26] currently says until ended by voters those four words will be replaced with

[1:45:34] expiring after 14 years.

[1:45:39] And that is found in, that's in the question.

[1:45:44] Question as well.

[1:45:45] And then we will add section 4.110.240,

[1:45:51] which is the sunset provision.

[1:45:53] And that will say the special parcel tax

[1:45:55] established by this ordinance shall automatically

[1:45:57] expire 14 years after its effective date,

[1:46:00] unless extended by a subsequent ordinance

[1:46:04] approved by the voters of the city of Pasadena

[1:46:06] Upon expiration, no further taxes shall be levied

[1:46:09] pursuant to this chapter, and any remaining funds

[1:46:11] shall be used exclusively for the purposes

[1:46:14] authorized herein until expended.

[1:46:17] And I would suggest, I know you don't like this,

[1:46:21] but we should read the question as amended.

[1:46:24] Sure, I can do that.

[1:46:28] The title, City of Pasadena 9-1-1 Firefighter

[1:46:31] Paramedic Emergency Medical Wildfire

[1:46:34] Preparedness Response Measure.

[1:46:36] City of Pasadena 9-1-1 firefighter paramedic emergency

[1:46:40] medical wildfire preparedness response measure

[1:46:44] to help maintain fire paramedic 9-1-1 response,

[1:46:49] prepare for, respond to wildfires, earthquakes,

[1:46:53] medical emergencies, recruit, retain well-trained

[1:46:56] firefighters, maintain life-saving equipment,

[1:47:00] fire alert communication,

[1:47:02] Shall City of Pasadena's measure annually levy 19 cents

[1:47:07] per square foot of improved property

[1:47:09] with low income senior exemption

[1:47:11] providing approximately 22 million 100,000 annually

[1:47:15] expiring after 14 years requiring accountability,

[1:47:20] independent audits, oversight,

[1:47:22] public spending disclosure,

[1:47:24] all funds must be used to support local fire protection

[1:47:27] emergency medical response services be adopted.

[1:47:35] Okay with that I think that completes this matter and the plane has landed.

[1:48:03] Now everyone has to go out and campaign for it. Yeah tonight start knocking on

[1:48:08] door. And sorry for the turbulence but okay we'll allow those who want to stay

[1:48:19] to stay and those who do not to thank you for your participation okay now we

[1:48:28] will entertain a actually mayor what

[1:48:40] do you want mayor do you want did you want

[1:48:45] to do public comment on matters not on the agenda we have two spoke cards

[1:48:49] mayor yeah we have two public comment cards for matters not on the agenda

[1:48:55] And Caleb Kodama, followed by Heather Kodama.

[1:49:00] Are you here?

[1:49:03] [AD] Public Speakers Heather Kodama and Caleb Kodama approach the podium

[1:49:07] Go ahead.

[1:49:28] Ms. Kodama, go ahead.

[1:49:29] Hi.

[1:49:30] How are you?

[1:49:30] Good.

[1:49:31] Good evening.

[1:49:32] My name is Heather Kodama, and I'm proud to be a lifelong Pasadenaan and an Altadena

[1:49:40] resident.

[1:49:43] I attended Firehouse Preschool, Burbank Elementary, Noe's Elementary, Elliott Middle School,

[1:49:50] and John Muir High School.

[1:49:52] For more than 30 years, I volunteered

[1:49:54] with Pasadena Unified School District

[1:49:56] and spent 10 years decorating Tournament of Roses floats

[1:50:01] and currently serve as the vice president

[1:50:03] of Rolls-Royce Riders.

[1:50:05] My husband is the former principal

[1:50:07] of Pasadena High School

[1:50:10] and our son proudly graduated

[1:50:12] from Pasadena High School in 2026.

[1:50:16] Horses have been part of my life

[1:50:18] since I was five years old.

[1:50:20] Years later when my son was nine, he discovered horseback riding through

[1:50:24] Rose Bowl Riders' Art of the Horse program. That city-supported program

[1:50:29] introduced primary Title I students to horses through the art, hands-on

[1:50:34] learning, and equestrian demonstrations. For many children it was their first

[1:50:40] experience with animals, nature, and the outdoors. More recently, Rose Bowl

[1:50:45] Riders and Myrtle Hill Farm have continued serving our community by

[1:50:48] hosting programs for Pasadena after school youth and Five Acres.

[1:50:53] Our members volunteer countless hours because we are deeply committed, not only to preserving

[1:50:59] these programs, but to expanding affordable public access so more Pasadena families,

[1:51:04] especially our children, can experience the lifelong lessons horses teach.

[1:51:09] Responsibility, commitment, discipline, confidence, compassion, and the value of

[1:51:15] the committee.

[1:51:15] The mission is especially meaningful to me personally as a child my own family experienced homelessness for nearly three years

[1:51:23] During that difficult period a local barn gave me the opportunity to become a working student that experience provided stability

[1:51:31] purpose responsibility hope during one of the hardest times of my life ma'am

[1:51:36] You your time is expired. I've got one little sentence

[1:51:40] Okay, go ahead and wrap it up as Roseville riders approach it this 80th year in ha ha munga watershed park

[1:51:45] I respectfully ask the City Council to continue supporting these valuable community partnerships with myrtle Hall farm and

[1:51:52] Local schools face increasing fiscal challenges in coming years programs like mine

[1:51:57] They become even more important for Pasadena youth. Thank you. Thank you so much, and we're having our 80th anniversary

[1:52:03] I'm over ma'am now now you're

[1:52:07] Caleb

[1:52:08] [AD] Public Speaker Caleb Kodama approaches the podium.

[1:52:09] [AD] Public Speaker Caleb Kodama approaches the podium. [CC] Kodama. Two minutes. I feel like a half my points got said by my dear mom there.

[1:52:11] [CC] Kodama. Two minutes. I feel like a half my points got said by my dear mom there.

[1:52:14] One minute. Hi, as you guys know my name is Kodama. I graduated Pasadena High

[1:52:20] School, don't worry like me or two for those of you out there, and you know in

[1:52:24] a couple very short weeks I'm going to be starting to study bioengineering

[1:52:28] at University of California, Riverside. Now as she said I started going to

[1:52:33] Rose Bowl Riders when I was nine. Pretty cool I thought at the time and

[1:52:37] That was from Rose Bowl Riders' Art of the Horse program.

[1:52:40] You know, one day, one field trip turned into multiple years

[1:52:43] and a lifelong commitment to the program.

[1:52:46] The thing for Rose Bowl Riders with me

[1:52:48] is it helped shape fundamentally who I am today

[1:52:50] and I think it is a valuable tool

[1:52:52] in doing that for the youth of today as well.

[1:52:55] You know, for me, growing up wasn't always easy.

[1:52:57] I faced social struggles, got bullied,

[1:52:58] but you don't wanna hear about that right now.

[1:53:00] We got two minutes, right?

[1:53:01] But the thing is, is at this barn,

[1:53:03] I found something that I couldn't find anywhere else.

[1:53:06] I found community, and I was guaranteed lessons by that community. I learned confidence, organization,

[1:53:12] responsibility, perseverance. I mean, hey, horses don't judge you, right? They ask you to be patient,

[1:53:18] consistent, and keep trying. And those lessons have carried over to every part of my life.

[1:53:22] I mean, except for those couple seconds of air time I get whenever I'm bucked off. But

[1:53:26] during COVID, when so many activities came to a stop, and the same thing for and during,

[1:53:32] Oh, wow.

[1:53:34] The Eden Fires.

[1:53:35] The community offered by Rolls-Royce Riders

[1:53:37] and the Myrtle Hill Farm Lessons program

[1:53:39] provided so much support for me.

[1:53:43] The lessons I have gained from riding, from the barn,

[1:53:46] from the community has given me, frankly,

[1:53:50] invaluable experience in building my character that

[1:53:52] has helped me persevere through volunteering,

[1:53:56] school, the fires, and now college.

[1:53:59] Thank you very much for your time,

[1:54:00] and I hope that we can continue to support

[1:54:02] the whole farm and RVR.

[1:54:03] Thank you.

[1:54:04] Thank you.

[1:54:05] And congratulations.

[1:54:08] That completes public comment.

[1:54:10] A matter is not on the agenda.

[1:54:11] We have the consent calendar now.

[1:54:13] Okay, is there a motion on the consent calendar?

[1:54:15] Sweet motion.

[1:54:17] The only one I'll accept.

[1:54:21] So there's a sweet motion and a second.

[1:54:25] Roll call.

[1:54:25] [CC] Roll call.

[1:54:25] [AD] Roll call vote for the consent calendar. [CC] Roll call.

[1:54:26] [AD] Roll call vote for the consent calendar.

[1:54:26] [AD] Roll call vote for the consent calendar. [CC] Council Member Cole.

[1:54:27] [AD] Roll call vote for the consent calendar.

[1:54:28] [AD] Roll call vote for the consent calendar. [CC] Council Member Hampton.

[1:54:28] [CC] Council Member Hampton.

[1:54:32] Yes.

[1:54:33] Council Member Jones.

[1:54:34] Yes.

[1:54:35] Councilman Lyon.

[1:54:36] Yes.

[1:54:36] Yes. Councilman Madison.

[1:54:36] Councilman Madison.

[1:54:38] Yes.

[1:54:38] Councilman Masuda.

[1:54:39] Yes.

[1:54:40] Vice Mayor Rivas.

[1:54:41] Yes.

[1:54:41] Mayor Gordo.

[1:54:42] Yes.

[1:54:43] The motion is and the consent calendar

[1:54:45] is approved unanimously.

[1:54:47] And we have second reading of an ordinance.

[1:54:57] [AD] Roll call vote for an ordinance.

[1:54:59] [AD] Roll call vote for an ordinance. [CC] This is an ordinance offered by Council Member Cole.

[1:55:00] [CC] This is an ordinance offered by Council Member Cole.

[1:55:02] It's an ordinance of the City of Pasadena

[1:55:03] repealing ordinance numbers 7455 and 7457,

[1:55:08] seven prohibiting urban lot splits and construction of multiple dwellings

[1:55:14] pursuant to Senate Bill 9 and very high fire hazard severity zones within the

[1:55:18] boundary of the Eaton fire to adopt. Councilmember Cole.

[1:55:25] Yes and I'd like to

[1:55:25] make an explanation afterwards. Councilmember Hampton.

[1:55:33] Yes. Thank you.

[1:55:34] Councilmember Jones. Yes. Councilmember Lyon. Yes. Councilmember Madison. Yes.

[1:55:40] Councilman Masuda? Yes. Vice Mayor Rivas? Yes. Mayor Gordo? Yes. The ordinance is adopted unanimously. Mr.

[1:55:48] Cole, explain yourself. So I supported originally a version of this ordinance. I asked for one that

[1:55:57] was more restrictive. In the end we passed this this ordinance as an emergency ordinance

[1:56:03] recognizing that it would not be on there forever.

[1:56:08] It should be noted because people have asked,

[1:56:10] Well, wait a minute, are you suddenly opening the flood gates

[1:56:13] to high density development in high fire danger areas?

[1:56:17] We are not.

[1:56:19] And we should also be clear that we were sued on this

[1:56:24] and we would have lost the lawsuit.

[1:56:27] And so I think that people need to understand

[1:56:33] that context for the decision

[1:56:37] that the council is making tonight.

[1:56:39] Thank you, Mr. Cole.

[1:56:41] Okay, that completes our agenda.

[1:56:45] Good morning, Mr. Madison.

[1:56:47] Oh, he's gone.

[1:56:49] Oh, he's there, yeah.

[1:56:52] Okay.

[1:56:52] Thank you, Mayor.

[1:56:55] And with that, we will adjourn.

[1:56:59] Thank you, everyone.

City Council Meeting: August 3, 2026 (Audio Description)

Agenda

Transcript