[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.
[19:07] 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.