[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[0:00] Aye. A little mayor pro-tam. How are you? Good. Good. We miss you up here. I miss you, too.
[0:11] All right. I'd like to call this close session order at 6.02 p.m. We get roll call, please. Certainly,
[0:20] mayor pro-tam. Councilmember Ferrero. Ah, he made it. Councilmember Lewis. Here. Councilmember
[0:29] Councillor Perrestam. Mayor Pro Temsale. Mayor Bradley via Zoom.
[0:34] Here.
[0:34] We have a core mayor and next item are public comments for closed session items.
[0:38] Seeing none, we can move to our closed session item list.
[0:41] Thank you, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem and members of the council. Any who may be viewing with us electronically.
[0:46] The city council has three items on its closed session agenda.
[0:50] They are as follows. A closed session will be held for soon. The government code section
[0:54] Section 54957.6 with the city's labor negotiators regarding ongoing labor negotiations with AFSCME District 36.
[1:05] City Council will also meet in closed session pursuant to government code section 54956.9D2 or D3 and E1 because there is significant exposure litigation in one case.
[1:16] And lastly, we will meet in close session pursuant to government code section 549-56.9E because the council is considering whether to initiate litigation in two cases.
[1:28] Thank you, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem.
[1:30] Thank you. Thank you. We will recess our close session to the far side room. Thank you, everyone.
[9:10] Dave, you good?
[9:11] Good.
[9:12] Okay. I'm going to start this meeting.
[9:15] I'll call this meeting to order at 706, roll call please.
[9:21] Councilmember Ferraro?
[9:23] Here.
[9:24] Councilmember Perry-Stam?
[9:25] Here.
[9:26] Councilmember Lewis?
[9:27] Here.
[9:28] Mayor Prattemseo?
[9:29] Here.
[9:29] Mayor Bradley and Tum.
[9:31] Here.
[9:32] We have a quorum.
[9:33] Our next item then is the Pledge of Allegiance.
[9:35] Thank you.
[9:36] Today, our Pledge of Allegiance will be led by our Deputy City Manager, Ms. John.
[9:54] The next item is
[10:04] the closed session report.
[10:06] Thank you, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, members of the Council, ladies and gentlemen.
[10:10] The City Council had three items on its closed session agenda tonight.
[10:14] The first involved ongoing labor negotiations with the part time employee unit represented
[10:20] by AFSCME District 36, there was a privileged and confidential briefing on the status of
[10:25] negotiations.
[10:26] Additional negotiating authority was given to the city's negotiating team.
[10:31] No reportable action was taken.
[10:33] With respect to items number two and three, on the closed session agendas were placeholder
[10:38] items that were not needed tonight and were not discussed.
[10:41] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
[10:48] I'm going to mention something that happened not too long ago where we lost some sure safety.
[11:01] So tonight is in the memoriam, we're going to read a little extra from tonight.
[11:06] Okay, National Night Out is an annual community building event that promotes strong partnerships between law enforcement and fire and neighbors they serve.
[11:14] It's a night with residents, public safety personnel and city leaders come together in unity to strengthen trust, build relationships, and show that safety is a shared responsibility.
[11:24] For our PVNational Night Out is more than a tradition, so reminder that when we work together we create safe for more connected and more resilient communities.
[11:30] On this national night out, a night that stands for Community Partnership and Trust between Law Enforcement and the public, we pause to honor the three brave Los Angeles Sheriff's Department detectives, Detective Joshua Kelly Eckland, Detective Victor Lemus, and Detective William Osborne, who are all assigned to Special Enforcement Bureau's Arts and Explosive Detail, and made the ultimate sacrifice on July 18th, 2025.
[11:58] May their legacy remind us why this night matters because strong communities are built on unity, respect, and standing together.
[12:05] Their loss is deeply felt and we will remember them, not just for how they pass, but for how they lived.
[12:10] With courage, commitment to justice, and the compassion they carried will never be forgotten.
[12:15] These detectives were more than law enforcement. There were sons, fathers, friends, and heroes.
[12:20] We honor their service, our hearts are with their loved ones, and the entire LSD family.
[12:25] So we'll be adjourning this meeting tonight in their honor.
[12:29] Thank you.
[12:34] Next item.
[12:35] If I may have a motion to approve the recycle and emergency personal preparedness kit
[12:40] drawing winners, Kathy Anderson and Sandra Beirons.
[12:43] Sound moved?
[12:46] Second.
[12:51] Council Member Lewis.
[12:52] Yes.
[12:52] Council Member Paris-Dan.
[12:54] Yes.
[12:54] Council Member Ferraro.
[12:55] Yes.
[12:57] Mayor Rotem Seil.
[12:58] Yes.
[12:58] Mayor Bradley.
[12:59] Yes.
[13:00] Motion passes.
[13:00] our next item is the approval of the agenda.
[13:03] Can I get a motion to approve the agenda, please?
[13:06] So moved.
[13:07] Can I get a second?
[13:10] Council Member Ferraro.
[13:12] Yes.
[13:12] Council Member Lewis.
[13:14] Yes.
[13:14] Council Member Peristam.
[13:16] Yes.
[13:16] Mayor Pro Temseo.
[13:17] Yes.
[13:18] Mayor Bradley.
[13:19] Yes.
[13:19] Motion passes.
[13:20] Without we can move to our public comments for non-agenda items.
[13:23] And I do have two requests to speak.
[13:25] Our first speaker is Carol Mueller.
[13:28] Good evening, Carol.
[13:38] Good evening.
[13:38] I've been trying to work with Terry about exposing something that probably a lot of people
[13:45] would be interested in.
[13:50] My issue involves San Pedro Locke and Key, and maybe Torrance, Memorial, or Torrance
[13:57] Locke that they just don't want to deal with it, I don't know, but it also may involve
[14:04] of my ex-husband and his wife and San Pedro Locke and Kea
[14:13] the pair has sold the keys to my house to people that they
[14:20] shouldn't have done.
[14:23] It's cost me a lot of money.
[14:25] Between the two so far, I've spent $850 and nothing is right.
[14:31] I gave Terry this article that I got out of the computer, how to verify that your
[14:40] locksmith is bonded license and insured.
[14:45] I've known San Pedro Lock and Keith for many years, but obviously there's different
[14:51] owners.
[14:53] and
[14:57] I don't know what to say, but, uh...
[15:02] I'm missing things in my house. Nobody's breaking in. There's no evidence that anybody's broken in. So whoever's coming in is coming in with a key. And one
[15:21] of the things that I'm missing is I had a big four by three. One of the original pictures from the moon that was given to me by some of the original astronauts. My ex, Vanistre Bray,
[15:34] who, by the way, worked here for a while,
[15:40] poked a hole in the center of it.
[15:42] It was real cute.
[15:43] So I'm not sure it has any value,
[15:46] but I have two turtle cards for those that remember
[15:49] back in the 70s, one signed by Wale Shira.
[15:55] And I forget which other one.
[16:00] But this is how to verify.
[16:02] And it says, if they are supposed to get
[16:06] finger printed and California has a law and they need to be bonded so you know
[16:15] they're honest if these people do this to other people it isn't very funny and
[16:23] it's very frustrating when you're trying to lead a normal life and every
[16:30] time you turn around something you see they're missing or broken in your house
[16:35] So,
[16:40] anyway, other than the fact that it's cost me a lot of money, nothing is still fixed.
[16:48] I have five doors in and out of my house, and I think maybe in your newsletter it might
[16:55] be good to put in some information about what locksmiths are required to be, so that this
[17:02] doesn't happen to somebody else.
[17:05] I appreciate your help.
[17:07] Thank you.
[17:08] Thank you.
[17:09] Thank you.
[17:11] Our next speaker, Biazoum, is Eva Aboucia?
[17:16] Good evening.
[17:17] Good evening.
[17:18] Can you hear me okay?
[17:19] Yep, you got you.
[17:20] All right.
[17:21] Perfect.
[17:22] Good evening.
[17:22] Mayor Pertencille, Mayor Bradley, city council, city staff.
[17:30] A couple things.
[17:32] Excited to see how well the paving went this time.
[17:36] It's great on PB Drive South.
[17:39] It's running great for all of us to drive on.
[17:42] Also it's great to see the new crane
[17:46] that's putting in a new well over there
[17:48] and the other side of the ski jump.
[17:50] The things I have questions on is on exultant
[17:53] and the corner of exultant and dauntless.
[17:55] The house still has not been demoed yet.
[17:59] I wanted to see if you guys can put some pressure
[18:02] on getting that moving because we are already getting into August
[18:07] and rainy season is just around the corner, so we love to see that done.
[18:13] That's the first item. The second item is, I would like to see on your city website
[18:20] and information about the exact plan of the sanitation plans of where you will be
[18:28] removing sewer if PV drive southwards of fail.
[18:32] We already had one time that had to close down for a few hours and it's doomed to be happening
[18:42] anytime in the future.
[18:45] So we need to get everybody involved.
[18:48] All Rancher Paul's verties needs to know what your plan is.
[18:51] Where is the stations of where you'd be pumping, removing sewer?
[18:57] Where's the connection lines?
[19:00] what is your plan of action? Where's the trucks coming from? Where is
[19:05] peppertrees outlet? Where is CVU's outlet? What is the plan for everything? We've
[19:12] heard that you're going to be doing trucks, but we haven't seen anything
[19:15] arriving. We need to know. There's only a few feet left on PV Drive South next to
[19:22] the ski slope and we are moving four inches a week or whatever it is in that
[19:27] section. And we need to be prepared as a community if that ski slope has to be shut down and what is your next plan of action on sanitation?
[19:38] Thank you very much and have a great evening.
[19:41] Thank you.
[19:42] Our next speaker, forgive me. Our next item is the City Manager Report.
[19:46] Thank you.
[19:47] Thank you.
[19:57] through tonight's presentation, my city manager's report.
[20:00] I do want to respond that on two of our public speakers are on agenda items.
[20:05] The suggestion that we put an article on how to select a locksmith, I think that's a good
[20:11] one, and we will, it may not be in the fall, a new quarterly newsletter, but we may put one
[20:16] an article in future newsletter, so I just wanted to provide that response, so the council
[20:21] also is always good to know how to select certain special services and know what to look for.
[20:29] And then in terms of the last speaker who asked about the abatement for the House, the red tag
[20:37] House, the corner of exultant and dollars, I know working with Grandee in the Community Development Department,
[20:42] we were very close to getting the last permits from the AQMD.
[20:46] We're hoping that we will be able to do that demolition this week, if not early in
[20:51] next week, so we will notify the residents and as soon as we get word, I'll make sure the
[20:56] Council is aware of it as well, so just wanted to answer those to provide you some responses
[21:01] to those questions.
[21:03] So with that, I want to start my city manager's report, and I think it may be deja vu or
[21:09] not, but it seems like a little over 24 hours ago, we were in this very same room to commemorate
[21:16] our five-year anniversary with our sister city,
[21:19] so core city, it's hard to believe that it's been five years.
[21:22] We started that back in August of 2020,
[21:26] and we did that remotely, we did the resolutions,
[21:30] and here we, for those of you who were not in attendance.
[21:35] Last night we held a special ceremonial celebration
[21:39] of the five years with our sister city.
[21:41] They were, it was morning for them evening for us.
[21:45] we had a cake, we gifted them a wood sculpture because for those of you who follow those traditions
[21:51] of how anniversaries are recognized five years is the year of the wood, and so we gave them
[21:58] a wood sculpture. But I also want to take a moment that this year is a special year. We had a banner
[22:05] year with our sister city. There was a lot that we engaged in. We went to Sakura City to celebrate
[22:12] They're 20th anniversary as a city as they came to our city in 2023 to celebrate our 50th anniversary.
[22:20] So it was a great opportunity last night to reflect on.
[22:24] I think all of us had a lot of gratitude and appreciation for their generosity and their hospitality.
[22:29] So I just wanted to just bring it to the public's attention that we do have this sister city relationship with Sakura City.
[22:36] And we're five years into it and look forward to many more years.
[22:39] We're going to launch a penpal program as well. So any of those who are interested, especially our youth that will have more information available on the city's website.
[22:48] So next slide, Nathan.
[22:52] So as Mayor Pro Tem mentioned tonight is National Night Out and it's a very special night.
[22:59] In fact, our captain is absent for the time being, but she will be here shortly to participate.
[23:07] But you can you can see that we've got some of our glasses on and I'll put them on as well
[23:12] But national national night out is is a very special night. It's an opportunity once a year. I can't do this
[23:19] I can't speak, but it's an opportunity to bring the community together and and recognize our law enforcement and our
[23:28] Public safety and what's most significant out of this event is the fact that our our law enforcement is going out in
[23:37] meeting and interacting with our community and coming, serving in a united front on how
[23:42] we address crime and the importance of public safety and also the announcement of our new
[23:49] public safety division you guys look so cool with these glasses on. So one of the things
[23:54] that we wanted to do as we had our reception from four to six o'clock and that's where we
[23:59] all receive these glasses. We had a reception out in the courtyard. There was a video that
[24:06] But we published and released on social media that I want to play because I think there's
[24:14] two messages.
[24:14] One is how we communicate to the public.
[24:17] I just thought it was just a great video on seeing the human side of our law enforcement
[24:22] officers that I want to share with the public.
[24:24] So it's about 30 seconds that was produced by our public safety manager, Jen Schmidt, who's
[24:30] in the back who's going to be speaking later this evening.
[24:33] So Nathan, if you can play the video for our audience and council, I think go for it.
[24:41] Hey, hi, hey, hey, no, that's not August, it's
[24:49] an attitude in Rancho Palace Verde's next Tuesday, ready?
[24:53] Hey, stop by Hespar in the City of Rancho Palace Verde's next Tuesday, August 5th, between 4 and 6 p.m.
[25:00] You're going to meet your local first responders and just for showing up, you'll get some cool merch
[25:05] and you'll even have the opportunity to win some amazing prizes, an Apple iPad,
[25:10] you get free weather radios, the possibility of winning an emergency go-back
[25:14] or even this ring camera for your own security system.
[25:17] Let's see you there.
[25:19] So I know the event already happened.
[25:22] Hopefully for those of you who were not in attendance this evening,
[25:25] you'll remember National Night Out next year.
[25:28] It's always the first Tuesday of August.
[25:30] We have a great event. We have these giveaways.
[25:32] And it's a great opportunity for you to meet the captain and interact with both our
[25:38] sheriff's department as well as our fire department.
[25:41] So mark your calendars and remember, okay, glass is off.
[25:46] Next slide.
[25:48] So I believe it was the last council meeting that our resident, Lynne Bielski, came to the
[25:53] council and mentioned, gave, told us a very great story about the bombings that occurred
[26:01] in Hiroshima, which it's actually 80 years ago, tomorrow and on the 9th, and how the church,
[26:09] I believe it was the Church of Europe, Kami Cathedral, which is a Catholic church,
[26:14] was demolished as a result of the bombings, but and the two bell towers were lost. There was
[26:19] a north and south bell tower known as the bells of Nagasaki. And so the church was rebuilt in 1956,
[26:28] And the only one bell was installed and recently the second bell, the north bell, was gifted to the church.
[26:39] And so this past Sunday, there was a special event, a musical performance, commemorating the gifting of the bell.
[26:48] And that bell is actually going to be sounded, I believe it's going to be on August 9th at 11 o'clock to AM.
[26:57] So, that's going to be the first use of that bell, and I know Councilmember Pereson,
[27:01] you attended that event at St. John's Fisher and so I just wanted to let the public know
[27:09] if we have some information on the city's website if you're interested in learning more
[27:13] about this event.
[27:14] There's a great history and it's also featured in the peninsula news.
[27:18] Next slide.
[27:20] And as the council knows, we are tracking the movement of Assembly Bill 986, which was
[27:27] introduced by Assembly Member Almer Suci, which will include landslides in the Emergency
[27:33] Services Act.
[27:35] And today, this afternoon, the Board of Supervisors under a consent calendar submitted a support
[27:42] letter for Assembly Bill 986, which we understand is tentatively scheduled to be heard by the
[27:48] appropriations committee on August 18th, so we will continue to follow this bill.
[27:53] We are sponsors of this bill.
[27:55] This is very important to our city and the landside complex.
[27:59] Next slide.
[28:01] For those of you who follow all things related to the palace for this nature preserve,
[28:05] we have an upcoming quarterly public forum meeting that happens every quarter.
[28:09] And that next meeting is scheduled for August 21st at 6 p.m.
[28:13] It's held at the city hall community room.
[28:15] It's a hybrid meeting so you can participate in person or virtually if you're interested in learning more about the trails including
[28:22] The status of the trail closures as a result of the landside
[28:26] The public's welcome to this public forum meeting next slide and
[28:33] the council may recall you approved this a couple meetings ago a community
[28:37] Survey is going to be launched or has has launched by the recreation parks department
[28:43] I mean, we want to learn and hear from our residents about the different programs and
[28:48] classes you'd like offered at our recreational facilities.
[28:51] There are two surveys.
[28:53] There's a youth survey that are for individuals that are up to 17 years old.
[28:58] And those who are 18 or older, there's an adult version.
[29:01] The information's on the city's website, and we have these QR codes that you could scan
[29:07] and download on your device and fill out that survey.
[29:10] We're hoping to get responses by September 30th, and that will help shape the programming that we offer on our parks.
[29:17] Next slide.
[29:19] And speaking of programming in our parks, if you're interested in softballing, your youth wants to join a softball camp.
[29:26] We have that featured August 15th through 17th. It's going to be at Ryan Park and our very own recreation parks staffer.
[29:35] or Jordan Kraus is going to be taking the lead in that softball camp, so if you're interested, it's $120 per person and applications are being accepted now.
[29:46] Next slide.
[29:49] And as we are in August and it's last call for our movies in the park and our constant park, the next moving the park is this Saturday.
[30:00] And it's wild robot. And it's going to be at the Candidacific Center. The movie starts at 7 p.m. But well, the event starts at 7 p.m. The movie will start at sundown, which or dusk. And so we've got that. And then on Saturday, August 23rd to week two Saturdays past the movies in the park. We have our last concert in the park and it's going to be oldies and classic rocks. So if you're interested, come out to that event.
[30:28] And that starts at four o'clock, and it's always a great event, especially as you're listening to great music and watching the sunset, it's a beautiful setting, so come out, bring your families next slide.
[30:41] And I'm very excited to announce this year's covert of the leadership academy, the city has been doing this for several years and we get many great participants who end up applying for many of our volunteer positions on committees
[30:58] and eventually lead into some of you who end up running for council as well.
[31:05] So our leisure academy applications are open.
[31:08] We are starting to accept the applications.
[31:10] We have 25 slots and we're accepting applications through August 20th.
[31:17] And I've got a video I want to show on this one as well.
[31:21] So if Nathan, you can play the video.
[31:32] I'm RMR on your Renjo Piles Verticity Manager.
[31:35] If you have ever wondered about what city employees do to keep our community running
[31:39] seamlessly, then that may be a sign for you to apply to the city's leadership academy.
[31:44] A program designed to inform and educate citizens about the operations of local government.
[31:50] The fall 2025 program will focus on our main departments, administration, community
[31:55] development, public safety, recreation and parks, and public work.
[31:59] Presentations will be conducted by the department directors, with other speakers including myself
[32:05] Mayor David Bradley, Mayor Podem, Paul Sale, and more.
[32:09] Our deputy city manager, Catherine June,
[32:11] has more information to share about the program.
[32:14] Hello, I'm Catherine Jun, deputy city manager
[32:17] of Rancho Palace Ferties.
[32:19] Leadership Academy is not only a great way
[32:21] to learn about city functions, but it is also a stepping stone
[32:25] into the world of local government.
[32:27] Many previous participants have continued their involvement
[32:30] by serving on our advisory committees.
[32:32] If you have any interest in running for local office or working in the public sector, then you are encouraged to apply.
[32:39] Please note that space is limited and approved on a first-come, first-served basis.
[32:45] I'm very excited and enthusiastic about this year's program because not only is this a great opportunity for you, the citizens, but it is also a great opportunity for us to city staff.
[32:55] To meet and connect with community leaders and advocates.
[32:58] Those of us here at City Hall are committed to making leadership academy a valuable and enriching
[33:04] experience.
[33:05] I hope to see you there.
[33:10] August 20th, submit your applications.
[33:12] The things more awkward than watching yourself on screen.
[33:15] My last item I want to report out is this Thursday's actually a national light house day.
[33:22] And I think it's very special because that is an iconic feature we have in Rancho Paz,
[33:28] Third is the point for Sunday Lighthouse and next year, 2020-26 is its 100th anniversary
[33:34] and so I wanted to just end on that note to remind us that we are going to be actively
[33:39] involved in celebrating the 100th year anniversary of our blood point for Sunday Lighthouse.
[33:45] That concludes my report this evening.
[33:48] Thank you.
[33:50] Next item, please.
[33:51] Our next item is the consent calendar.
[33:52] Late correspondence was distributed on items letter E and H and I do not have any
[33:57] Any request to speak?
[33:59] Okay.
[33:59] Can I get a motion to approve the consent calendar, please?
[34:03] I need to approve.
[34:05] Can I get a second?
[34:07] Second.
[34:09] Council Member Ferraro?
[34:11] Yes.
[34:12] Council Member Perrestam?
[34:13] Yes.
[34:14] Council Member Lewis?
[34:15] Yes.
[34:15] Mayor Pro Temseo?
[34:17] Yes.
[34:17] Mayor Bratley?
[34:18] Yes.
[34:19] Motion passes.
[34:20] With that, we can move to item number one.
[34:26] Under regular business consideration to receive a status report on recommended traffic measures
[34:30] for Pell's Rudy's Drive East between Crest Road and Pell's Rudy's Drive South, and I currently have two requests to speak.
[34:39] Thank you. Can we get the staff report?
[34:44] Good evening, Honorable Mayor Hurtem, City Council Members.
[34:48] I'd like to start this evening's presentation by first introducing traffic safety committee chair,
[34:54] Crossman, who is in the audience this evening, and available to answer questions on the traffic safety committee's discussion and
[35:01] role in this topic and thank the Traffic Safety Committee for their hard work.
[35:07] Just a quick reminder on the timeline, this goes back a couple of years to when the
[35:12] HOA, the Mediterranean HOA reached out to the city about recent crashes and most recently
[35:17] you may recall seeing this item in May when staff presented a report with recommendations
[35:24] questions for the city council and just a quick reminder about existing conditions.
[35:30] The subject roadway under discussion today, Palsworth is driving east from Crest Road to PV Drive South.
[35:37] Which is 35 miles per hour from Crest Road to Ganado and then 40 miles per hour from Ganado to PV Drive South under existing conditions.
[35:47] On May 20th, the city council approved several items, modifying the landscaping in the median.
[35:53] between Pousport and his drive east and the spur road, moving the stop bar at Ganado to the flow line of PV drive east, upgrading signs and pavement markings and installing a five foot bike lane as part of the pavement upcoming pavement project for PV drive east and last but not least prioritizing law enforcement with a return report the speed limit recommendation, the recommendation to adopt a resolution establishing a new speed limit was deferred
[36:25] and is the primary topic of this evening's agenda item.
[36:31] But first, just a quick update on the other measures that the City Council approved.
[36:38] The landscaping, the city is now contracted with a landscape architecture company to prepare
[36:45] a concept design, which will be done in consultation with the HOA before any implementation.
[36:53] The stop bar has been relocated to the flow line of PV drive east to improve the ability of drivers to get closer to the flow line.
[37:03] Signage upgrades have been installed with the exception of speed feedback signs.
[37:07] They've been ordered and they're expected to arrive within the next couple days this week.
[37:12] And finally, the design work is in progress for the bike lanes as part of the upcoming CIP project for the pavement management of PV drive east.
[37:22] For traffic enforcement, I'll turn it over to Jennifer.
[37:29] Thank you, good evening, Honorable Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem and City Council.
[37:35] I'm here to provide a status update on the Lumina Sheriff's Station's recent enhanced traffic enforcement program along the Palisforated Drive East between Crosford commonly known as the Switch Facts.
[37:48] So on May 25th, the Sheriff's Department launched a 30-day targeted initiative, combining enforcement and public outreach to reduce unsafe driving behaviors, particularly for speeding.
[38:01] In the first phase, which was a 10-day enforcement surge during which deputies conducted 186 patrols, which means they observed 166 times along the switchbacks.
[38:12] And they issued 110 citations, 78, which were for speeding, in total over the full 30-day period, 141 citations were issued.
[38:24] Next slide.
[38:28] Following a request from Council Members' Parastam and Louis,
[38:31] Lumina Sheriff's Station compiled data on the origin of those cited.
[38:36] So 48% of the side of drivers were from the Palis Verde's Peninsula, which included 54 citations from Rancho Palis Verde's 14 citations.
[38:44] from the other peninsula cities of Rolling Hills estates, Rolling Hills, and
[38:48] Poles Parais estates.
[38:50] 19% were from San Pedro, which due to proximity, we consider part of the local region.
[38:56] And 33% were from other cities outside the immediate area.
[39:00] In short, about two-thirds of the citations were issued to local or regional drivers.
[39:07] For our speed management plan to address these concerns, staff has developed a speed management plan
[39:12] focused on enforcement and education while engineering efforts such as lookout modifications
[39:18] are underway, enforcement and education will be our primary focus moving forward.
[39:23] The limit of stir up station has reviewed citation data to identify high violation days
[39:28] and times for targeted enforcement.
[39:31] The city's motor deputy and traffic unit will also be patrolling during these windows that
[39:35] were identified using our contracted law enforcement hours at or minutes at no extra cost.
[39:43] For additional coverage during the peak periods that were identified, supplemental overtime
[39:47] has been budgeted for fiscal year 2526.
[39:50] Again, this is pending deputy availability as this is not required for the deputies to participate
[39:57] in the supplemental overtime.
[39:59] While we don't disclose exact schedules publicly of the type of high violation days and times
[40:04] that were identified. This information has been shared with the Public Safety Committee,
[40:08] subcommittee, and for council members for oversight and transparency.
[40:15] For education and community outreach, we're also increasing education to promote safe
[40:21] driving behavior. Key efforts include targeting both local and frequent regional drivers through
[40:27] tailored messaging, reinforcing posted speed limits, installing speed feedback signs,
[40:32] Launching social media campaigns, addressing reckless driving and loud exhausts, placing portable message boards along PV drive east for high visibility safety reminders.
[40:44] It's also worth noting that our existing boards are in use for the landslide messaging on PV drive south, so additional rentals will be needed, which are approximately 1100 per board per month.
[40:55] Lastly, we will deploy our automated license plate reader trailers, which includes a built-in message board to enhance enforcement visibility.
[41:03] On that, we will also be providing quarterly LSD enforcement updates and safety reminders to continue monitoring trends and effectiveness.
[41:12] In conclusion, this approach aims to reduce speeding, discourage unsafe driving, and improve overall traffic safety along the switchbacks.
[41:25] In closing, staff recommendation this evening is for the City Council to adopt a resolution
[41:32] establishing a speed limit for PV drive south from, sorry, for PV drive east from Crest
[41:40] to PV drive south.
[41:42] Staff recommendation is a 35 mile per hour speed limit for the entire stretch of the roadway.
[41:48] And after action study, one year after implementation of all of the approved measures, and this is
[41:54] on the basis of the 85% tile speed and the thought that a 10 mile power drop at one time
[42:03] for the, for one section of the roadway may not have high compliance as we don't often
[42:09] change speed limits in the city and so we want to influence driver behavior with these measures
[42:15] to get the prevailing speeds down and then look at another speed limit reduction in the future.
[42:20] And
[42:24] just again, a reminder of next steps after the City Council action on the speed limit
[42:31] if any, that signage can be installed relatively quickly and the last remaining item would
[42:36] be the bike lanes as part of the PV drive use to pavement management project.
[42:43] And that concludes the presentation this evening.
[42:46] Okay, any questions from City Council?
[42:49] Council member Peres, thank you, Mayor Peres.
[42:52] First, I'd like to thank the captain.
[42:56] I've been on her case for the last two council meetings that we need more information data to make an informed decision on this roadway.
[43:06] And some of the recommendations were implemented back in May, some of them were before us today.
[43:11] And the information was provided in the staff report, the details was very helpful.
[43:16] And that's why, that's really why was requested from Councilman Lewis and myself.
[43:21] And that's why on an ongoing basis, we would like to continue to have that type of data, because we have to continue to make these important decisions.
[43:29] But I want to thank you publicly, because again, we were very hard on you in making this request, so we appreciate it greatly.
[43:37] Respect comments, I think I'll wait until I have to the public hearing, and then go from there.
[43:41] Thank you, Mayor Paten.
[43:42] Okay, any other questions?
[43:46] Got it, Council Member.
[43:47] I have a couple comments, too.
[43:49] comments. Mr. speakers. Mayor Bradley, do you have any questions?
[44:01] No question at this time.
[44:02] Got it. Okay, let's move on to speakers in. First speaker please.
[44:05] Our first speaker is Mickey Shibayama.
[44:17] That's fine.
[44:25] We'll do the next person and come back.
[44:26] Our next speaker then is Eva Albuja.
[44:32] Eva you there?
[44:37] Is Eva online?
[44:38] issues. Hi. Good evening, Mayor Patel, Sal, and Mayor Bradley and Council and staff. I drive
[44:50] this road, PV Drive East daily up and down due to the last slide. And one behavior that has
[45:00] We've not been discussed is having those pernounce for people to look at the view, which is really nice to have, has become an attraction for drivers to sit there on weekends and film cars going up and down. So they'll get a set of group, groupies of, let's say, 10 hot cars. And they purposely, purposely speed down and up.
[45:29] the switchbacks so they can get video for posting it, maybe in social media, whatever they like to do.
[45:37] And it's a real danger.
[45:39] I have called it in various times to complain about it because they do reach high speeds when they are filming.
[45:49] One time I was driving down, they were doing that, and there was a kid that was about 10 years old, climbing the side of the hillside, trying to do, I don't know why the kids were climbing, but they were going through the trails on a curb, a blind curve, and the kid fell, and luckily I had enough space not to hit the kid.
[46:10] But you're talking about kids climbing on trails, you're having speedsters and videotaping what I'm asking is that they do not have that much time to sit there on those turnabouts and gather around to film and speed.
[46:29] So something has to be done with those turnabouts because it is an attraction during the weekend for drinking and filming.
[46:37] Thank you.
[46:37] Yes.
[46:39] Thank you.
[46:41] I heard the speakers.
[46:42] They're trying to reach out just in case she didn't come to his park.
[46:46] Okay.
[46:47] But so far no contact.
[46:49] What we can do is we can move on to deliberations in which it comes in.
[46:52] We can have her speak.
[46:53] Sounds good.
[46:54] Thank you.
[46:55] Okay.
[46:56] All right.
[46:56] I'll open the floor up for deliberations.
[47:00] Council Member Lewis.
[47:01] Couple.
[47:02] Just a brief question, Ramsey.
[47:04] You alluded to this being a potential two step.
[47:07] I think I know the answer to this.
[47:09] The corresponding speed limit on PV East on the other side of the hill going down towards PV North is 30, right?
[47:21] Whereas at 35.
[47:23] I actually have to look that up.
[47:26] Okay, and I think what we're talking about here is to lower the sections now that are 40 down to 35.
[47:33] That's what's on the table tonight.
[47:36] Right.
[47:37] Yes, or to 30.
[47:39] Or to 30, okay, can you, I didn't see on your map any sections that were 30 day?
[47:45] Missile?
[47:46] No.
[47:46] I'm sorry.
[47:47] What I meant to say is that what you're considering this evening is reducing the speed limit from 40 to 35 or to 30.
[47:55] Oh, I'm sorry.
[47:56] And both options tonight.
[47:57] Okay.
[47:57] Yes, understood.
[47:58] Okay.
[47:58] Thank you.
[48:00] Yeah, the staff recommendation is 35, but as an alternative, you can consider 30.
[48:06] Right, because I think I think 100% sure, but I think PVE's on the other side of the hill is 30.
[48:13] In its acute switchbacks.
[48:16] No?
[48:17] No.
[48:18] On the reservoir side, I don't believe that's true.
[48:21] Councilman, please.
[48:23] I could be wrong.
[48:24] I'm not 100% sure.
[48:25] Okay.
[48:26] Thank you.
[48:28] I'm going to map it and see.
[48:33] Council Member Perram.
[48:34] Thank you.
[48:34] I have three questions.
[48:36] First is speed
[48:40] enforcement.
[48:42] And I don't know if it's addressed to Bill or to Ramsey.
[48:46] If I'm going to take the example of out here in front of Hawthorne,
[48:50] where we have on Southbound at Ryan Park,
[48:55] we have a speed limit in this segment from Crest.
[48:58] I believe all the way down or close to the PV drive south slash west there is a 45 but we have signage
[49:07] that says
[49:08] 30 miles an hour in bright orange with lights going on and
[49:13] Very very loudly very very strongly saying 30 and then it measures with a a feedback of what your actual speed is
[49:22] is
[49:23] That sign enforceable at 30 miles an hour or is the speed limit for the
[49:28] That whole segment of road may 45 and only enforceable of 45.
[49:35] That sign does not represent the speed limit.
[49:38] That sign is an advisory sign to motorists.
[49:42] So it does not change the speed limit.
[49:44] Okay.
[49:44] So it's not enforceable no matter what we say.
[49:48] And that-
[49:49] Yes.
[49:50] 45 is not something that a ticket can be issued for or a citation.
[49:53] Thank you.
[49:54] The final question on that is, do we know if that sign has been effective in that segment
[50:04] of the roadway on Hawthorne, basically north of Valin, because that was the purpose of
[50:10] putting that into effect, and then it goes back to 45 miles an hour.
[50:14] Do we have any measurement of that, of the effectiveness, even though we can't do actual enforcement
[50:19] by speed, have we no results on that?
[50:22] We have seen a reduction in collisions in that segment, and it's probably time for us to do another speed measurement to see what the change is in actual 85% outspeeds there.
[50:35] Okay, so would you be comfortable in saying we met the purpose of reducing or having that sign there that that very prominent loud sign?
[50:46] 30? Yes. And that's the same type of sign that's being recommended on PV drive east.
[50:52] That's the same sign that we're talking about on PV drive east, southbound, north of
[50:58] between Crest and Bernardo. Yes. Okay. All right. Thank you.
[51:05] Third question is the bike lane and I know that the bike lane discussion whether we approve
[51:10] or the council majority approve that, and I'm supportive of that as well, that that's deferred at the moment because of some major work that's going to occur, either the next fiscal year or the fiscal year after that, of the rearranging of where that by crosses out from Grenado and then transitions into the switchbacks, is that correct?
[51:34] Yes, so that by clean will be included in a pavement project that is part of this fiscal year's budget,
[51:40] CIP budget and part of this fiscal year, it's currently under design, the pavement project,
[51:44] it's under design, it's that'll be inserted as part of that overall project.
[51:47] And that's just to avoid re-work coming back and re-do it.
[51:50] Okay, I'm going to go back, that's my set up to to ask this next question.
[51:55] What's the cost of that? So, if we chose to implement that sooner rather than later,
[52:02] I'm not an engineer, it looks like a paint job to me.
[52:05] You're going to reroute the bicycle lane there.
[52:08] The engineering work will be done, it's being done now.
[52:12] What would it take if we had to do the rework, but we could get the job done a year or two faster?
[52:16] What would be the cost of the city on that, if you have a sense of that?
[52:18] Yeah, and I will look that up here.
[52:20] We had it included in the last staff report.
[52:22] I don't remember it off the top of my head, but I'll look it right up.
[52:25] Okay, great, thank you.
[52:27] Thank you, Mayor Pjolene.
[52:27] Thank you, Councilmember Ferraro.
[52:31] Do you have anything?
[52:33] Yes, I just wanted to make a comment about the speed because I live there.
[52:43] I live so near there that I'm constantly up and down the hill and I tried very hard
[52:52] to stick to the speed limits that we were going to change it to.
[53:00] And I don't really see a problem with it.
[53:02] It doesn't slow down the traffic too much, but it does slow down somewhat.
[53:11] And I think it's a good compromise, not to go to 30, but to go to 35.
[53:19] and I think it will help.
[53:22] I don't know if they think that it helped
[53:27] to have enforcement on there a lot,
[53:31] but I think it did slow down a few people.
[53:36] And sometimes on the weekends we get visitors
[53:41] that are not familiar with our area at all.
[53:48] and we don't really have, I think, enough enforcement on the weekend, so if we can do a little bit more of that, it might help as well.
[54:03] That's it. I think this is a good thing to reduce the speed to 35.
[54:09] Okay, thank you very much. Mayor Brodley.
[54:13] Yeah, a couple questions of staff. Ramsey, how long has the current speed limit between
[54:19] crest and PV drive south been at 40 miles an hour?
[54:25] Since 2014.
[54:29] Okay, so over 10 years. Now, is there any data that says that 40 miles an hour is an unsafe
[54:41] safe speed going down that stretcher road?
[54:49] No, I wouldn't say that there's data that says 40 miles per hour is an unsafe speed.
[54:56] Okay.
[54:58] Now I'm going to opine a little bit that what I think we have here, and I think I said
[55:05] this last time, is an issue of enforcement that we've had some folks that have blatantly
[55:12] disregarded the 40-mile-an-hour speed limit. It could have been, you know, I mean, it's just been
[55:19] disregarded. I think with the recent enforcement we've had, increased enforcement with our sheriff's
[55:26] partners, we've seen a drastic reduction in the amount of speeding along there. I don't know that
[55:34] just reducing the speed limit is going to help those folks that are disregarding the 40-mile-an-hour
[55:41] speed limit, if we just lowered, that's not going to solve the problem. I think the problem
[55:47] has been the blatant disregard of the current set speed line. I don't think just dropping
[55:54] the speed limit is going to change anything. I think 40 miles an hour is not an unreasonable
[56:01] speed for the stretch of road from Crest down to PV Drive South. I'm in favor of keeping
[56:08] the current speed limit, but continuing to have additional focus on speed limits on some of our high thoroughfare and high excessive speed areas to keep the people in check and to enforce the current loss.
[56:26] Thank you, Mayor Bradley.
[56:29] Yeah, I'm just going to weigh in a little bit too because I think, you know, Mayor Bradley and I are on the same page in terms of enforcement.
[56:35] And I know the Sheriff's Department has been doing a great job in enforcing it.
[56:40] We did a 30-day study period or an enforcement period to see exactly what happened.
[56:46] You know, we saw some data from the Public Safety Subcommittee in regards to when the citations were actually issued.
[56:52] And to me, based on all the complaints and things that we were getting from our neighbors about the race,
[57:00] seeing about the speeding, about the loitering, and whatnot, those, I believe the hours in
[57:06] terms of what we were talking about were after hours, nighttime, you know, 1 a.m. 2 a.m. and
[57:11] things like that. When we looked at the data, the data didn't reflect that. Very minimal. The bulk
[57:17] of the time frame for these citations happened during commuting. So, in my opinion, there was unintended
[57:23] consequences of our enforcement. And, you know, for me at least, we basically targeted people that
[57:28] going to work or dropping out their kids to school or going up back and forth and stuff like that.
[57:33] So in my opinion, what we were looking at and what people were complaining about,
[57:37] then enforcement didn't cover that. Now, granted there were numbers that ticked up and there's
[57:45] single digit enforcement citations on that specific timeframes that we did talk about, but it wasn't
[57:50] what we were expecting in my opinion. And I think in regards to the mile per hour that we have there,
[57:58] I think it's more of a behavioral issue, more than anything else.
[58:02] I think it is an enforcement issue, and I think we need to make sure that our speed management
[58:06] plan and the education of it is robust.
[58:11] And we need to keep on enforcing and make sure that we're out there, you know, tapping down
[58:17] on the speeds and making sure we have presence to actually show people that we do have a presence
[58:21] out there to keep them from doing what they're doing before regarding the complaints.
[58:25] So going forward, what I like to see is making sure that we do consistent enforcement as much as we possibly can.
[58:34] I know you guys can't say a date or in time frame. I know you guys have been doing an excellent job.
[58:38] So based on the resource that we have, I just want to see that we're consistently doing it.
[58:42] Make sure that we affect behavior more than anything else.
[58:47] I really don't think, you know, based on citations that we're given, I don't think the speed limit's really going to make a difference in my opinion.
[58:54] Now that we did get the complaint from the neighbors and the staff recommendation based
[58:59] on the study that we did, the recommendation is 35 miles per hour.
[59:04] So, you know, for me at this juncture, I'm going to agree with the staff recommendation.
[59:08] But in my opinion, the issue that we have is behavioral.
[59:12] And what I would recommend to staff is that we stay on the enforcement, talk with LASD to
[59:18] make sure that there is consistent enforcement along that road.
[59:21] We keep on monitoring it and we do get complaints about it, we're on it pretty quickly to ask to affect the behavior of the area.
[59:27] So that's where I stand with the issue today.
[59:32] Any other statements? Yes, Councilmember Perstant?
[59:36] I just want to clarify a clarification, but I think there was a statement made that the speed limit is 40 miles an hour from Crest Road to PV Drive South.
[59:44] That's not correct.
[59:45] In fact, the speed limit is 35 miles an hour from Crest Road to a top of the switchbacks
[59:52] and from the switchbacks proceeding south to PV drive south, that's 40 miles an hour.
[59:58] So, there's a distinct-
[1:00:00] There, amongst the upper part of that, the subject area, and the lower part, the switchbacks. So, when we're talking about 35, top the bottom, or 40, top the bottom, we have to, we have to take that into consideration. There's two different speed limits already in that location. Is that correct? Is that something that's a verify that? I apologize. I think you are correct, Council Member Bishop. I said from crest to the bottom. You're right, it does change. Council Member Lewis.
[1:00:29] Yes, I real quick, I think, you know.
[1:00:31] I'll just open quickly and state my view, which is that I agree with Council Member Farrow.
[1:00:39] I'm in favor of reducing the speed limit on the section of road.
[1:00:43] I, both Mayor Bradley and Mayor Pro Tem, so I think you may be right.
[1:00:48] I'm not sure that lowering the speed limit is going to have a direct cause and effect on driver behavior.
[1:00:53] It'll have some, but probably enforcement issues also are a part of it.
[1:00:57] but I think for other reasons we should do this and if you're all right in my flawed memory of
[1:01:04] PV East on the other side of the hill, if you guys have it right, I think there's a virtue in us
[1:01:10] handling similar situations similarly. And so I think the speed limit should be on the switchbacks
[1:01:15] should be on the same and both sets of switchbacks and that's why if it's 35 on the north side,
[1:01:21] we should have a 35 on the south side too. So I'm in favor of it.
[1:01:24] So, Councilman Lewis, I just want me to pine a little bit on that.
[1:01:29] There is a difference in the topology between the north side and the south side.
[1:01:35] There are driveways and street inferences, and people turning left and turning right
[1:01:41] on the north side where there isn't, once you get past Granado and you're going down on
[1:01:49] the switchbacks.
[1:01:50] I think that was the original reason why there was a difference through there because there weren't people turning out onto the turning left and right and no driveways, so there is a difference.
[1:02:04] It's a fair point, I mean, there's, I didn't say there were identical situations, but I think I said similar, and I think we've heard from the neighbors in the community that there's people on foot, there's people on bikes.
[1:02:16] And so, while there's not driveways and cars pulling out of driveways is a distraction.
[1:02:21] There are other safety distractions on this similarly narrow road, a similarly steep hill, with similarly little visibility and so on.
[1:02:32] So I just think there's virtue in us handling those two situations similarly, that's all.
[1:02:38] So,
[1:02:43] as a practical matter, you really can't go 40 all the way down the switchbacks because
[1:02:51] there are two places where it's pretty much a U-turn, you know, it's down on one side
[1:03:01] of the other.
[1:03:02] And so I don't see that in a way it's going to have a great deal of impact to reduce the speed limit because you're forced to reduce it in those two locations anyway.
[1:03:22] I have never seen, well, I have seen a few people on bikes, but never any kids playing
[1:03:32] on the road, and I've lived there almost well more than 30 years, I guess.
[1:03:40] So I don't think kids playing on the road is a real concern.
[1:03:47] But I do think, I mean I drove this the other day watching my speed limit to see and simulate
[1:04:00] what exactly we were going to ask people to do.
[1:04:05] And I think reducing it to 35, it's a good thing to do.
[1:04:12] If we want to, you know, it will help slow down a little bit and help people get used
[1:04:21] to it.
[1:04:22] And if we can get a little more enforcement for a period of time, that would be good too.
[1:04:28] But I know that that's problematic at best.
[1:04:32] But still I think it's important to have more consistency.
[1:04:37] And so just to say, to reduce it to 35, makes it consistent all the way down.
[1:04:46] And maybe that'll help.
[1:04:50] You know?
[1:04:51] Council Member Peres, that.
[1:04:53] Okay.
[1:04:53] Thank you.
[1:04:53] Just to add one more layer or wrinkle on to this, that I'm going to separate the southbound
[1:05:00] from Crest to Mr. Delmar, Leonardo, and then the switchbacks, that I think if we use the parallel of Hawthorne Boulevard with the speed limits 45, and we have loud signage that it's 30, and if we take that to the Crest down to Mr. Delmar intersection before we get the switchbacks and have that same loudness and feedback at 30, then I think that would be effective.
[1:05:29] And at least on a temporary basis, maybe for a year, we can take a look at doing that.
[1:05:34] And then, regarding the switchbacks, that's a separate issue of, I agree with the staff recommendation there on that part.
[1:05:41] So it would all be 35, except for, and the speed limit actually would not change.
[1:05:47] It would be signage, orange signage that says 30, which are in place today, south of Castellina.
[1:05:55] Yeah, we already have a sign in orange saying 30, reinforcement of that a little louder further south before we get to the intersection of Grenado, I would be happy with that then.
[1:06:06] Thank you.
[1:06:08] Mayor Bradley.
[1:06:08] I really don't want to see louder enforcement signs.
[1:06:13] I mean, I think they would be tacky.
[1:06:17] So, Mayor Bradley, I would just go to make a motion.
[1:06:25] Before that, Mayor Bradley, give me one second, R.I. wanted to say something.
[1:06:28] Right. I just wanted to clarify for the council's benefit. I think what council member
[1:06:32] Paris-Stem is saying is, if you adjust this bead limit, the white signs are the regulatory
[1:06:38] signs. The yellow signs, which you're describing as the loud signs, are the advisory that you're
[1:06:45] being advised to drive 30 miles per hour, but it's not an enforceable bead limit. So that's
[1:06:53] I think that's the distinct difference.
[1:06:56] It's enforceable under the portion of the code, I believe.
[1:07:00] I don't know if the captain is there,
[1:07:01] but under the code that you're bound to drive
[1:07:05] at a safe speed for the road conditions.
[1:07:08] And those are advisory saying coming into the hairpin curve,
[1:07:13] it is advisable to reduce your speed to a safe speed amount.
[1:07:18] safe speed amount?
[1:07:23] Is I believe how the code reads? Is that correct, Captain? Is she there?
[1:07:28] Yes, she's there. Yes, Sam.
[1:07:29] Got him, girl. That is correct. Thank you.
[1:07:35] So, it is quasi-enforceable,
[1:07:38] Councilman Parrisam, under the heading of your bound to do drive at a safe speed for the road conditions.
[1:07:46] There's a maximum speed limit, but if it's unsafe, you can't drive the speed limit.
[1:07:52] If it's icy, if it's rainy, you know, whatever it is,
[1:07:58] does that make sense?
[1:08:02] So I'd like to make a motion.
[1:08:03] I'd like to make the motion that we continue to focus on enforcement, but we do not change
[1:08:11] the speed limit.
[1:08:12] We continue to keep the speed limit.
[1:08:14] At the upper part, should a PV drive east from Crest down to the top of the switchbacks
[1:08:20] where it changes to 40, leave it at 40, I do like the idea of Councilman Paris-Jams suggestion
[1:08:29] of putting a couple more advisory signs on there towards the really steep or the drastic
[1:08:39] changes and add additional signage for advisory going into those curves, but maintain the current speed limits, but continue to focus on enforcement.
[1:08:48] Is there a second for the mayor's motion?
[1:08:55] No second, mayor.
[1:08:59] All right, at this point the motion fails.
[1:09:03] Let me just clarify some issues here. When it comes to what we want to do with this, it comes down to public safety.
[1:09:11] and everybody wants to make sure that there are no accidents in people in injuries as well as fatalities.
[1:09:18] Now, with the speed limit some cells, I know we've talked extensively about it and about, you know, dropping it down to 30,
[1:09:25] I suppose the 35 and 40 and currently what it's at. I know a lot of folks in neighborhood wanted to drop down to 30.
[1:09:33] But in my opinion, you know, based on what we've seen and data that's been collected, it hasn't.
[1:09:37] And in my opinion, it really does not matter when it comes to speed limit.
[1:09:41] It's the actual enforcement like we keep saying, and if we don't do the enforcement and
[1:09:44] we're not consistent, we're not going to get the same results.
[1:09:47] So at this point, I think a good, I guess, compromise solution for tonight's purposes is to
[1:09:57] recommend the staff recommendation, but to add number six to increase the signage that
[1:10:04] that customer repairs and wanted and the other part too would be to direct staff to make
[1:10:10] sure that we actually take in the data that we need because one thing that I think we
[1:10:14] lack is the implementation and the data collecting to make sure that we're actually implementing
[1:10:19] and changing the situation and so I'd like to see that more instead of a year, I'd like
[1:10:25] to see that in six months. So at this point I'd make the motion for staff recommendation
[1:10:32] recommendation, one through five, plus the addition of six to increase signage, and then seven to come back in six months, I suppose a year to see if we're actually doing the, or implementing the solutions that we want it.
[1:10:45] Second.
[1:10:49] Roll call, please.
[1:10:51] Council Member Ferraro.
[1:10:52] Yes.
[1:10:53] Council Member Lewis.
[1:10:54] Yes.
[1:10:55] Council Member Peristam.
[1:10:57] Yes.
[1:10:57] Mayor Pro Temsale.
[1:10:59] Yes.
[1:10:59] Mayor Bradley.
[1:11:00] No.
[1:11:01] Motion passes.
[1:11:02] Would that be removed to item number two?
[1:11:06] Thank you.
[1:11:07] Can we get staff report on item number two, please?
[1:11:10] Which is the consideration to repeal and replace chapter 15.20 of the Rancho Palos Verde's municipal code on building regulations within the greater Portuguese and landslide complex.
[1:11:19] Late correspondence was distributed earlier and they do currently have six requests to speak.
[1:11:24] Yes, and Mayor Pro Tempo, before I hand it over to the community development director, Randy Ford.
[1:11:31] So I just want to make some comments on this agenda item.
[1:11:35] This is not going to be, or is not considered a popular item, but it's an important one.
[1:11:42] And it's due to change circumstances and in the interest of public health and safety and welfare.
[1:11:49] This agenda item before you this evening needs to consider repealing and
[1:11:53] placing chapter 1520 of the Ranch of Palsvertis Municipal Code, which is currently titled Landside
[1:12:00] Moratorium, and we are dropping the term Landside Moratorium and actually calling it the
[1:12:07] Greater Portuguese Bend Landside Building Regulations that Brandi is going to describe in greater
[1:12:14] detail. So I'll hand it over to Brandi.
[1:12:18] Great. Thank you. Good evening, Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem and City Council. This agenda item
[1:12:24] is for the consideration to repeal and replace chapter 15.20 of the Rancho Pals Verde's municipal
[1:12:30] code on building regulations within the Greater Portuguese Bend Landslide Complex. The City Council
[1:12:36] will consider the introduction of the ordinance. If the ordinance is introduced, it will be brought
[1:12:44] back to you for adoption at the August 19th meeting.
[1:12:50] The ancient landslide complex covers approximately two square miles on the South Central portion
[1:12:55] of the Palace Verdes Peninsula.
[1:12:57] In August of 1957, an area in the ancient landslide began to slide the area commonly known
[1:13:03] as the Portuguese then landslide.
[1:13:06] Between January of 1974 and March of 1976, an area also in the ancient landslide began
[1:13:13] to slide the area commonly known as the Abelone Cove Landslide, both remain active.
[1:13:19] On September 5th of 1978, the City Council enacted an urgency ordinance prohibiting the
[1:13:25] development of property in the ancient landslide area, as it had come to the attention of
[1:13:30] the City Council that the land identified in the Landslide Moratorium map, which was previously
[1:13:36] thought to be stable was susceptible to or experiencing landslide movement at that time.
[1:13:43] In order to protect the public health safety and welfare, it was necessary for the city
[1:13:49] to adopt this ordinance. The landslide moratorium has been updated over the years to incorporate
[1:13:55] exceptions on a case-by-case basis, but the amount of development has been limited to those exceptions.
[1:14:01] In 2005, the City Council adopted interim urgency ordinance number 427U, which halted construction
[1:14:10] and issuance of permits on a portion of the Klondike Canyon landslide based on increased
[1:14:15] movement following an unusually wet winter that year.
[1:14:19] And this was within parts of the CBU and Portuguese Ben Beach Club neighborhoods.
[1:14:23] In
[1:14:27] 2002, the case of monks versus the city of Rancho Palos Verdez was filed for in-verse
[1:14:34] condemnation for 16 properties within the landslide moratorium ordinance area.
[1:14:41] In 2008, the Court of Appeals in the Monks case concluded that the city's existing Portuguese
[1:14:48] He's been landslide regulations in Chapter 1520 of the RPV Municipal Code,
[1:14:54] constituted a taking of real property and was therefore unlawful.
[1:14:59] The Court of Appeal-
[1:15:00] Members ordered the city to allow development or compensate the property owners. With limited resources on September 15th of 2009, the city council took the next action necessary to comply with the Court of Appeals decision by adopting ordinance 498 to enact revisions to the landslide, more auditorium ordinance, to allow the development of the monks' plaintiffs' 16 undeveloped lots as an exception category.
[1:15:29] In compliance with the monk's decision, 12 homes have been constructed on the 16 monks
[1:15:35] plane of slots within the landslide complex.
[1:15:39] The historic winter rains of 2022-23, and again in the winter of 23-24, this caused significant
[1:15:48] damage to homes, roads, utilities, and other vital infrastructure.
[1:15:53] As a result of those, as a result of those 12 monks homes that were constructed,
[1:15:59] three have been red tagged, meaning that they are uninhabitable, and one has been yellow tagged,
[1:16:05] meaning that portions of the structure may not be habitable, or that the property has sustained significant damage.
[1:16:11] A total of five of the monks planted property owners have applied for the city's FEMA voluntary property
[1:16:17] bioprogram to relocate from the risk of imminent failure of land movement.
[1:16:23] So this brings us to the significant change of circumstances in the landslide area driving
[1:16:28] the need for these revised regulations.
[1:16:33] The situation today is different from the circumstances of the initial recorded movement
[1:16:39] of the conditions that influence the City Council to adopt the original landslide more
[1:16:44] or Torium Ordnance in 1978, and to the state of the landslide at the time of the 2008
[1:16:51] monks decision. It is important to note that the courts have recognized the legal doctrine
[1:16:57] of changed circumstances, particularly in areas like property law, land use, and environmental
[1:17:03] regulations. The doctrine acknowledges that circumstances can evolve over time, potentially
[1:17:10] actually impacting the legal justification for previously established rules or findings.
[1:17:16] The documentation of the change circumstances presented in the staff report and
[1:17:21] in this presentation was provided by the city's consultant geologist Mike Fipps of Cotton Shires and Associates.
[1:17:29] And Mike is available on Zoom for questions after the presentation.
[1:17:34] As you're aware, the heavy rainstorms of the winter of 22-23 triggered a historic increase in land movement.
[1:17:42] This was subsequently exacerbated by similar weather patterns the following winter of 23-24.
[1:17:49] On October 3rd of 2023, the city declared a local state of emergency and implemented an urgency ordinance prohibiting all new construction in the Portuguese then landslide complex.
[1:18:01] The urgency ordinance was submitted to the California Department of Housing and Community
[1:18:06] Development, or HCD, and they provided a letter of approval on October 6th of 2023.
[1:18:13] The urgency ordinance provided a moratorium prohibiting construction within the boundaries
[1:18:18] of the Greater Portuguese Bend Landslide Complex.
[1:18:21] No application for permit has been accepted, considered, or issued for construction on any
[1:18:27] property within the landslide complex during the period of the urgency ordinance, aside
[1:18:31] from those that qualify for an exception. And there are four exception categories. One
[1:18:37] was for a repair and maintenance. The second was for landslide mitigation measures. The
[1:18:43] third was for immediate preservation of public health and safety. And the fourth was construction
[1:18:48] that the city manager deemed necessary and consistent to be ratified by city council.
[1:18:53] The city followed the process for the extensions to the urgency ordinance moratorium extending it through the first full year on November 14th of 2023 and then for an additional 12 month period on September 3rd of 2024.
[1:19:08] This moratorium has been extended to the maximum two year life and is set to expire on October 2nd of 2025.
[1:19:15] In
[1:19:19] October of 2022, a year prior to the city council's declaration of a local emergency and the passing of the interim urgency ordinance moratorium, the average land movement velocity based on the GPS survey data published by McGee serving consulting through October of 2022, monitoring period was approximately 0.6 inches per month.
[1:19:46] that was in October of 2022.
[1:19:50] The rainy season of 22-23 was 193% of an average rainfall season for the area.
[1:19:58] As a result, a dramatic acceleration in land movement occurred reaching an average
[1:20:03] of 3.6 inches per month by October 10 of 2023.
[1:20:08] 3. Since the adoption of the interim urgency ordinance,
[1:20:13] moratorium on October 3rd of 2023, and through the period of the subsequent extensions, the
[1:20:19] city geologist has conducted additional field mapping throughout the landslide complex
[1:20:24] to document and update the boundary of the major active land movement.
[1:20:29] He has also observed conditions at various site-specific locations impacting residential neighborhoods,
[1:20:35] public infrastructure and where trails have been impacted.
[1:20:40] He reviewed additional survey and rainfall data.
[1:20:43] He has participated in weekly meetings of the geology team and the RPB landslide complex
[1:20:49] working group.
[1:20:50] And he peer reviewed and observed the entire subsurface exploration and instrumentation phase
[1:20:55] of work in advance of the emergency deep to watering wells.
[1:21:00] By March of 2024, the City Geologist had documented a significantly expanded area of major
[1:21:08] land movement comprising approximately 700 acres, where the prior boundaries of the
[1:21:13] historically active landslides within the landslide complex was 380 acres.
[1:21:19] So the land movement area and the ancient landslide complex is nearly doubled.
[1:21:24] At the July 2nd, 2024 City Council meeting, the City Geologist reported that rainfall and the resulting runoff and infiltration into the landslide complex continued to adversely affect the landslide area, causing further acceleration of land movement following back-to-back significant winter rain seasons.
[1:21:46] The seasonal rainfall average has been calculated over the past 67 years as measured at the
[1:21:53] rolling health fire station rain gauge.
[1:21:56] In the winter of 22-23, the rainfall was 193% of the average.
[1:22:03] In 23-24, the rainfall total was over 23 inches or approximately 170% of the season average.
[1:22:11] On June 25th of 2024, the city geologist's report concluded that the recent land movement
[1:22:18] rates or velocities were approximately 9-12 inches per week in the Portuguese-Bandland
[1:22:24] slide, 7-11 inches per week in the Abelone Cove landslide, and 2-7 inches per week in
[1:22:31] the Clandite Canyon landslide.
[1:22:33] And by August 20th of 2024, that landslide update staff report, those land movement rates
[1:22:40] This remains steady at approximately 7-11 inches per week in the Abelone Cove, 9-13 inches
[1:22:46] per week in Portuguese Bend, and 2-8 inches per week in the Clondite Canyon Landside.
[1:22:52] This was described by the city geologist as a significant and unprecedented change in
[1:22:58] movement behavior from historical movements of the Portuguese Bend and Abelone Cove Landsides.
[1:23:04] The large acceleration of land movement continued to manifest at the ground surface in the
[1:23:10] form of scarps, fissures, grobins, sinkholes,
[1:23:14] tensional cracking, shear zones, and thrust features,
[1:23:18] resulting in enlargement and expansion, widening,
[1:23:23] or growth of these ground deformation features,
[1:23:26] depending on the type of feature and location.
[1:23:30] The city's deep dewatering well program,
[1:23:33] along with the dewatering activities by A-clad and K-clad,
[1:23:37] have been effective at reducing groundwater pore pressures and dramatically slow the land
[1:23:44] movement in some areas.
[1:23:46] Horizontal land movement ceased in the Condit Canyon landslide by mid-October of 2024 and
[1:23:51] decreased significantly in the Portuguese Bend landslide, but has reached an apparent steady
[1:23:57] state of movement at about 2.76 inches per week.
[1:24:02] While land movement has decelerated in 2025, the land is still moving up to 3.7 inches per week.
[1:24:10] That's the equivalent of 16 inches per month in some areas.
[1:24:16] This current rate is considerably more than the rate when the emergency declaration was instituted
[1:24:21] in October of 2023, where the movement was at a rate of up to 3.6 inches per month.
[1:24:28] That means there are significant areas in the landslides still moving three to four times
[1:24:34] the rate that the land was moving in October of 2023 when the emergency declaration and urgency
[1:24:39] ordinance more auditorium were instituted.
[1:24:42] Based upon the July and August 2024 field mapping, the total area the active landslide complex
[1:24:48] had expanded.
[1:24:50] The eastern landslide boundary of the Klondike Canyon landslide was manifesting approximately
[1:24:55] only 50 feet farther east on admirable drive and 150 feet farther east on exultant drive.
[1:25:02] However, these boundaries appear to be for the most part except for the eight properties
[1:25:07] that will be discussed later in my presentation, they seem to be consistent with the historical
[1:25:13] mapping of the Klondike Canyon landslide and the location of the pre-development drainage
[1:25:18] course that is believed to define the Easterly limit of the prehistoric landslide.
[1:25:25] Also expanded is the Westerly boundary of the active landslide complex in the Abelone
[1:25:31] Cova landslide area.
[1:25:33] This has expanded approximately 180 feet farther west at Narcissa Drive and on the York
[1:25:38] property at 6,0001 Pous Verdes Drive South.
[1:25:42] This new expanded landslide movement was noted to be quickly deforming the Narcissa
[1:25:48] the drive curve and is the same movement that displaced the administration building at Wayfair's
[1:25:53] Chapel property and caused major bulging of the parking lot and the chapel building. The Wayfair's
[1:25:59] chapel property was closed to the public and the chapel itself was dismantled for future relocation.
[1:26:06] The Portuguese Ben Beach Club area continued to experience major deformation along C-Wall Road
[1:26:13] and bulging uplift of up to four to five feet across the beach on an east to west trend.
[1:26:20] This deformation and uplift were noted to continue offshore into the Portuguese Ben
[1:26:26] landslide based on major emergence of land in the surf zone and near shore zone at the
[1:26:32] south easterly toe of the Portuguese Ben landslide.
[1:26:35] In this area, the sea floor uplifted above mean sea level as far as 200 to 300 feet south
[1:26:43] of the former shore slope of the beach.
[1:26:49] Roadways, water mains, sewer pipes, gas lines, and electrical power poles have all been
[1:26:56] impacted by the land movement throughout the land side complex.
[1:27:00] A more robust description of the impacts of each utility, including water and sewer, was
[1:27:05] updated in the July 1st, 2025 City Council agenda report, extending the emergency declaration
[1:27:12] which further explains the change in circumstances. The road conditions on PV drive south across
[1:27:19] the lower landslide complex continued to be adversely impacted due to the differential rates
[1:27:26] in land movement. Pavement conditions on PV drive south remain very poor with cracks,
[1:27:33] Blacks, bumps, fissures, and other irregularities, sometimes forming almost overnight.
[1:27:39] The rate of movement on heavey drives south is up to four inches per week in certain areas.
[1:27:44] The city-owned Palace Verdes Drive nature-preserved trail conditions within the landslide complex
[1:27:50] have continued to worsen.
[1:27:53] Many of these areas experience landslide-related damage including fissures, rock slides, sinkholes,
[1:27:59] unstable trails, and significant erosion.
[1:28:01] Many locations are almost unrecognizable with little to no trail remaining.
[1:28:08] Out of concern for public safety and in consultation with the city geologist, the city manager closed large areas of the preserve consisting of approximately 12 miles of trails.
[1:28:20] On July 29th of last year, Southern California gas company or so-cal gas shut off gas service to approximately 135 households due to safety concerns.
[1:28:32] On July 30th, level last year, Southern California Edison or SCE issued a statement that there has been considerable land movement putting the utilities serving the area and multiple properties at risk.
[1:28:45] From July 29th to September 6th of 2024, so Cal Gas shut off natural gas to homes in the landslide area indefinitely.
[1:28:55] In the Portuguese Ben Community Association, there were 139 homes, in CVU 34 homes.
[1:29:03] The Portuguese Ben Beach Club 24 homes for a total of 197 homes.
[1:29:09] On August 6th of 2024, the City Council adopted a resolution declaring a state of local
[1:29:15] emergency in the Portuguese Ben Community on the grounds of a sudden shortage of energy based
[1:29:21] on so-called gas shutting off gas service to homes in the landslide complex.
[1:29:26] Then from August 31st to September 9th of 2024, SCE turned off power to a significant
[1:29:34] portion of the landslide area, leaving homes without electricity indefinitely.
[1:29:38] The Portuguese Ben Community Association, 193 homes in CVU, 30 homes, and the Portuguese
[1:29:46] he's been beach club 54 homes, that's a total of 277 homes without power.
[1:29:53] Cox communication also discontinued communication services to 146 homes in the-
[1:30:00] The Portuguese Ben Community Association, rendering them without internet or phone service. Although the power and gas have been restored to some, it has not been universally restored. These critical services have not been available to energize city-owned utilities, including the Abelone Cove sewer collection system, as well as the landslide mitigation efforts, such as the deep de-watering wells. These services are continuing to be powered by fuel generators.
[1:30:29] It is also important to note that any increased acceleration in land movement in the future that
[1:30:36] is at or near the level that the city experienced last year would likely instigate the energy
[1:30:41] providers to revisit de-energization possibilities.
[1:30:49] With the extreme acceleration in land movement since the initial adoption of the interim urgency
[1:30:54] ordinance moratorium in October of 2023, dozens of homes have experienced severe damage.
[1:31:00] On October 28th of 2024, the city, FEMA, and Cal OES announced a $42 million voluntary property acquisition by-out program for property owners in the landslide complex whose homes have been damaged or threatened by land movement.
[1:31:18] The city received 85 applications for the first round of program funding.
[1:31:23] Based on voluntary inspections, 21 homes have been red tagged where they are not habitable and 38 have been yellow tagged, where portions of the home may not be habitable and may have experienced damage to structures.
[1:31:38] The building official only visited those homes, excuse me, where the owners voluntarily requested an inspection.
[1:31:46] So, there may be other homes that are in similar condition that have not been inspected
[1:31:50] or read or yellow tagged, where the threat of life, health and property still exists.
[1:31:59] As mentioned previously, of the 12 monks' plan of slots that were developed, five of those
[1:32:04] applied for that FEMA brought by out program.
[1:32:07] And the point of all of this is that there is still a concern that those lots that had been
[1:32:12] and previously thought to be stable,
[1:32:14] may in fact still be susceptible
[1:32:16] to or experiencing current landslide movement,
[1:32:19] which was the reasoning for the moratorium back in 1978.
[1:32:24] The city's geologist has also expressed
[1:32:26] that development of a vacant parcel
[1:32:29] on the actively moving landslide
[1:32:31] generally would have net negative impacts
[1:32:34] that have the potential to accelerate
[1:32:36] the already moving landslide,
[1:32:38] causing damage to other properties
[1:32:40] because of the introduction of building loads, grading loads, disturbance due to grading,
[1:32:47] change in permeable area, resulting in the concentration of runoff from impermeable surfaces
[1:32:53] and potential increases to ground water from infiltration of landscape water and storm water.
[1:33:01] Last August, City Council received an update from the Director of Public Works and
[1:33:06] the city geologist, the land movement is occurring predominantly on a deeper slip plane that
[1:33:12] is up to 330 feet below the ground surface, referred to as the Altamera slip plane.
[1:33:18] And may encompass more than the Portuguese-Benn landslide area, requiring a rethinking of
[1:33:24] the mitigation approach on a holistic level.
[1:33:28] The ancient Altamera slip plane, which was identified in only a handful of historical
[1:33:33] boreings underneath the active portuguese bend landslide was never historically documented
[1:33:38] is actively moving. The city has gained a more detailed geologic understanding of the expanded
[1:33:45] active portion of the landslide complex, now approximately 715 acres, with test bore holes
[1:33:53] drilled in 2024 revealing a much deeper plane of land movement than initially understood.
[1:33:59] Based on current conditions, it is clear that land movement will be substantially more difficult to mitigate long-term.
[1:34:08] This new information about the deeper slip plane and its contribution to the unprecedented land movement
[1:34:14] highlights how the general understanding of the landside complex continues to evolve as changes in circumstances arise,
[1:34:22] ranging from the weather conditions to landslide evaluation tools.
[1:34:27] Landslide movements throughout the ancient landslide complex, outside of the historical
[1:34:32] boundaries of the Abelone Cove and Portuguese Bend landslides, previously exhibited low
[1:34:37] rates of creep movement in the 11-year monitoring period from 2007 to 2018, for which data are
[1:34:44] readily available.
[1:34:46] By comparison, since October 10, 2022, not even three years, total horizontal land movements
[1:34:53] throughout the Altamere Landside Complex has ranged from approximately 27 to 39 feet in most areas
[1:35:02] with the exception being approximately 6 to 21 feet of horizontal land movement in the
[1:35:08] Clondite Canyon Landslide area. Vertical displacements have ranged from one to 10 feet in most areas over
[1:35:15] the same period. Measures today have clearly slowed but not stopped the land movement
[1:35:21] and proposed landslide regulations are necessary as the active movement can still expand further into the mapped ancient landslide areas
[1:35:30] and further weather is unpredictable and we may expect to see more extreme conditions similar to what was experienced in the winters of 2022,
[1:35:39] 22, 23 and winter of 23, 24.
[1:35:44] The land movement is unprecedented in terms of speed and size, encompassing approximately
[1:35:50] 715 acres of active land movement within the mapped ancient landslide complex.
[1:35:56] This includes movement on a significantly deeper slide plane that had not been accounted
[1:36:02] for in previous studies, although there are some areas where the landslide mitigation measures
[1:36:07] there's have some improvement in some monitoring points currently have no measurable horizontal movement.
[1:36:13] There still may be vertical settling as well.
[1:36:16] The city cannot predict what the impacts will be of future rain events.
[1:36:20] The underlying geology is the same.
[1:36:23] So the entirety of the landside complex is still susceptible to future movement.
[1:36:39] An interim urgency ordinance that institutes a construction moratorium can only be extended for
[1:36:46] a maximum total of a two-year lifespan, and the current ordinance that extended their
[1:36:51] interim urgency or moratorium for the total of the 24 months is set to expire on October
[1:36:57] 2nd of this year.
[1:36:59] As we approach the sunset of the urgency ordinance, the city is required to act.
[1:37:04] Since the conditions that require the urgency ordinance are still active, the city needs
[1:37:09] to adopt permanent regulations to address the impacts of the substantial change in circumstances
[1:37:14] of the land movement and the threat to the loss or damage to life, health, property,
[1:37:20] or essential public services. The city council needs to permanently respond to these
[1:37:25] conditions that gave the rise to the urgency ordinance, more torment in 2023.
[1:37:33] The ordinance for consideration tonight proposes to repeal the existing chapter 15.2O of the
[1:37:41] RPD municipal code and replace it with the new regulations. How the proposed regulations are
[1:37:46] are actually different from the existing landslide moratorium were shown in the track changes
[1:37:51] attachment B to the staff report. In summary, new construction of residential structures
[1:37:57] will not be allowed. It is important to note that any permit for new construction that had
[1:38:03] previously been granted but not acted upon will be revoked.
[1:38:07] Residential home additions are prohibited. As are new attached or detached garages and larger
[1:38:14] or accessory structures.
[1:38:16] Following the town hall meeting on July 16th,
[1:38:19] the City Council subcommittee addressed the question
[1:38:22] regarding swimming pools and the regulations now state
[1:38:25] that repair, replacement, or restoration of swimming pools
[1:38:28] is not allowed.
[1:38:32] The allowed exceptions to the prohibition
[1:38:35] are the maintenance of existing structures or facilities
[1:38:38] which do not increase the land coverage of those facilities
[1:38:42] or add to the water usage of those facilities.
[1:38:46] Replacement repair or restoration including any demolition necessary to
[1:38:50] effectuate that of residential buildings or structures within the same
[1:38:54] square footage. Number of stories and square footage per story, setbacks and
[1:39:00] footprint in the same general location on the property so as not to aggravate any
[1:39:04] hazardous geological condition. Manufactured homes will be allowed for
[1:39:10] replacement. So long as they meet the standards just mentioned regarding setbacks and square footage,
[1:39:18] and the other the other standards and the installation would need to meet the building code
[1:39:24] requirements. This is both for when the damage is caused by a geologic hazard or other hazard such as
[1:39:30] fire or earthquake. The same general location is the language that was already in the code and it
[1:39:38] has been the past practice of the city based on geotechnical review and on rebuilding structures
[1:39:44] that were severely damaged by land movement. Another exception is for minor non-residential structures
[1:39:51] such as storage sheds of 320 square feet or less with no foundation. Special uses where it is not
[1:39:59] a change to the structure and is ancillary to the primary use such as permits for keeping large
[1:40:05] domestic animals and exotic animals will be an exception, fences, walls, and hedge permits
[1:40:12] that don't involve grading or construction of retaining walls, barns and similar non-habitable
[1:40:19] structures for the sole purpose of housing animals where the facility is not fully enclosed
[1:40:25] on lots that are currently legally developed with a residential structure, the barn shall not exceed
[1:40:33] the maximum roofed area of 1,600 square feet, and it must be demonstrated to the satisfaction
[1:40:38] of the geotechnical consultant that the structural and not aggravate the existing situation.
[1:40:46] Non-remedial grading up to a cumulative maximum of 50 cubic yards and permanent demolition.
[1:40:54] Additional allowed exceptions that include non-construction activities include environmental studies,
[1:41:02] geologic investigations, remedial grading for soil stability and to reduce geotechnical hazards,
[1:41:10] lot line adjustments and similar lot mergers, and bringing an existing structure built prior to October 5th of 1978 up to code.
[1:41:19] There is also a process for a land owner to apply for their parcel to be excluded from the landslide regulation area,
[1:41:28] yet there are strict submittal criteria and findings to be met.
[1:41:33] Those have remained the same as the existing moratorium language.
[1:41:39] To address public safety, the boundaries of the landslide complex will be updated to correspond with the expanded limits of recent land movement.
[1:41:48] The city's previous landslide map will be repealed and replaced with this new proposed map.
[1:41:53] The
[1:41:57] city's geologist has been mapping the boundary of the prehistoric landslide and the major active land movement areas from 2023 to 2025.
[1:42:07] These have been displayed regularly in the city council staff reports every 60 days as we have continued the emergency declaration.
[1:42:16] And those are both outlined in the map on the left. I know this might be a little difficult to see, but the yellow is where the ancient landslide is and the green is where the
[1:42:26] the major active land movement has been.
[1:42:31] The proposed map for the new code amendment
[1:42:35] constitutes the outer boundary of those two areas of the prehistoric landslide
[1:42:39] and the major active land movement within the city limits.
[1:42:42] It is expected that eight additional properties, seven in CVU and one in beach club will be added
[1:42:47] as shown in the red on these two maps.
[1:42:51] For the lots to be removed, shown in the blue on the map on the right,
[1:42:55] It was determined that these lots south of C-COVE and the Abelone Cove shoreline park that have previously been included are unrelated to the Greater Portuguese Bend Landslide Complex.
[1:43:09] Although the bluff area does have young shallow landslides on the face of the bluff, the geologist has confirmed that they are different landslides that are not connected in any way to the ancient landslide.
[1:43:20] and they are for do not need to be included in the greater Portuguese Ben Landside Complex.
[1:43:25] There are land use regulations that would restrict the development on those bluffs that address
[1:43:31] the conditions of those lots.
[1:43:34] In some cases, the Landside Complex boundary traverses parcels and does not encompass the
[1:43:40] entire parcel, especially on these eight additional lots.
[1:43:44] So similar to past practice, it will only be the portion within the landslide complex
[1:43:51] boundary that would be subject to the proposed landslide regulations in the ordinance.
[1:43:55] So if there's some portion of the lot that is outside of the landslide complex boundary,
[1:44:00] that would not be subjected, subject to the regulations.
[1:44:09] In preparation for these code amendments, the City Council subcommittee met on June 23rd
[1:44:15] in June 25th to discuss draft code revisions to address the change in the circumstances
[1:44:22] and need for permanent regulations. Following a town hall community meeting on this issue,
[1:44:28] the City Council subcommittee met again with staff on July 18th to review the input from
[1:44:34] the public and consider any final amendments to the code revisions.
[1:44:38] A courtesy notice was issued on July 10th by publication in the Palis Verde's Peninsula
[1:44:44] News and mailed written courtesy notices were sent to property owners within the Proposal
[1:44:49] Landslide Area where the proposed regulations would be applicable.
[1:44:53] The notice was also emailed to the representatives of the Neighborhood Associations with a boundary
[1:45:00] It was potentially expanding. And the July 10th notice informed the residents and the public of the proposed code amendments. It notified them of the town hall community meeting held on July 16th and the Scheduled City Council consideration of these code amendments for tonight. There were approximately 90 members of the public in attendance in virtually at the July 16th town hall.
[1:45:28] The city received 12 public comments that was Attachment K of the staff report from the public in response to the courtesy notice that was issued for the proposed code amendment staff received additional public comments after the TransMiddle of this report, all which have been forward to the City Council as late correspondence.
[1:45:50] pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, it has been determined
[1:45:55] that the proposed code amendment is exempt from CEQA. Generally speaking, the exemption
[1:46:00] is because the proposed code amendment is not a project within the meaning of CEQA guidelines.
[1:46:06] The code amendment is an action taken to prevent an emergency. The proposed code amendment does
[1:46:12] not have the potential to significantly impact the environment. And this code amendment constitutes
[1:46:18] an action to protect the environment.
[1:46:21] The references to each of the exemptions can be found in the administrative report for
[1:46:26] this agenda item.
[1:46:31] The staff, the recommended council actions on this slide, I'm not going to read everything
[1:46:36] on it, but the staff recommends that the city council introduce an ordinance repealing chapter
[1:46:41] 1520, the moratorium on land use permits of title 15 building and construction of the Rancho
[1:46:49] the Palace Verde's municipal code and replacing it with Chapter 1520.
[1:46:54] Greater Portuguese ben landslide complex regulations on land use permits.
[1:46:59] Also, staff recommends that the City Council refer to the Planning Commission for Rebue,
[1:47:04] an ordinance to update references to the amended, the amended Chapter 1520.
[1:47:11] These sections of code, it just references the same Chapter 1520.
[1:47:18] it's just calling it by the former title, so this would be a cleanup, it would be incidental changes, and
[1:47:26] what it would be is the staff is recommending the City Council refer those to the Planning Commission and those within their
[1:47:32] recommendations would come back to City Council.
[1:47:36] If the City Council accepts the staff's recommendations, the proposed code amendments will be presented to City Council on
[1:47:43] August 19th for a second reading and adoption on the consent calendar.
[1:47:47] The ordinance would become effective 30 days after adoption.
[1:47:52] The intent is to have the permanent regulations in place prior to the expiration of the current
[1:47:57] urgency ordinance more to him on October 2, 2025.
[1:48:01] If the City Council refers the related code amendments to the planning commission, a public
[1:48:06] hearing of the planning commission will be scheduled and noticed for consideration of those
[1:48:11] code amendments.
[1:48:14] Since these are revisions to the building code section of the Rancho Palace Verde's municipal
[1:48:20] code, this is not technically a public hearing.
[1:48:24] It doesn't require public hearing, but we did, again, issue the courtesy notice to the
[1:48:30] residents that would be impacted.
[1:48:33] This concludes my presentation.
[1:48:36] You can open up for questions.
[1:48:38] Again, Mike Fitts of Cotton Shires is available online and we can bring up any of the slides the proposed code amendments or any maps is needed.
[1:48:49] Thank you very much. Are there any questions from Council?
[1:48:54] Council Member Perram.
[1:48:55] Thank you. Just one and it's probably from Mike.
[1:48:59] Could you Mike articulate the criteria you use to include the additional parcels to the eastern edge of the landslide complex?
[1:49:16] Yes, it's based upon two primary items, number one, where is the mapped ancient landslide boundary as mapped by the California Geological Survey, which is the most recent map that any government agency has produced in 2007.
[1:49:39] And then more importantly, it's based on our field observations, our field mapping of ground cracking and evaluation of the GPS monitoring devices.
[1:49:52] I've communicated to city staff and to the council in the past that the eastern boundary is very difficult. It's not well defined.
[1:50:05] And that's because the landslide is sort of hinging off of that boundary.
[1:50:10] And so you end up with a very broad shear zone that covers a pretty wide area,
[1:50:18] whereas in some places you can walk up and there's a clear cut scarpe right in front of you.
[1:50:22] And you say, okay, here's the boundary.
[1:50:25] It's not the case on the eastern boundary.
[1:50:27] And so we really honed in on looking at our field mapping,
[1:50:32] the properties that we were able to get on to plus the city streets and mapping in where we see
[1:50:42] landslide related distress and you know where we see I mean there is distress to homes out there
[1:50:50] that may not be related to the landsides simply because of the age of the track being in the mid-1950s.
[1:50:58] So, it's primarily based on our field mapping, GPS monitoring data and in some cases,
[1:51:07] the CGS ancient landslide boundary, which is outside of the active movement in a couple
[1:51:15] of places.
[1:51:17] Okay.
[1:51:19] Thank you.
[1:51:20] Thank you, Mike.
[1:51:22] Any further questions?
[1:51:23] Mayor Bradley, do you have any questions?
[1:51:24] Questions?
[1:51:27] All right, we'll take our first speaker, please.
[1:51:29] Our first speaker is Ellen Tuberosi.
[1:51:33] Good evening.
[1:51:34] Hi, good evening.
[1:51:36] This is my first time doing this.
[1:51:38] On orders.
[1:51:39] Do me a favor.
[1:51:39] Can you grab the mic and just pretty close your mouth so that everybody can hear?
[1:51:43] Yes, I am.
[1:51:43] Perfectly challenged.
[1:51:46] Thank you for having me, Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem and Katie City Councilman.
[1:51:54] My name is Ellen.
[1:51:54] And I am a long time resident of Rancho Palos Verde's when my family has deep roots.
[1:52:00] My mother worked alongside Ken Daita to establish this city.
[1:52:05] I'm speaking today of a proposed expansion of the moratorium boundaries on the new construction development of the Landside Zone, which now possibly includes my property.
[1:52:17] My primary concern is the safety and well-being of our neighborhood, where my husband and
[1:52:24] When I raised our children and built cherished memories of our community, the day I walked
[1:52:30] into our home with the day I learned I was expecting our son.
[1:52:35] This is not just a red box on a map, this is our home, this is our lives, I've lived
[1:52:42] there almost 30 years and see you.
[1:52:46] I understand that the state law requires residents to be notified of proposals and changes
[1:52:52] that may impact our properties, unfortunately, I didn't receive a notice about the
[1:52:58] moratorium or the expanded boundaries. After speaking with neighbors, I learned
[1:53:05] that only one out of four houses that I spoke to received a notification about
[1:53:12] the town hall meeting. I was lucky enough to see that on social media, so I was
[1:53:21] So I watched and came after I saw that there were houses that were being included.
[1:53:29] So I ran over there because the map was clearly unrecognizable if it was my house or not.
[1:53:37] And when I got there, I still couldn't recognize if my house was in the boundary or not.
[1:53:43] And I asked and there were no addresses to be told.
[1:53:47] So I left not knowing if I was in or out, which is, as you can imagine, very disassessing,
[1:53:57] excuse me.
[1:54:00] I'm also seeking information about the geological basis and expand in moratorium boundaries, which you have answered a lot of questions.
[1:54:13] In 1997 when we bought our home, or when we were going to buy our home, we conducted
[1:54:18] a thorough look-see with the former geologist, our PV, to make sure we were good, make
[1:54:27] sure that our house was sound, and we were good to go, we weren't in the boundaries.
[1:54:33] And he agreed that we weren't, so we bought our home.
[1:54:37] I
[1:54:46] went to the city
[1:54:49] to ask about the geological reports, and I went to building in safety and I said I would really like to see the latest in my neighborhood, and they gave me somebody's report for 2021,
[1:55:10] you know, not helpful.
[1:55:14] It's been a very stressful couple of weeks, as you can imagine.
[1:55:19] My house is nothing like anybody else's house that I have seen in this light.
[1:55:26] And I feel like it's got to be a mistake, I just, it's my home.
[1:55:34] And it's a lot, this is a lot, as you can well imagine.
[1:55:40] And I thank you for listening to me and I'm sorry, I went over and I appreciate you being here and I appreciate everything that you have done.
[1:55:48] I know you guys, this is a hard job for you.
[1:55:51] And I always, when I see you on the street or at a function, I always try to thank you for everything.
[1:55:59] Thank you.
[1:56:00] Thank you on.
[1:56:00] Excuse me.
[1:56:03] I just wanted to ask you what street are you on?
[1:56:07] I'm on admirable.
[1:56:08] Admiral.
[1:56:09] Okay.
[1:56:10] Thank you.
[1:56:10] Thank you.
[1:56:12] Our next speaker is Sherry Hastings.
[1:56:15] Hi, Sherry.
[1:56:21] Thank you all.
[1:56:22] I really want to thank the geologists and the people who have paid the geologist for all the work they've done.
[1:56:28] I 100% agree with a more time extension.
[1:56:31] I'd actually like to see it extended even further.
[1:56:34] In the 1980s, those houses above us on Crest Road were originally supposed to drain into
[1:56:41] Macarrel Canyon.
[1:56:42] The city signed off on those to drain into Alta, Americanian, and that contributed according
[1:56:49] to several geologists I talked to about the problem that contributed a lot to the landside
[1:56:56] movement we saw here on Vanderlip, where I live.
[1:56:59] I would like to see the moratorium extended even further so that no further development
[1:57:04] occurs up on Crest Road.
[1:57:05] I would also like to see everybody be required to have rain barrels because my understanding
[1:57:12] of landslides is that they are due to weight and geology and water and that water coming
[1:57:20] down from Crest is even worse for us.
[1:57:22] I'd like to see that moratorium extended up on Crest Road so that no development occurs
[1:57:25] up there that increases the chances of water coming down out to Mericanion.
[1:57:30] I'd like to see everybody in Portuguese spend where I live required to have rain barrels
[1:57:35] so that that water doesn't get into the ground.
[1:57:37] And anything we can do to prevent this from extending further.
[1:57:41] Thank you.
[1:57:42] Thank you very much.
[1:57:45] Our next speaker is Gordon Leone.
[1:57:52] Good evening.
[1:57:52] Good evening.
[1:57:53] How are you?
[1:57:54] Good.
[1:57:54] But in general, I'm in favor of normalizing the development code with respect to the landslide.
[1:58:04] And I think that going back to the LME that we had before is a good starting point.
[1:58:12] I do have a few suggestions for this.
[1:58:17] First is, I believe this needs to be treated with a variance process.
[1:58:25] And the variance process should go through the normal, the director first, the planning
[1:58:31] commission, before it burdens the city council.
[1:58:36] Right now the way the documents written, if you want to do anything you have to do an appeal
[1:58:42] under the appeal goes directly to the city council.
[1:58:45] and I think you would be better served by having the planning commission in between that process.
[1:58:56] Next is the concept of same general location. This has been interpreted in the past as plus minus five feet by several directors of the development department.
[1:59:15] In Portuguese bend, we have very large lots, and there are a number of reasons that it makes sense to not be within plus and minus five feet.
[1:59:29] Those would include the general land movement that's taken place over time,
[1:59:36] Fisures that are within the area causing the house needing to move, and so what my suggestion would be would be to strike that language so that we don't get that interpreted as plus and minus five feet.
[1:59:56] I know those are specific suggestions, but I think they would-
[2:00:00] Let me improve the document. Thank you very much. Thank you. Our next speaker is John Colidge.
[2:00:15] Good evening.
[2:00:18] Good evening, everybody. I've been up living up to the O for 50 years now, and some other construction up here, and I own three parcels in this area. I think it was about what, 10 years ago, you had your 35th anniversary at my house. The cottage, Barbara was there, Barbara was there, and the cottage
[2:00:40] is 99 ban on lip, and it's still in one piece as my Rick, a PV engineering said it's like a boat in the ocean.
[2:00:50] Because of the foundation, it didn't do much damage at all to the house.
[2:00:55] Even though we had moving all the way around it, the house is in one piece.
[2:00:59] No cracking, no nothing.
[2:01:01] And then you go 10 feet from there, we have our gigantic creature,
[2:01:06] which is, goes by Sherry's house, Gordon's house, my house, and goes all the way down to Cinnamon, the same Fisher takes, and then two of the houses that are red tagged are on that same Fisher.
[2:01:20] So basically, where the Fisher is is where we're having all the problems, where the Fisher goes through your property, if it goes right through your house, like on Cinnamon, the upper Cinnamon there, you're going to lose the house.
[2:01:33] But if the fisher doesn't go into your house, or goes outside your house,
[2:01:37] your house is, believe it or not, my house is fine.
[2:01:40] And we had, I had to move a 5, 10,000 yards of dirt to fill up that fisher who was so big.
[2:01:46] So I owned that 60, I owned 60, a vandal of which is across the street, which is five acres.
[2:01:51] And we have the fisher go through the top, but the rest of it looks like nothing ever touched it.
[2:01:56] And I don't understand why I can't put a trailer there, I can't do anything with five acres of land.
[2:02:02] which you can drive down there. I'll have to take you down there and show it to you that there's no damage.
[2:02:07] The upper end was damaged on ventilator drive, but from there down there's no sign of any damage.
[2:02:14] So this is ruling about you can't put trailers, you can't put mobile homes, you can't do this, you can't do that.
[2:02:21] I mean, I'm not going to build a house. I just want to put a livable facility there and do some, maybe some farming, do something.
[2:02:28] I got five acres, I could have sold it for 3.5 million before the slide, and now it's worth nothing.
[2:02:34] So I think you can't be so stringent, I think you're going to look at every parcel individually.
[2:02:40] So that if you guys want to drive the sides with me, I'd love to drive sides with the show you what I'm talking about.
[2:02:46] Where the fishers are or where the damage is, outside the fishers, I'll throw it in my house, it's 15 feet away.
[2:02:52] I've got a pool right there with no cracks, I'd love to show it to you.
[2:02:56] Anyway, I don't like that part of your, whatever it is anyway, I'm not happy with it and I hope you will join me sometime and take it right with me.
[2:03:08] Thank you.
[2:03:08] Thank you very much.
[2:03:10] Next speaker.
[2:03:11] Our next speaker is Ben Eilenberg.
[2:03:17] Young Jim.
[2:03:25] Ben Canira's.
[2:03:32] Mayor Prattem, he's declined having us moving him over as a panelist so if you like, we can skip ahead and then keep trying with him.
[2:03:46] I think the City Council knows I am the CEO of a number of entities that own properties
[2:03:54] throughout the proposed moratorium region. I have two things that I want to raise. One is
[2:04:01] an issue and then the other is more just a, let's hopefully make sure that the City Council
[2:04:07] has contemplated this. The first issue, the first which is the issue, is I recognize the staff
[2:04:13] has said that this is exempt from CEQA. I respectfully disagree. Because while arguably,
[2:04:23] this is a situation where blocking development will not have a effect on the environment,
[2:04:33] And preventing development and preventing people from being able to properly use and maintain
[2:04:40] their properties will eventually lead to light and abandonment of various properties which
[2:04:47] actually will have a large environmental impact particularly as various utilities break down.
[2:04:54] So I think that the city is skipping an important step by not being a sequa analysis on this.
[2:05:00] The second is simply as was referenced in the staff report, the prior moratorium led to the
[2:05:09] monk's decision, which eventually put the city in the position of either paying for eminent
[2:05:16] domain or inverse condemnation or allowing development. And I think the city is about to open a very,
[2:05:23] very, very large door into its budget by doing the same thing to everybody.
[2:05:30] So that is it. I do appreciate that the staff has worked very hard and that the geologist has
[2:05:36] worked very hard. I just think that it may be skipping some parts of the analysis. Thank you very
[2:05:41] much. Thank you. Next speaker. Our next speaker is Dr. Kitsong also via Zoom.
[2:05:49] Thank you.
[2:05:51] Are you able to hear me okay?
[2:05:53] I got you.
[2:05:54] Yes.
[2:05:54] Okay. Great.
[2:05:55] Thank you very much.
[2:05:56] And I appreciate the opportunity to speak.
[2:05:58] I want to thank city staff for actually doing a very good job with report and also for the public meeting that happened in La Dera Linda.
[2:06:06] I think that was very well run.
[2:06:08] Just a couple of quick comments.
[2:06:10] And I think all of us that are on the western side of.
[2:06:13] Schooner realized that in the future there could be an expansion and a change of the existing land movement.
[2:06:21] I support the idea of the moratorium because the reality is that it's been shown now multiple times that this land movement is not going to stop.
[2:06:30] That having been said, I think that as was pointed out earlier, the issue of how variance and also initially for the seven homes in CVU,
[2:06:40] that are currently on the margins. If there is an appeal process based upon the criteria that
[2:06:45] we're used to include them in the area, I think that that should be allowed in this initial stage.
[2:06:52] And then possibly what the criteria would be for reassessment of properties that are along the margins
[2:06:57] for the future that might be able to get them off that could involve, for example,
[2:07:02] voluntary inspections of the home and property. Because I did hear Mike say that they were not able
[2:07:07] to access all of the properties to do a proper assessment.
[2:07:10] So my encouragement here is to consider better detail around issues of variance as put forward
[2:07:19] by Gordon, and then also the issue of initially appeal and then possibly reversal of some
[2:07:26] of the home inclusions on the margins based upon a very specific criteria that the geology
[2:07:31] staff could put out.
[2:07:33] Thank you.
[2:07:33] That's all I have.
[2:07:35] Thank you, kid.
[2:07:36] Our next speaker is Eva Albuja, also via Zoom.
[2:07:44] Hello again.
[2:07:45] Hi again.
[2:07:47] Okay, so I do support the auditorium that you just went over.
[2:07:53] We just heard all the destruction and damages of what our
[2:07:58] landslide residents have experienced since October of 2022.
[2:08:02] The landslide victims have not received any aid to make repairs,
[2:08:06] except special financing from SBA loans, which is a tool only available to those who can qualify for the loan.
[2:08:16] I have learned that the city will start charging landslide victims for permits and
[2:08:24] requiring geo-report starting in September of 2025.
[2:08:27] I ask that the city to not charge land sub-slide victims on permits and requiring geo-reports
[2:08:38] on homes that suffered from land-side damages of foundations and other damages to the home
[2:08:46] going forward.
[2:08:48] There are many homes that need repairs to their foundations and other parts of the homes and
[2:08:55] and they should not have to pay permits going forward, or geo-reports if they are trying
[2:09:03] to bait the damages caused from the landslide.
[2:09:08] The city needs to help the landslide victims and to keep on waving those permits when they
[2:09:15] are repairing their homes that were caused by damages at the landslide.
[2:09:21] I hope that we continue what you have done in the past because, again, the landslide is active and there will be more repairs coming down the line and the victims have not received support financially on anything.
[2:09:40] And so by continuing to help them wave those permit fees and waving the geo reports would be really helpful. Thank you for your time.
[2:09:49] Thank you very much. We have any other speakers?
[2:09:52] We did have a final speaker, Michelle Carbone.
[2:09:54] Staff has tried repeatedly now since the beginning of the item and has not been able to contact her.
[2:10:00] Okay. Then once we do contact her and she chimes in then we'll hear from her but at this point let's move on to council deliberation.
[2:10:08] Anybody want to go first? Council member Perra Stan.
[2:10:12] Thank you, Mayor Tristan.
[2:10:14] A question regarding Shaleon's point about the variance process versus the proposed process that we have.
[2:10:23] Would that potentially help with being able to handle specific properties differently?
[2:10:34] Or I know this isn't an easy, okay, we go down route A versus route B.
[2:10:39] There's consequences both ways, I understand that.
[2:10:44] But I'll put you on the spot a little bit to respond to this right now, and this is our bill yourself.
[2:10:49] Anybody wants to try to take this, is this a merit in that process?
[2:10:53] Let me chime in on that.
[2:10:55] Okay.
[2:10:55] First of all, the concept of variance is a land use concept.
[2:10:58] This is a building ordinance.
[2:11:00] So a variance, the planning commission is not staffed to consider building code issues,
[2:11:07] issues, building code issues, and building regulations are technical issues.
[2:11:12] Second of all, the two-step process going through the planning commission and up to the City
[2:11:19] Council will actually slow the process, not expedite the process.
[2:11:23] So what is planned for the ordinance now will allow technical analysis of the issues with
[2:11:31] the right to appeal to the full council, that seems to me to be more friendly to the
[2:11:38] property owners that are affected by chapter 1520 than the two step process of or three
[2:11:45] step process requiring director determination planning commissioner view and city council
[2:11:51] review. So I would not support that. I would not recommend that.
[2:11:55] And I would add, for context purposes, the way the code currently reads, as the landside moratorium,
[2:12:03] as the city attorney indicated, it's in the building code section.
[2:12:07] So chapter 15 is the building code.
[2:12:10] When you submit it, when you wanted to use one of the exceptions,
[2:12:15] you would go through what's called a landside moratorium exception permit.
[2:12:19] You would demonstrate to the city geologist that what you're proposing
[2:12:24] is not going to aggravate the landslide, then we would authorize you to then submit the
[2:12:30] planning applications, which is part of the zoning code, which is Title 17. That's
[2:12:36] all being repealed and essentially what's happening is that two-step process remains the
[2:12:42] same. So the exceptions that Brandy went over, you still have to apply to the city and geologists
[2:12:52] that what you want to do, like restoring or repairing your structures,
[2:12:56] not going to aggravate the landslide, then you would be authorized to go through the planning process.
[2:13:01] The variance is to seek relief from the zoning code, and this isn't part of the zoning code.
[2:13:08] This is the building code.
[2:13:11] The other thing I would add is, unfortunately, in bygone days, pre-my day,
[2:13:17] there was an unfortunate use of a land use term called moratorium,
[2:13:21] which should never have been used with respect to these regulations.
[2:13:25] That's why we're striking that from our vocabulary when it comes to this code section.
[2:13:30] This never was a moratorium. Moratoriums by their definition are land use regulations that have
[2:13:36] temporary lives and this had a permanent life. So it was an unfortunate use of terms we're talking
[2:13:44] about building code regulations. I think the other thing that is worth noting is the
[2:13:50] The exclusion portion that the Community Development Director mentioned will be a tool for
[2:13:58] these marginal properties that was spoken of a little bit earlier, that they may be able
[2:14:02] to demonstrate they ought to be excluded from the requirements of 1520.
[2:14:07] So there is a remedy there already built into the ordinance.
[2:14:11] With respect to this notion that CEQA should be complied with, that isn't a correct analysis.
[2:14:17] We've dealt with Mr. Islandberg and continued to deal with him in a series of frivolous litigation
[2:14:23] She's he's filed against the city that we've dealt with and we'll continue to deal with so thank you for that
[2:14:30] Thank you mayor pro Tim. Thank you. Any other comments?
[2:14:35] Liberty comments mayor Bradley
[2:14:38] No comments no comments no questions
[2:14:41] Thank you.
[2:14:43] Councilmember Lewis?
[2:14:47] Just real quick.
[2:14:48] I think what we need to really explain in terms of the situation is there is significant
[2:14:54] unprecedented change in circumstances from what we've had before.
[2:14:58] And we're very sensitive about-
[2:15:00] So, you know, the land and the folks that are now included in the zone, and we completely understand it. We've been dealing with it for a long time now. So, we're very sensitive to permitting, to fees, anything that's going to be detrimental to you and the decision process you guys have with your land and houses. Because if we were there, we'd be doing the same thing, too. But what it comes down to, it's public safety and well-being for the people on that land. And for me, at least, we have to make sure that we put this in place so that we do the right thing, too.
[2:15:29] but also, what was mentioned is there is an exclusion provision, right, and it's carved out.
[2:15:36] So if you think that based on what we have now, you are excluded, there is a process for that,
[2:15:42] and then there is a carve out for that, and I think that's very important.
[2:15:45] Now, the variance portion was explained by our city attorney.
[2:15:48] I think he did it very well.
[2:15:49] But at the same time, what we implemented with the exclusion provision,
[2:15:53] make sure that there is a process for landowners and
[2:15:57] and proper and is to actually bring it up to the City Council in an expedited process.
[2:16:01] So based on that and my statements, I'm for the staff recommendation.
[2:16:07] So at this point, if there are no other comments, can I please get a motion on this agenda item?
[2:16:13] I'd like to move to adopt the action number one to replace the current 1520 with the new 1520
[2:16:27] languages has been written and amend 15.0404 of Title 15,
[2:16:36] if I'm saying this right,
[2:16:39] And also amend section 16.40.030, the parts of requirements as stated in the report.
[2:16:49] Is that sufficient?
[2:16:52] Member Lewis does it include recommendation number two?
[2:16:57] Is it to initiate the code amendment proceedings to this?
[2:17:00] Yes.
[2:17:01] So it's staff recommendation.
[2:17:02] Yeah, I moved to, in short hand, I moved, I moved to, moved to, uh, advanced staff, staff
[2:17:09] recommendations, one and two. Can I get that in a second? I think that would have been better.
[2:17:12] Yeah. Second.
[2:17:14] Roll call, please.
[2:17:18] Councilmember Lewis? Yes. Councilmember Ferraro?
[2:17:21] Yes. Councilmember Paris-Dan? Yes. Mayor Prutem-Sale?
[2:17:24] Yes. Mayor Bradley? Yes. Motion passes, what that we can move to item number three.
[2:17:29] Consideration to initiate the process to establish a new third Geologic Hazard Amatement District.
[2:17:35] I do have two requests to speak.
[2:17:37] Before we move forward, let's take a 10-minute bio break, we'll take a break and come back at 9.25.
[2:17:51] Next item, please.
[2:17:53] Our next item is item number three.
[2:17:55] Consideration to initiate the process to establish a new third Geologic Hazard Amatement District.
[2:18:00] I currently have two requests to speak on this matter.
[2:18:03] Thank you. Can we have the staff before, please?
[2:18:05] Yes, Mr. Mayor.
[2:18:06] Mayor Pro Tem, CEO and members of the City Council.
[2:18:10] So City Attorney and myself are going to present this agenda item this evening and tonight
[2:18:15] the Council's being asked to consider initiating the process to form a new geologic hazard abatement
[2:18:21] district, also known as GAD, so if you're referring it to as a GAD, it's the acronym for Geologic
[2:18:27] Hazard Abatement District.
[2:18:28] Oh my God.
[2:18:30] Yes.
[2:18:30] So, Nathan's going to be navigating the slide deck here.
[2:18:34] And what I'd like to do is to start off this agenda item.
[2:18:39] I want to read to you what geologic hazard abatement district is.
[2:18:44] Gads are government districts formed for the prevention, mitigation,
[2:18:48] abatement, or control of a geologic hazard, which is defined as an actual or threatened landslide,
[2:18:55] land subsidence, soil erosion, earthquake, fault movement, or any other natural or unnatural
[2:19:02] movement of land or earth.
[2:19:05] Essentially the formation of a dad, based on dad law, which we'll get into, it's a separate
[2:19:13] government entity, so it's not part of an actual city, it's its own separate government entity,
[2:19:19] it's recognized by the state as a government entity.
[2:19:21] It enables the entity to conduct improvements to
[2:19:27] abate the conditions of a geologic hazard.
[2:19:31] And it uses assessments of the property owners within the district to pay for
[2:19:38] the improvements that are necessary.
[2:19:42] Moving to the next slide, just to give you some context,
[2:19:45] the geologic hazard abatement law was enacted through a legislation that
[2:19:51] That was sponsored and authored by Senator Robert Beverly, who was our Senator back in the late 70s.
[2:20:01] It's through Senate Bill 1195.
[2:20:03] There's a link in the staff report that you could view that legislation.
[2:20:08] But that bill that was proposed in past that it created the geologic hazard abatement district was also assisted in its formation by then council member Ken Dieda.
[2:20:20] And the two first geologic hazard abatement districts in California are in Rancho Palsvers.
[2:20:26] In 1981, the Abelante Cove Landside Abatement District was formed and in 1982, the Clondike Canyon Landside Abatement District was formed.
[2:20:36] Since then, there are approximately 55 geologic hazard abatement districts throughout California.
[2:20:42] So moving on to the next slide, what I'd like to do is hand the presentation over to the city attorney who's going to
[2:20:49] to discuss some of the advantages and legalities
[2:20:54] of forming a geologic hazard treatment district.
[2:20:57] Thank you, Mr. City Manager.
[2:20:58] So why would you form a GAD?
[2:21:01] What's the purpose of forming a GAD?
[2:21:03] Well, one of its purposes is to bring expertise to bear
[2:21:07] on a geologic hazard.
[2:21:09] And that expertise, the City Manager will be talking about,
[2:21:14] will be reflected in the form of a plan of control
[2:21:17] that will guide the activities of the GAD in the future.
[2:21:22] But there are some administrative and legal advantages
[2:21:26] to forming a geologic hazardous abatement district.
[2:21:30] First of all, a GAD has borrowing authority under state law.
[2:21:34] We've cited that in the staff report.
[2:21:37] As far as we're aware, neither of our existing GADs have used that option,
[2:21:41] but it is an option.
[2:21:43] but with it comes debt service.
[2:21:48] There is a greater immunity for liability claims
[2:21:53] from the activities of a GAD because a GAD is addressing emergency situations
[2:21:59] in the form of geologic hazards.
[2:22:01] And because GADs are primarily in the business of addressing geologic emergencies,
[2:22:08] the state law forming, authorizing the creation of these geologic hazard
[2:22:15] disabatement districts also exempted them from the requirements of CEQA, and
[2:22:20] exempted them from the public contract code provisions.
[2:22:24] Public contracting code generally requires awarding contracts to the lowest
[2:22:29] responsible bidder, it can be a cumbersome and an expensive process, and
[2:22:36] And GADs are allowed to adopt rules and regulations for their own method and manner of awarding contracts.
[2:22:46] Those advantages make using a GAD more flexible, more limble, and able to respond more rapidly to the geologic hazards they're designed to mitigate.
[2:23:01] Okay. So moving on to the next slide. Geologic hazard
[2:23:07] abatement districts are similar to other districts where you are using assessments
[2:23:12] to generate the revenue needed to conduct the improvements. And so, Proposition 218 applies.
[2:23:20] And what I wanted to just briefly walk the Council and the public through the process
[2:23:25] established through Proposition 218, if the Council decides to initiate the formation
[2:23:30] of the geologic hazard abatement district.
[2:23:33] The first and foremost step that needs to happen is hiring an engineer who's going to
[2:23:40] prepare an engineer's report.
[2:23:42] In that engineer's report, they're essentially assessing and evaluating the conditions of
[2:23:49] the alleged geologic hazard and then coming up with a plan of control.
[2:23:53] The plan of control essentially identifies the necessity for conducting the abatement issues for the purposes of public health safety and welfare.
[2:24:07] So that plan of control will outline what would need to happen if this district was formed, and that is the district's charter.
[2:24:15] So in all their actions, they have to heed to the plan of control.
[2:24:22] Once that plan of control and the engineer's report is prepared in this situation, if the council
[2:24:29] initiates this process, what we would do is once that plan of control and engineer's
[2:24:34] report is prepared, we would then conduct a town hall and present that information to
[2:24:39] the public so they understand the content of what's being recommended and what is potentially
[2:24:45] really the basis for forming this third and new geologic hazard abatement district.
[2:24:51] After that, we would come to the City Council, we would have a public hearing where that
[2:24:55] information in the engineer's report would be presented to you.
[2:24:59] At that point, the council can decide the resolution whether they want to initiate the formation
[2:25:06] of this geologic hazard abatement district, and in that case, we would then enter into what's
[2:25:11] considered like a public hearing or a protest hearing,
[2:25:14] pursuant to Proposition 218,
[2:25:16] and that's where we would put out notices
[2:25:18] to all the impacted properties,
[2:25:20] and they would have to submit opposition or objection
[2:25:26] to it, protesting the formation
[2:25:28] of the geologic hazard abatement district.
[2:25:31] Typically, in this case, it's based on the assessed valuation.
[2:25:36] It's more than 50% of the properties within the,
[2:25:40] the identified district boundaries oppose or protest then the proceedings would stop at that point.
[2:25:49] So, it all depends on this protest hearing.
[2:25:52] So, what the city is presenting, if we go to the next slide.
[2:25:56] Currently, as I mentioned, we have two geologic hazard abatement districts, one on the west side, one on the east side, and the slide is not showing.
[2:26:03] Oh, it is.
[2:26:03] So, you can see in the purple is the light purple is Abelone cove landslide abatement district
[2:26:10] and that the smaller area in dark purple is the Clondite Canyon. In the center piece,
[2:26:17] what was never formed is what's commonly referred to as the Portuguese band landslide and that is
[2:26:23] part of the greater landslide complex which are four subslides that make up the overall area.
[2:26:30] What we are recommending, what staff is recommending for the council's consideration is that we would form a new third
[2:26:37] Geologic hazard abatement district in the center piece
[2:26:40] It would be called the Portuguese ban landside abatement district if you go to the next slide a Nathan
[2:26:46] It's approximately 113 properties 90 are private foe privately owned and 23 are public properties
[2:26:55] And so what we're asking the Council's consideration now is if this seems like something that based
[2:27:05] on the advantages of the city attorney described and the process here, if the Council's interested
[2:27:12] in or desires to do this then we would ask that you give staff direction to proceed with the
[2:27:19] initiation of forming a third new geologic hazard abatement district, and that concludes
[2:27:24] the report.
[2:27:27] Speakers.
[2:27:30] Our first speaker is Nikki Nushka.
[2:27:33] Nikki.
[2:27:43] All right.
[2:27:43] Good evening.
[2:27:45] So I've read the staff report on this item, and I've also listened to the city attorney
[2:27:52] and the city manager's briefing on this topic.
[2:27:54] But there is nothing that I've heard or read that says thou shall not repeat the mistakes
[2:28:03] of the past.
[2:28:05] The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting
[2:28:09] different results.
[2:28:11] If you're going to create a district to try to basically be able to abate things cheaper,
[2:28:20] not have to deal with CEQA, not have to deal with contracting, some of the contracting regulations, et cetera.
[2:28:28] You should also think about the problem more holistically.
[2:28:33] You should think about how are you going to fund this, and no, I'm not talking about borrowing.
[2:28:38] But you're looking at yet again creating another entity to tax a small minority of homeowners,
[2:28:46] to try to abate a largest landslide in North America.
[2:28:54] That's what you're doing.
[2:29:00] Think about that.
[2:29:02] You're taxing a small minority of individuals to
[2:29:08] abate the largest landslide in North America and creating an entity that has no oversight as you have demonstrated yourselves in the letters that you had sent to the State Controllers Office.
[2:29:20] to try to figure out who the hell is in charge of the abatement districts with a law that is broken.
[2:29:32] This is disgusting.
[2:29:37] Thank you, Nikki. Next speaker, please.
[2:29:39] Our next speaker is Ben Zask.
[2:29:42] Hey, Ben.
[2:29:46] So I heard the word emergency. And yeah, you know, I'm living in a Portuguese band,
[2:29:54] blank slide and kind of like you know feeling stressed and
[2:30:00] And what I hear is delay. And when there's an emergency, the last thing you want to hear is we'll get back to you. And the reason I'm talking to you is because I feel LA county should step up. But first of all, when I approached them things, they gave me the run around until Friday, and then I didn't hear from them again. But lately, they've been saying, oh, speak to the city, it's on the city, so that's why I'm here.
[2:30:29] because I feel the emergency should be handled by LA County.
[2:30:34] Couple of points, one.
[2:30:38] Portuguese Canyon, Etypachi Canyon,
[2:30:41] paintbrush Canyon, was destroyed by LA County Crenshaw Extension.
[2:30:47] And what did they do?
[2:30:48] Nothing, they'd left.
[2:30:50] And they're still emptying out into the head of the slide.
[2:30:54] You talk about, my fifth talked about the SCOP,
[2:30:58] there used to be a SCOP trail there.
[2:31:00] guess what? That's where the canyons got destroyed. The water goes into the
[2:31:06] stop, into the canyons. I mean, into the slide zone. That's where the water is.
[2:31:13] So stopping the landslide is two step one. Stop the water from getting in. It used
[2:31:19] to be where I used to talk to people now a serious about, yeah, it's almost 70
[2:31:24] years that this is going on, and now I kind of laugh on with it and just, you know,
[2:31:32] like it's not going to get what's it called, abatement, it's going to keep doing it, and
[2:31:40] we may as well have a 70 year anniversary next year of those canyons just emptying out into
[2:31:47] the slide zone.
[2:31:49] And another reason why LA County should be in charge is because before this recent
[2:31:54] and land movement and the trails were closed.
[2:31:57] I used to go hiking in the rim trail.
[2:31:59] There was a house and this is when the rainstorms
[2:32:02] are coming for the 2023 season.
[2:32:05] There was a house being built right at the edge
[2:32:09] of itchibachi canyon.
[2:32:12] With the street going right into itchibachi canyon,
[2:32:15] in case you don't remember.
[2:32:17] That's one of the three canyons that empty out
[2:32:19] into the head of the slide zone.
[2:32:22] I mean, is PBLAD going to handle that?
[2:32:29] Hey, rolling hills, what are you doing?
[2:32:32] No, LA County needs to go up there and say, look, before this development,
[2:32:37] the water should not go into the PB landslide that's almost 70 years old.
[2:32:43] Simple, the LA County needs to step up, and it's an emergency.
[2:32:48] And I think these measures about where the water is going and where it's supposed to go into the ocean like it has been.
[2:32:58] It needs to be addressed ASAP, and I'm not even sure if PPLAD is a good idea or not, because the veins are going to come.
[2:33:09] Thank you.
[2:33:10] Thanks, Ben.
[2:33:11] I'll find out.
[2:33:12] Final speakers, Eva Aboujah.
[2:33:14] Diazum.
[2:33:17] Aiba.
[2:33:19] Aiba.
[2:33:21] So, the city created K-Class and A-Class
[2:33:25] when the last slide was only 380 acres.
[2:33:30] Today we're at 715 acres in the last slide
[2:33:34] and it's growing.
[2:33:37] I just don't understand
[2:33:39] And why we are having K-clad and A-clad still running the show on a lot, largest landslide.
[2:33:49] They're not transparent in their expenses.
[2:33:52] They're not consistent in debating the landslide.
[2:33:56] And now we're talking about a third district and more money.
[2:33:59] We all suffered from huge losses to our values, to our homes.
[2:34:10] Our lives have been turned upside down with no electrical, no gas, and let's just ram
[2:34:18] more fees and taxes to all the people who have suffered and gotten no help to throne with
[2:34:26] loans to help themselves and let's us tack it on. Again, no transparency, no action, we're
[2:34:38] growing with the landslide and this will grow.
[2:34:43] We need something like a bond measure to distribute
[2:34:48] this cost because we have homeowners from RPB using PV drive south, whether it's for sewers,
[2:34:56] whether it's the drive on the drive, whether it's to transport goods to their
[2:35:02] businesses, but no, only the people in the district has to pay for the last
[2:35:09] slide. This is insane to pass that bill and have unlimited taxes to the people
[2:35:20] who are losing their homes.
[2:35:24] I don't understand. I get that you want a new district to help with
[2:35:30] lowering the fees. So, do one district, but don't put all the costs into the people who live in
[2:35:39] that district. It's unfair, unbalanced, and we need a change today. Thank you.
[2:35:46] Thank you.
[2:35:47] Thank you, Eva.
[2:35:48] Next speaker.
[2:35:49] I'm a final speaker.
[2:35:50] Tasha Hinchcliffe.
[2:35:53] Hi, Tasha.
[2:35:56] Hello, Council.
[2:35:58] Hi.
[2:35:58] Thank you for listening to all of us homeowners in the landslide, appreciate it.
[2:36:05] And I do want to thank all of the City Council and our Geologic Hazard Abatement District
[2:36:11] leaders and all of our neighbors who have been volunteering throughout this crisis and
[2:36:17] an emergency for some of them months and some of them for decades.
[2:36:22] Everyone's been doing what they can.
[2:36:25] What I'm very concerned about is that we are not focusing enough energy on trying to get LA County.
[2:36:35] I want to follow up on what Ben said a moment ago.
[2:36:38] LA County and the state and I've given up on the federal, so I'm not going to even go on down that road.
[2:36:46] but we really need to get their assistance
[2:36:49] because what has not been publicized enough
[2:36:52] is the fact that if we lose that sewer line
[2:36:55] along Pulse Freeze Drive South,
[2:36:58] it's not just what was asked in the land slide.
[2:37:01] It's 39,000 homes that would potentially lose
[2:37:06] their sewer service and then have the possibility
[2:37:09] of having to be evacuated.
[2:37:11] The only reason why we at the Beach Club
[2:37:13] and Sherry's neighbors and Gordon's neighbors up in the upper bend.
[2:37:18] We're not evacuated is because we have amazing neighbors who are very resilient
[2:37:24] and who work their tissues off to get their generators going to be able to pump the sewage
[2:37:30] so that they could get the sewage to that main line on PV Drive South and continue to live in our homes.
[2:37:38] That's neighbor helping neighbor.
[2:37:40] And they're still doing that, waking up early in the morning to deal with the pumps.
[2:37:44] One of my neighbors, up at 5 a.m., this morning dealing with the pumps down at the beach club and the reconstruction of the road down there.
[2:37:52] And that's the kind of thing that's happening every day.
[2:37:54] We need help, but we need to shift the energy and the funding.
[2:37:59] We need to shift it to the county and the state, the homeowners can't do it.
[2:38:04] forming another geologic hazard abatement district, is not the solution to the problem because we can't put the bill, as Nikki pointed out, this is the largest fastest moving landslide in North America.
[2:38:19] We also need expertise from outside of our city, and we need everyone on staff and council, and everyone involved to be willing to listen to people who come to them with alternative suggestions.
[2:38:33] That's been happening throughout and unfortunately, people who have been trying to help have fallen on deaf ears.
[2:38:40] We need outside resources financially and outside expertise to help solve this problem.
[2:38:46] Thanks for listening, appreciate it.
[2:38:48] Thank you very much.
[2:38:50] Okay, no further speakers.
[2:38:53] Council deliberation, anybody want to speak up first?
[2:38:57] Mayor Bradley?
[2:39:01] Sure, I'll kick this off.
[2:39:04] I listened to a bunch of the public comments and I am very sympathetic for what's going
[2:39:09] on in all of the greater landslide, ancient landslide district.
[2:39:16] This I think is an opportunity where we could put another tool in our toolbox, could
[2:39:24] help the city in managing the central portion of the landslide in a more economical way.
[2:39:32] This is not meant to continue to, I think one other speaker said, unlimited taxes.
[2:39:41] This has nothing to do with unlimited taxes.
[2:39:44] This is trying to get a handle on a very unfortunate geologic hazard that we have.
[2:39:49] I think this is exactly what the statute was intended for, is to form a district for joint
[2:40:00] you or joint benefit to be able to help mitigate a genealogic hazard.
[2:40:08] I would love to see the county, the state and the federal government take more of an
[2:40:14] active role. Unfortunately, we have, or we are continuing to work with our partners, but we've had
[2:40:22] and a very meager success in getting outside funds.
[2:40:29] The city has continued to support the stabilization of Palsbury's drive south and the residents
[2:40:35] in the land side area, so I think the city continues to support.
[2:40:40] So I'm in favor of forming the third geologic hazard of the 8-metre district.
[2:40:47] I think it will put some additional tools in our toolbox, allow us to do contracting in
[2:40:54] a more expeditious and fiscally sustainable way.
[2:40:59] So I'm in favor of it.
[2:41:01] Thank you, Mayor Brotel.
[2:41:02] Thank you.
[2:41:03] Councilman Perreston.
[2:41:04] Thank you, Mr. Mayor Brotel.
[2:41:06] I have a couple of questions to step.
[2:41:08] The intent of this is to investigate what this may look like.
[2:41:13] I think this isn't saying we're going to duplicate a clad or K-clad and that historical structure.
[2:41:20] This is new, we have alternatives, it's up to us and up to staff to make recommendations on what that new clad may look like.
[2:41:30] Is that fair?
[2:41:31] That is correct, I mean the board of this district could be comprised of the City Council, it could be comprised of residents in the area.
[2:41:40] So that's still unknown, we will go through that process and the council make those decisions if and when we get there and also follow up to that, is if we would in the future have the benefit of our partners coming through with funding, wouldn't we be able to funnel that funding through these organizations with the benefit of that structure and reap the advantages that we're trying to, that we're looking for at this point in time?
[2:42:08] There's not the intent, actually the district as a separate government entity can seek that those
[2:42:16] financial assistance, whether it's grants, whether it's applying for the hazard mitigation grant,
[2:42:21] they don't have, it can be due on its own without having to engage the city.
[2:42:27] Okay, thank you. I'm also supportive for this next step. I don't think this really
[2:42:34] It takes us down too far down the road where we may run into problems that are identified problems.
[2:42:42] And if this is just a necessary first step and maybe and hopefully we're all trying to have the same intention as well as all the speakers to improve the situation.
[2:42:52] So I think this is a reasonable next step in that process and I support the steps recommendation.
[2:42:58] Thank you, Council Member Lewis.
[2:43:00] Yeah, we're unanimous on that point, so thus far, one of the key things that Councilmember
[2:43:08] Paris-Dan pointed out was that in the event we are already able to achieve funds from
[2:43:13] some of our partners, there needs to be a pathway for those funds to reach the people that
[2:43:20] are affected.
[2:43:22] And right now we have, I mean, a couple of our speakers talked about equity and fairness.
[2:43:26] And so we have some houses that are covered by a glad and then other homes that aren't.
[2:43:34] And so there's a fundamental disparity, it seems to me that this is a remedy in which there will at least be one of three districts if we go through with it and the point is if that's not making that decision now.
[2:43:46] But if we were to go all the way through with it, every parcel in the new greater landslide would be represented by some.
[2:43:56] I think there's value in that, even if there's three different ones and they might have slightly different priorities.
[2:44:02] At least you don't have a situation where there's some homes that have none, and then others that have one.
[2:44:07] So to me, I think this is a good step to start to initiate the process.
[2:44:11] Thank you, Council Member Farah.
[2:44:16] Basically, I agree with what everyone has said, I think this is something that we need to do.
[2:44:25] You know, I'm just going to address a couple points that our speakers made today.
[2:44:30] I'm just going to start with the first part, which is trying to get external funds.
[2:44:34] You guys may not see it, but behind the scenes, I know the mayor has.
[2:44:39] I know myself and a lot of folks have talked to our elected members
[2:44:43] making multiple trips to Sacramento to DC.
[2:44:46] We've been trying to every possible route to get external funding.
[2:44:50] You know, we lobby Janice Hahn, our supervisor, and God bless for she, you know, she was the first person to give us money.
[2:44:57] So a lot of that money went to individual.
[2:45:00] Payments to the individuals in Portuguese ban in the area. We continue to talk to her because she's the only one that's been helping pretty much at this point. But the state is drying the federal government. You guys know how that's going right now. But we've been trying every possible way. And I know the staff is trying every single possible way from not only from through FEMA, but also through Homeland Security to get this money. So it's not lost in us in terms of what we're trying to do. Also in regards to this formation of this, of this gap,
[2:45:30] This is not something that we decided on the whim to do.
[2:45:34] We thought about this extensively, about what we could do
[2:45:38] and what we strategically need to do going in the next 10,
[2:45:43] 20, 30 years looking forward.
[2:45:46] What keeps us nimble?
[2:45:47] What keeps us at best in terms of a tool like Mayor Bradley said.
[2:45:52] In our pockets, to actually fix the problems,
[2:45:54] and I think having this geological hazard
[2:45:56] their payment district.
[2:45:57] The new one gives the opportunity to skirt a lot of the issues or rules that are statutes
[2:46:01] that are in place to make the decision quickly, to address the hazards that we have in the
[2:46:06] district, and then also to get money to where it needs to be going, and to actually fix the
[2:46:12] problem.
[2:46:12] So this is a strategic decision.
[2:46:14] This is not formed so that we can burden the folks that are actually living there.
[2:46:18] But this is this decision was made so that we can strategically help those individuals and
[2:46:22] actually create a solution going forward.
[2:46:25] So in terms of transparency and accountability, like the city manager was saying, the governing
[2:46:32] body would probably most likely be the city council, so you're going to be able to see
[2:46:36] everything that happens and transpires.
[2:46:39] So we need the best, we need to be in the best position possible going forward.
[2:46:42] So, you know, forming or, you know, exploring the formation of this, of this gap, I think
[2:46:49] is important.
[2:46:50] And I think strategically we need it so that we can actually address the problems that
[2:46:55] And the last part is the monetary aspect of it.
[2:46:58] The city is not, we don't have unlimited funds, like we just said.
[2:47:01] And by doing this, it gives us a strategy you could manage monetarily in terms of expenses,
[2:47:06] and what we need to pay for operations and maintenance of the wells and the actual landside areas.
[2:47:11] So, you know, those are some of the considerations that we took in before we started going down this path.
[2:47:16] And I know a lot of folks are frustrated about a lot of things that are in transpiring.
[2:47:21] But we're doing everything possible to make sure that we get back to historical norms.
[2:47:26] So with that being said, if there are other comments or statements or questions, can I
[2:47:33] hate a motion, please?
[2:47:37] I'll move the staff recommendation.
[2:47:40] I'll second.
[2:47:41] Okay, roll call, please.
[2:47:48] Council Member Lewis.
[2:47:49] Yes.
[2:47:50] Council Member Ferraro.
[2:47:51] Yes.
[2:47:52] Council Member Peristam.
[2:47:53] Yes.
[2:47:54] Mayor Pro Temsil.
[2:47:55] Yes. Mayor Bradley. Yes. Motion passes. With that we can move to item number four. Consideration to amend section 12.16. Oh, I know closed areas. I've titled 12 of the Rancher Palace for these municipal code. I do not have any request to speak.
[2:48:10] Okay, staff report please.
[2:48:12] Good evening, Mayor. Members of the City Council. Currently section 12.16.090 of the municipal code. Authorizes the city manager to temporarily close parks.
[2:48:24] works when necessary for public health, safety, and welfare.
[2:48:29] This allows the city to make immediate repairs and prevent the public from entering unsafe spaces.
[2:48:35] However, it has come to our attention that the code does not explicitly authorize the city manager to close other public spaces such as streets, sidewalks, city facilities and trails for public safety purposes.
[2:48:49] This currently California Vehicle Code number 2-1-1-0-1 does allow cities to temporarily
[2:48:55] close streets to safeguard the public, so long as it's codified or adopted by ordinance.
[2:49:02] Just to ensure clarity on this matter and given that public safety incidents are to be
[2:49:06] expected on public spaces, such as sidewalks, facilities, streets, and trails, and especially
[2:49:11] given our landslide emergencies, where we constantly see issues along PV drive south.
[2:49:16] staff is recommending a menu code 12.16.090 to enable the city manager to close these areas temporarily and as needed.
[2:49:28] Tonight would be the introduction of the submitted ordinance as you see here on this slide.
[2:49:33] If approved, the second reading would occur at the next council meeting on August 19th.
[2:49:38] And this concludes my report.
[2:49:43] Any questions from city staff or, sorry, city council?
[2:49:48] Yes, council member.
[2:49:49] What do we have to do with anybody's speakers because I was just going to make a comment.
[2:49:51] No, we don't have any speakers.
[2:49:52] No, it's fine.
[2:49:53] Okay.
[2:49:53] Just a comment here.
[2:49:55] We got notification a couple of weeks ago that the council did.
[2:49:59] I had the opportunity to go down there pretty quickly after that notification of that there was
[2:50:03] a problem on PV drive south, so I saw first hand.
[2:50:06] And first of all, I was surprised that the city manager doesn't already have this power
[2:50:10] And I get the fact that it's not explicit.
[2:50:13] So, I'd just say that there's a lot of well-meaning interested parties that show up when there's a crisis like that or a potential emergency.
[2:50:25] And we have to make sure that the calls made by the right person is quickly as possible.
[2:50:32] So, it was handled quite well, it was handled quite quickly.
[2:50:37] But the question of the city manager didn't have absolute authority to do that.
[2:50:43] Going into that was a bit of a surprise for me.
[2:50:46] So I saw firsthand the value of this ordinance being cleaned up and
[2:50:50] that the city manager had this tool as his disposal to take this action as quickly as he gets validated information that there is a crisis at hand.
[2:51:01] Thank you mayor Pratton.
[2:51:04] Anyone else?
[2:51:04] I
[2:51:23] know, we're waiting for you.
[2:51:25] Sorry, sorry.
[2:51:26] No, I don't have any.
[2:51:29] Mayor Bradley.
[2:51:31] I know, but I'd make a motion to accept staff recommendation and.
[2:51:36] So I can.
[2:51:37] I have to hold on before real quick.
[2:51:39] Sorry, Mr. Mayor.
[2:51:42] One of the issues that came up and, you know, I think the city manager and city attorney knows this.
[2:51:48] We got some complaints from protesters.
[2:51:50] a while back, and the reason why was because the city streets and parking lots, the public
[2:51:57] lots were closed, and they cited First Amendment issues, and also from, you know, based
[2:52:04] on, you know, they basically complained that it was preemptive, and it was blocking them
[2:52:09] from protesting in a peaceful manner, and I think it's very important that we understand
[2:52:14] what we're doing at the time that we're doing it, and that we don't even French upon First
[2:52:17] amendment rights, especially from protesters that are protesting safely and in a known manner,
[2:52:24] but I think this definitely codifies authority to city manage to be able to assess a situation,
[2:52:32] especially if something that protesters are doing are dangerous. So this is only one of the reasons
[2:52:38] why this came up, just so people understand in public that we didn't just pluck this out of city
[2:52:44] we're going to re-assess this one night.
[2:52:47] It's very important that everybody understands that we need to be able to react to public safety issues,
[2:52:54] especially if it's on a public street in our neighborhoods and our streets and during facilities as well.
[2:52:59] So that's kind of the impetus behind it, and then I'm on board with the staff recommendation for this.
[2:53:06] So at this point, Mr. City manager, did you have anything to add?
[2:53:10] But I was just going to say before you vote on the motion, it was the coincidence of the demonstration happened on Thursday and the sinkhole on PV drive happened on Saturday.
[2:53:22] It was almost like back-to-back incidents that required the closure for public safety.
[2:53:28] So I think I'm glad Mayor Procene that you mentioned the genesis of this and why it's on the agenda this evening.
[2:53:37] Okay, with that, can I get a motion, please?
[2:53:40] You already have a motion.
[2:53:42] Well, roll call then.
[2:53:46] Council Member Lewis.
[2:53:47] Yes.
[2:53:48] Council Member Faruaro.
[2:53:49] Yes.
[2:53:50] Council Member Paris-Stamp.
[2:53:51] Yes.
[2:53:52] Mayor Pradimseil.
[2:53:53] Yes.
[2:53:54] Mayor Bradley.
[2:53:55] Yes.
[2:53:55] Motion passes.
[2:53:56] With that, we can move to our future agenda items.
[2:54:01] Anyone have a future agenda items?
[2:54:03] Mr. Mayor, anything?
[2:54:05] No.
[2:54:06] Anyone? No. I have one quick one. So it's brought to my attention that there are some issues with our
[2:54:16] suit markets and equity when it comes to our senior citizens because what was brought to my
[2:54:21] attention was that they are not getting the same, I guess coupons digitally as opposed to physically.
[2:54:29] So physically, if you go into the store, you can get certain amounts of discounts and whatnot,
[2:54:34] but it's not available on both sides digitally and physically, so some people are feeling
[2:54:40] slighted and feel that it's unfair. So I know there are some ordinances that were passed in
[2:54:45] San Diego and were not to kind of codify or address that issue. I was wondering if we can kind
[2:54:51] of take a look at it. I know we had a conversation behind that. Yeah, sure. If the council's pleasure
[2:54:58] will add it to the future gen items and we will bring a report back in the council consider
[2:55:03] Please, they want to adopt an ordinance or not.
[2:55:05] Yeah, thank you very much.
[2:55:06] What kind of coupons?
[2:55:08] So, it's any discounts on products and whatnot.
[2:55:11] And they're what they're saying is folks that are quote unquote,
[2:55:14] digitally challenged senior citizens that can pull up these digital codes.
[2:55:20] They're more discounts digitally than physically that they're going to get.
[2:55:23] So, there were some complaints that came in that I understood that I heard.
[2:55:27] So they just want to have the same opportunity to get the discounts.
[2:55:31] Yeah.
[2:55:32] I myself was struggled with Ralph's digital coupons.
[2:55:35] It's their app that would help the customer to listen as well.
[2:55:41] Mr. Ralph's though, the clerks usually at checkout will accommodate if you ask.
[2:55:47] All right, any other future in dead narratives?
[2:55:49] Nothing?
[2:55:50] Okay.
[2:55:50] Next item, please.
[2:55:51] City Council, oral reports?
[2:55:54] Anything?
[2:55:55] I just wanted to say that I attended the bells to Nagasaki and
[2:56:01] And the city manager had a slide on that and that was a very worthwhile experience, very memorable and an important memory in our history.
[2:56:14] So, thank you.
[2:56:16] That was my release,
[2:56:19] that was my for all.
[2:56:21] I went to the last music at City Hall, the band, and they were very popular.
[2:56:29] there were so many people dancing to the very last song.
[2:56:35] So if you haven't been to the music in the park,
[2:56:40] there's one more chance.
[2:56:42] What's the date?
[2:56:43] August 23rd, and it's classic rock and holdings.
[2:56:48] When you went to was 90's music.
[2:56:51] It was what?
[2:56:52] 90's music.
[2:56:54] I knew, I didn't know any of the words to the songs.
[2:56:57] but maybe I will this next one new songs can't be understood very
[2:57:04] brightly any updates just a couple things mayor pro tem thank you I have the
[2:57:09] opportunity to go to the Dalmatian America Club this lunch in down in San
[2:57:13] Pedro on Friday the 25th once again a bunch of great leaders were down there so
[2:57:25] So that was a great experience, several of us were able to go to that lunch that day.
[2:57:35] Then we did have the annual State of the City breakfast on Friday the 1st, which was,
[2:57:45] I thought a pretty good event.
[2:57:47] We had many representatives from state and local agencies, as well as some of the representatives
[2:57:54] from the federal, our federal partners.
[2:57:56] So, once again, getting the word out for what's going on in the city of Rancho Palsaries.
[2:58:01] So, that's it.
[2:58:03] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
[2:58:04] I will reserve my comments or updates for next meeting for the sake of time.
[2:58:10] So, next item is adjournment.
[2:58:12] I will adjourn this meeting in the memory of the three deputies that we've lost from LASD and
[2:58:19] adjourn this meeting at 1007 PM.