Ventura City Council Meeting
November 8, 2010
Ventura City Hall - 501 Poli Street
Public Communications – Samantha from La Mesa spoke as a representative of business groups who are opposed to the regulation of alcohol establishments. “Reasonable steps” to curb nuisance behavior is vague, according to the speaker. Other aspects of the proposal are also excessively vague, she said. Her claim was that costs such as those being proposed would simply be passed on to business owners. Her stance was that the changes should be opposed and in some cases are unconstitutional.
[Comment] When did business owners begin thinking that it would be unconstitutional for them to incur costs? They could always seek another line of work . . . like ditch digging, perhaps? [Ed.]
To View a listing of the agenda items for this council meeting, go to www.cityofventura.net/meeting/city-council-meeting-15
Mayor Fulton called the Council meeting to order with the call of the roll – all present. Council members and spectators were then asked to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.
The monthly Mayor for a Moment qualifiers were fifth-grade students from Saticoy Elementary School, and at the end of it all Valerie Truman was asked to step forward and read her winning essay on the subject of sportsmanship. She exemplified sportsmanship by not complaining when asked to perform an unpleasant task. She emphasized that a helpful attitude always exemplifies good sportsmanship. The mayor and then presented the young essayist with a “key to the city.”
The mayor noted that recognition for volunteers within the city is an ongoing award. The Community Motivator Award for individuals was Mary Galbraith of Focus on the Masters. Focus on the Masters documents and preserves the works of contemporary artists, to which Mary donates as many as 40 hours a week in addition to managing the day-to-day operations of the organization. A loyal patron of the arts, Mary was presented with the monthly award.
Mary spoke graciously and thanked the mayor along with all participants in all volunteer organizations across the city of Ventura. An open house will occur Sunday and the speaker invited all interested persons to attend.
Kay Doyle came forward as Chair of the Ventura Housing Authority (four years) recently retired, while remaining on the Board. Kay has improved relationships between tenants and the city, transforming the Housing Authority. The mayor presented the city council’s recognition award, with Kay then speaking of excellence – on the part of the board and on the staff. She noted that Ed Moses is often the one to turn off the lights evenings.
It is Homeless and Poverty Awareness Month, with Steering Committee members of the Ventura Homelessness Task Force being asked to step forward. Their efforts to provide shelter and housing were deemed deserving of the City Council’s Award. Several outbursts from spectators, however, were in evidence as the speaker began to thank the council.
Mr. Monahan asked that Dorty Foltz, who worked for the Oxnard Roll Laundry, be remembered at the end of the meeting.
City Council Communications – Council Member Brennan was recognized, noting that this is Restaurant Week in downtown Ventura. From now to next Friday a number of restaurants will have special menus as a promotion for the city's great creativity in the restauranteur area. Also, 50 residents completed the Community Response Training program for which the councilman thanked staff and fire department personnel for their help.
Council Member Andrews spoke, noting that on Saturday, November 13, a collaborative between the Social Services Task Force, the League of Women Voters and the Commission to End Homelessness will be present a public awareness seminar on homelessness in Ventura county, stressing the facts and numbers including the 10-Year Plan. The discussion will include the progress made across the county on homelessness, including the challenges involved. The event will be held from nine until noon at the County Board of Education offices on Adolfo Road in Camarillo. Refreshments will be served.
Along the same lines an event called One City, One Meal put on by a number of faith-based communities will include a Thanksgiving Day feast at the Knights of Columbus Hall where the public may come to sit and enjoy food in a process of giving and learning through shared experiences with the homeless, who will be served simultaneously. Serving will take place at 11:00, 12:00 and 1:00 p.m. Also a policy consideration that would include reconsidering the parking meter situation had not been agendized, according to Councilman Andrews, and through his address to the public he noted that the ideas are being considered by the city council.
It was noted that on November 22 the parking meter agenda will be included for public comment.
Council Member Weir reiterated Restaurant Week, noting that there are 33 restaurants participating, wherein a three-course meal will be offered for the low price of $20 by all participating businesses. The Midtown Community Council is sponsoring a cleanup day from 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. on December 4. Go to www.midtownventura.org for more information.
Mr. Monahan noted that Veterans Day is this Thursday, where there will be a ceremony in Cemetery Park with flags and a service for the veterans. The beach promenade will have 25 flags installed in honor the troops and veterans all over the world, occurring on November 11.
Council Member Morehouse wished to congratulate Turning Point and the firefighters for a successful Kinetic Sculpture Race sponsorship. The councilman was also glowing in his praise of the passage of Proposition 22.
The One City, One Meal at the Knights of Columbus Hall was also praised by the mayor. The mayor seemed to be echoing Council Member Andrews in his praise of the work done in support of the poor, the homeless and the needy.
Closed session report – a significant litigation issue was discussed – no reportable action -- while a second issue also had no reportable action.
Regional Boards, Commissions and Committees – a SCAG meeting reported upon by Council Member Morehouse indicated that a letter went out concerning the Centennial census, which protested several associations and managers over the issue of census, where Ventura would be included in the census of Santa Barbara and other parts of Los Angeles. In other news, an economic summit of sorts is planned for Dec. 2 the purpose of which is to discuss jobs and the economic recovery. This was associated with item number nine on the agenda list.
The councilman also voiced an update on the Ventura Council of Governments report on the early prisoner release program. These returnees, unlike parolees, are simply returned to the general population without supervision into areas where employment opportunities are scarce to nonexistent, causing recidivism to be extremely high.
The issue of plastic bags has been agendized for a January meeting.
Council Member Andrews serves on the Strategy Committee of the Regional Board the California Air Resources Board, which now requires cleaner emissions (known as the “fuel rule”) along the open water shipping lanes off the coast of Southern California. Shipping is being diverted past the Naval Live Firing Range adjacent to point Mugu. The range is being compromised to the tune of $2 billion as a result of the disruption in job activity and other factors, where rule modifications with the Air Resources Board are at odds with an ongoing home-grown effort to protect this valuable local resource.
A Topping Room meeting on Friday between the city and Gold Coast Transit concluded with a public transit report wherein specific plan action resulted in a bus fare increase of $.25, and while there has not been a fare increase since 1994, the fares were raised out of necessity, the mayor said. Minor operational changes were also hammered out at the meeting and are scheduled for implementation in January to ease some of the crowding on the Main Street bus during the daytime.
Public communications – first Monday included about 25 speakers for this meeting, with the mayor allowing three minutes of time for each speaker. The mayor included a list of standard protocols normally observed in Council Chambers.
Helen Yunker spoke complaining of her latest in the ongoing saga of the damage to property Lot No. 7, this time caused by land slippage due to rainfall and water runoff. She has been advised that with her complaints being ignored, there would be grounds for litigation against the city. She claimed that the developer has defaulted on agreements to stabilize the land surrounding the lot. The Planning Commission has also stalled on revitalization plans, according to her.
Council Member Monahan responded asking for clarification on the claim that no one from the Planning Commission has actually performed on the contract, with the city manager then voluntarily agreeing to revisit the matter.
Steve Slater spoke in support of the citizens concerned over the ongoing problem of desecrated graves in Cemetery Park and other locations around the city. At 11:00 a.m. on Thursday there will be a special memorial for the people whose remains lie unmarked and for whom there is no way to memorialize each individual. The speaker noted that 70 flags on the grass in Cemetery Park does make the area seem more appropriately “memorial.” He noted also that the fight to keep Private Sumner’s remains interred in the park “does not appear to be one of the solutions we should be proud of here in Ventura.” Steve noted once again that the mayor's parents are memorialized with a very expensive headstone in a cemetery with a choice location in a well-to-do community back East.
Several speakers yielded their time to John Snowling and Rosie Arnielez, allowing them 10 minutes to present, followed by Doug Mizer.
There was almost $11 million in these unreserved funds, with audit findings noting that from 12% to 4% were the reduction factors. The city has no unfunded liabilities in public employee retirement and postretirement health insurance liabilities. The city has taken some steps along the lines recommended by the pay cuts and service costs that the firefighters are being asked, unrealistically, to absorb, and sanity needs to be restored. The city should negotiate, not dictate, according to the speaker.
Deputy Mayor Tracy asked John to clarify a point made concerning pre-payments on member contributions. The speaker replied that CalPERS does offer a pre-payment option, allowing union members to make voluntary contributions to their own retirement accounts, which, if allowed by the city, would save the city of $3000 annually. Such voluntary contributions are not currently allowed, however.
The next speaker, Frank Maxim, who recently served on the Compensation Policies Task Force, is part of the current negotiating team, and nonetheless took the council to task for its rank-and-file “motivational” skills, or its unquestioned lack thereof. He also wished to convey a message to the council noting the city's failing strategy to reduce costs in an understaffed code enforcement department along with a rising tide of foreclosed properties, which destabilizes neighborhoods, lowers property values and depresses revenues. Neighboring communities have been enacting Foreclosure Registry Ordinances as a way of increasing revenues, the speaker said. The city may impose fines of up to $1000 per day on properties that are vacated and not maintained by the mortgage holder. The Chula Vista mortgage program issued $1.5 million in fines. Riverside issued $3.5 million in revenues while Los Angeles raised $5 million from programs that have been shown to favor General Fund augmentation while simultaneously helping to ease blight conditions within the city.
Council Member Brennan called Frank's assessment a “creative approach,” not withstanding proposition 26 which has probably put a cloud over these types of ordinances.
Doug Mizer from the Firefighters Association referred also to Restaurant Week, singling out Café Zack and an anecdotal conversation that had occurred between the speaker and the restaurant owner. The owner believed that the secret to success is through its employees. The speaker then segued into a comparison between successful private business operations and the City of Ventura's problems with its employees. “You can't demand permanent employee wage reductions” without damaging employee relations and lowering quality in the long run, said the speaker.
Jim McDermott on behalf of the Ventura County Taxpayers Association, picked up on the previous speaker’s example of a successful restaurant business, also finding it improbable that the city would ask for dramatic reductions in pay and benefits for its employees. The speaker insisted that public employees are entitled to their own pensions and with a $46 million “under water” situation in the employee retirement fund programs, an untenable situation is being created, according to him.
David Grau also of the VCTA, noted that the association supports the city council by returning to employee participation in the pension fund arena. Taking the “public” out of public pensions would be a far more equitable solution once retirement employees are returned to contributing to their own pensions, according to the speaker. He notes that the employees are positioning themselves in an untenable situation by refusing to support their own pension and ask instead for taxpayer support. The taxpayer association appeared to be favoring the newer “second tier” model of pension support.
[Comment] It is probably not too well known or understood that with few exceptions, “public” employees are forbidden by law to participate in Social Security. It is difficult to see how this makes any sense, because you see, our hard working city employees work for us, really – the citizens. We’re their employers. Private sector employers such as Northrop-Grumman, Litton and Boeing couldn’t have attracted and retained the kind of top talent they’ve traditionally needed in order to remain competitive in the job market without offering fully vested retirement programs. [Isn’t this the same rationale used to justify multi-million dollar salaries to the CEOs of private corporations?] These pension funds when combined with Social Security have made the difference between a “decent” retirement and S.S. alone for millions of retired aerospace workers, including this writer. It makes us wonder if Mr. Grau or any of his similar-minded association friends are either receiving or planning to receive Social Security benefits, or if they in any way have ever thought what might happen to them if their private-sector pension fund (or 401(k) were to suddenly dry up. [Ed.]
Thomas Lawson spoke representing himself as a member residing near Ventura College. The stop sign at Loma Vista has been removed, and with college students speeding down the roadway the speaker asked that speed bumps be placed in the street, saying that the residents themselves would be willing to contribute to the costs. Council Member Morehouse commented, saying that efforts are underway to create a College Community Council, which could be of significant assistance to this part of the community.
City Manager Cole also commented on the problem noting that the $11.5 million in cuts through the 2010 – 2011 budget was realized through the curtailment of programs, with this probably being one of them. Mr. Cole noted that the issue of speed bumps is a thorny one, being opposed by roughly half of all residents and generally supported by the other half. Fire department response is another issue and that the council need not decide the issue at this time but that a further discussion under a separate agenda item would be desirable.
Raymond Stoyanov representing CAAN (the Childhood Abuse And Neglect thrift outlet) addressed the parking meters downtown, noting that daily sales records taken with controls over the same time frames in 2009. One-day sales figures were $600 over the control in one instance. In another the sales figure was $800 over the control. Another 15 days out of the survey indicated a three thousand dollar loss over the control figures. The speaker believed that the city has erred in erecting parking meters downtown. Upon questioning by the mayor the speaker said that years prior to 2009 show no comparable decreases in revenues.
LaDonna Martinez spoke as she has in the past as a self-described “tea partier,” and who also noted that the parking meter “problem” has other holes, including automation errors.
Carla spoke in opposition to parking meters.
Tony Dolts spoke in favor of paid public parking, conceptually, but he seemed to be in opposition to the method adopted by the city. His feeling was that “parking meters are a tax,” and wished for the council’s consideration in abolishing the parking meters.
Gary Parker of American Flags Incorporated spoke, wanting to thank Jim Monahan for his interest in the issue of flags being installed for public display. He also spoke on the public parking meters. It appears that the Business Owners Association is on the move to encourage shoppers to use the free facilities available rather than paying money to the meters. “One could call this a boycott,” Gary said, wishing to see the meters removed.
Miriam spoke as a resident of the East end, noting that shopping facilities are available elsewhere and that the downtown area is not a normal draw from long distances, noting also that parking fees are a further disincentive to travel.
William Hicks spoke as a resident of Thousand Oaks, noting that he and his wife visit downtown shops on a rather regular basis, but that their trips to Ventura have been cut short due to the parking meters.
[Comment] Unbelievable. Someone who lives in Thousand Oaks – one of the most affluent cities in California – cannot bear the thought of parting with his spare change [probably recovered from the cushions of his couch] and just enough to help support a near subsistence-level lifestyle for the very least among us. [Ed.]
Chuck Goranson spoke noting that upon driving through downtown there are fewer congestion issues, but with open parking in front of nearly every business. He said he would rather be shopping in Camarillo, citing the parking meters in Ventura as a bad example of progress.
[Comment] Well, sir. We say, “Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.” [Ed.]
Citizens Alliance for Property Rights along with Tea Party Observers had an ally in Deborah Tash, apparently, who noted that density caused by mixed use zoning and properties created “on top of each other,” according to her, does not contribute to quality of life improvements, noting further the problems seen in San Jose and other Northern California cities. Her claim was that the raising of families in the newest age of American philosophy does not work largely due to the way cities now approach livability spaces.
Greg Kravitz noted that the uniqueness of Ventura is worth preserving when considering cities like Pasadena and Santa Monica. His point was that progressive cities throughout California employ public parking fees (not out of spite but out of necessity) and noted that these are issues almost unavoidable with large populations and city congestion. His view was that the public does not have a problem with pay public parking.
Kathleen Erikson, Executive Director of Downtown Ventura Partners, spoke, noting that only 342 parking spaces are metered. Her contention was that the parking metered spaces are working. The other 2500 free parking places downtown have not been affected by the parking meter program. During primetime there are no more than one or two spaces available downtown along with a noticeable decrease in panhandling due to higher police presence. The downtown Ventura Partners organization wishes to create a safe and vibrant downtown, she said. The speaker also voiced a realization that economic times are a factor, but that the program overall will provide additional resources to all citizens in the form of improved safety and greater reliability in the community services that are relied upon by all.
Councilman Monahan noted that the merchants have requested a moratorium on parking meters and wished to have the speaker comment on a possible moratorium. The answer included the fact that the merchants’ concerns have been noted, and that a parking meter advisory committee has been created to look into the requests.
Bill Hardin mentioned a litany of overdue projects including the California Street overpass crossing along with the proposed 101 improvements, both being issues which have been covered lately in council meetings. He also complained over the noisy street sweepers. The speaker emphasized the opinion that while the city contributed $350,000 to the State Beach Erosion project, the results have been disastrous.
Patti Thomas noted that an e-mail received questioned the fact that the Wright Library building appears to be occupied by construction workers, lighting specialists and other trade personnel. Her point was that the city council has been tasked control the use the Wright Library building. The city may no longer desire to be part of the library system, according to her, but this must be negotiated through the council and not handed over to private development under 19.103.
The mayor noted that the activity within the building comes as surprise to both him and the council. Mr. Cole noted that the college is prohibited from using the building under conditions where irreversible changes might be undertaken. Council will take it up with the College District if this turns out to be the case, according to Mr. Cole.
John Haig has a business downtown, noting that business has slowed down since parking meters have been installed. He stated that his customers are not concerned over the dollar amount but rather the principle involved – “We don't want to pay to shop,” according to them.
[Comment] These are often the same people who don’t want to pay to drive, either – like through higher gas taxes, which is nothing more than an indicator (and a way of determining) the true cost of driving. In their view they should simply be allowed to buy their Mercedes, get in, turn the key and drive away without a care in the world. Pay parking, friends, is nothing more than a way of determining the true cost of shopping. For most of us, shopping involves other things . . . like walking, for instance. Some folks, we notice, won’t even do that. They seem to expect a selection of golf carts to choose from as they whiz up and down Big Box and grocery store aisles – supplied for free, of course. [Ed.]
Council Member Monahan asked about employee parking. The speaker denied that his employees were parking in front of his business establishment.
Dave Armstrong, President of Downtown Business Owners, spoke, noting that The Nutcracker is being performed this season at the Oxnard Cultural Center, but is being produced by the Ventura Ballet Company. [Nice touch.] His primary concern, however, was over business ideology during a down time in the economy. His fear was that political correctness is overtaking reality in some cases. His contention was that the streets are full of shoppers and that the meters are not the problem being presented by many.
Council Member Monahan asked about conditions in the Midtown area. Council Member Morehouse noted that two issues stand out when including public opinion along with lack of parking, but the speaker countered, saying that it's not time to build new parking but to manage existing parking. The speaker also claimed that outreach was conducted and that through Downtown Specific Plan update meetings, the Specific Plan has undergone extensive community input.
The city did a traffic survey, according to Mr. Armstrong, and that of samples taken 38% of the space is taken up by employees in front of stores.
Stephen Schaefer spoke as a “constant user” of downtown, and claimed to have found very little downtown parking. He claimed that the downtown area has been turned into a “wasteland.”
Michelle spoke on the comments of other commenters. She contended that only the business owners downtown should be “allowed,” as she put it, to comment on the efficacy or lack thereof in downtown parking.
Dan Cormode spoke claiming that parking meters downtown don't work.
Council Member Weir spoke on the downtown overpass containing the graffiti problem. The freeway would need to be closed in order to remove the graffiti, she said, involving many other processes and city resources before the problem could be fixed.
Council Member Monahan received a letter addressing the parking issue, suggesting that residents were required to pay up to two dollars per day to park in front of their homes. Permit parking, according to City Manager Cole, is being reviewed which will help those who are paying in residential areas.
The mayor indicated that the full agenda would be discussed following a break.
Council Consent Items – the mayor listed the agenda items. With no scheduled speakers, Council Member Andrews wished to pull Agenda Item No. 7. It was moved that the items be pulled all except number seven. With the roll being called, all members voted yes.
Council Member Andrews wished to discuss Agenda Item No. 7, noting that it was on a different platform than everything else based on a contractor/vendor type of format, and that a year-long extension at $110,000 would be “disruptive,” according to him. Authorizations or additions to a contract such as the current are worthy of additional study, he said. One additional study looked at contract options and noted that Staff might be asked to review the previous study and analyze alternative contract options before building out a more complicated platform contract.
Mr. Cole responded noting that it is imperative that the city build out cost-effective systems for utility billing, including online payment methods. The current software has not emphasized interoperability in a way that might be most desirable. Staff resources need not be “patched” into the existing system, according to the city manager. The integrated voice response add-in might support a council decision to take a second look at measure A, and go instead with B. A motion was brought to the floor to reflect that request. The roll was taken with all members voting yes.
Agenda Item No. 14 – the staff presentation was scheduled and made available for public and/or Council comment. Brian spoke on the Community Development code cleanup process, noting that issues of concern to the public had been addressed. Slide one indicated “dense landscaping” including wording to that effect. Another code challenge has centered on “story,” “half” or “half story”. A story is one in which the floor area does not exceed 50% of the maximum allowed building or buildable area. The new wording says that “a story whose floor area does not exceed 50%.
Corner lots are to be designated as “that portion of the property that serves as a front yard.” Day care centers were typically covered under this use classification system. Animal boarding is currently not covered under code, with proposals that include boarding in enclosed spaces only.
Accessory structures were covered noting that 750 ft.² might be acceptable as a tool shed but not as a granny flat or apartment rental. Animal boarding regulations were expanded to include waste removal.
Appliance repair facilities were shown to be modified and updated per code. Council Member Andrews wished to review the story and half-story diagram, noting that a floor area not exceeding 50% of the maximum allowed buildable area does not reflect the diagram as shown, with the councilman asking whether or not a revision to the diagram might be desirable. On the animal boarding the councilman wished clarification on whether outdoor “runs” would be included.
Council Member Weir asked about chickens noting that staff report includes animal husbandry and livestock animals. A person may desire to own to chickens, but wondered if that would be allowable in spaces over 2000 sq. ft. Staff did not put chickens in as a permitted use. The city attorney added a note saying that 4-H and other nonprofit organizations are exempted.
Council Member Monahan wished to raise the issue of RVs as mobile trailers as generally used as security buildings. Staff replied that caretakers using trailers require full utility hookups under permits. RV usage does not been clarified under code.
Deputy Mayor Tracy noted that animal boarding under the proposal may not make a distinction between fenced outdoor areas versus enclosed indoor spaces. An open space for dog kenneling would require a code change, according to Staff.
Public communications – the speaker Camille Harris requested that the council work to clarify lot division in relation to the Ventura Safe Housing Collaborative, whose members have worked diligently on the same issues, further asking that the council consider this work for reviewing purposes. (Especially second units)
Council Member Morehouse spoke after closing of the public session, noting that cleanup is periodically necessary in dealing with public safety code. An omission in the second reading should be amended to November 22, as stated by the mayor. With the roll being taken all members voted yes.
Agenda Item No. 15 – the city attorney began by outlining the Deemed Approved ordinance. Alcoholic beverage vendors would need to adhere to new ordinances where certain tightening measures have been included. Deemed Approved establishments would need to adhere to a new set of standards, including nuisance issues.
Public communications – Samantha from La Mesa spoke as a representative of business groups who are opposed to the regulation of alcohol establishments. Her claim was that the standards include taxes that are higher under these proposals than those of the vast majority of other cities. “Reasonable steps” to curb nuisance behavior is vague, according to the speaker. Other aspects of the proposal are also excessively vague according to the speaker. Her claim was that costs such as those being proposed would simply be passed on to business owners. Her stance was that the changes should be opposed and in some cases are unconstitutional.
[Comment] When did business owners begin thinking that it would be unconstitutional for them to incur costs?. They could always seek another line of work . . . like ditch digging, perhaps. [Ed.]
The next speaker, a liquor store business owner in Ventura, claims to have good law enforcement relations, but noted that “government takeover” of businesses in the city is excessive. The speaker has issues with homeless people. The speaker also appeared to be chastising the city for its efforts to help homeless people.
[Comment] Well, it certainly doesn’t say anywhere in the Constitution that government should be helping homeless people. Another candidate for ditch digger. [Ed.]
The next speaker, George, noted that parking which have been covered earlier coincides with the issues being presented. As a business owner with outlets in various cities, the speaker opposed city changes just on general principles. Alcohol retailers, according to the speaker, seemed to be targeted relentlessly in cities all across Southern California. His feeling was that new conditional use permits are restricted to business and costly to alcohol retailers.
[Comment] We used to call this “G.P.” My former hippie friends and I used to be opposed to everything – just on G.P. We were opposed to apple pie – just on G.P. The only things we were not opposed to – just on G.P. – was sex, drugs and rock ‘n roll. Of course we were just children at the time. [Ed.]
Dominique Montgomerie owns and manages the Bombay bar and Grill, believing that the proposed amendment is overbroad and vague. Her concern was with the “nuisances” issues, believing that small nuisances when added together could cause the closure of her business. Current ordinance states that reasonable standards must be followed. The current amendment however would require hired security personnel, according to her.
[Comment] Ditch digging is starting to look pretty good all of a sudden. [Ed.]
Jim Wright, speaking as the owner of Jimmy Slice and other businesses, also claimed that the proposal was too vague.
Aaron Curtis spoke works for the Goodbar on Main Street, saying that he “loves” Ventura, but that business owners need money, but the city is saying they'll get it from the businesses. The speaker noted that with parking fees being collected, he doesn't see that that money distribution will ever reach the business owner. His claim was that additional regulation will only exacerbate the problem.
Catherine Sumner spoke as owner of the Goodbar, noting that years went by with no problems but that in January her “world fell apart.” She had claimed to be harassed by police, and yet “she didn't feel like a criminal.” She had claimed also to have 12 employees and a business degree. The information she received on the proposal has only added to her concern, she said. She had received tickets for over capacity, and her treatment by the police has been less than satisfactory. Her contention was that the city will be “getting their money from her one way or another.”
[Comment] Poor baby. [Ed.]
Al Dargon owner of Rookies and Dargon's Claimed to be “scared” over the new proposed regulation. A C.U.P. Review, the speaker noted, can be performed but at a cost of over $3000 to the business owner.
Council Member Morehouse wished to have answered the question of “why” the regulations were necessary. The city attorney clarified that these ordinance changes were designed to permit greater flexibility in enforcement by police. The councilman countered by questioning the need for greater police involvement in nuisance activities. The city attorney however, stated that the clarification includes a need to address “mayhem” rather than nuisance.
Council Member Brennan tended to agree to the vagueness cited by public speakers on the part of the proposed amendment. Mr. Brennan was concerned about the transparency of the process. He asked Dave O'Brien to fill him in on the process.
The city attorney stepped in, calling in the deputy city police chief, noting that the “excessive calls ordinance” has had to be used in place of the alcohol ordinances. The Police Department spokesman agreed with the city attorney that the issue was mayhem and not merely, in the main, the issue of nuisances. The spokesman also insisted that only after a “pattern” of instances by the business owners has been established, that only then are many of the complaints responded to. Council Member Brennan cited knifings and serious fights that have attributed to the problem.
Council Member Andrews asked the city attorney concerning the patterning after the Oakland law, noting that the proposal is very vague and very broad and relies on excessive subjectivity on the part of business owners. The councilman agreed that the issue is mayhem, but that the police resources required to intervene in these manners may or may not be controllable by business owners. The councilman noted that problems occurring in the vicinity of the business may not be caused by the business. The councilman claimed to be unable to support proposals as written.
Deputy Mayor Tracy noted that the administrative report includes a process by which a business owner could appeal the action. The deputy mayor believed that the content was on point, and that the council should move forward on the issue.
As far as revoking a licensee’s deemed approved status, as stated by the city attorney, Ariel noted that there are several forms of checks and balances, including discretion and city council resolutions.
Council Member Weir mentioned that “reasonable standards” as the existing standard was actually more vague than the new proposals. She stated that the process is moving forward in a “less vague” direction rather than the opposite. Nuisance activities, according to her, should be included in all C.U.Ps and not just alcohol establishments. The councilwoman noted that the PD has been somewhat lenient in coupling the food requirement along with alcohol permitting. Deputy Police Chief Fenwick agreed. The councilwoman asked deputy chief to comment on removal of the item 'B' and would be in favor of softening the proposal in this area. The councilwoman agreed that she would support the staff recommendations.
Council Member Brennan attempted to craft a motion that might include an ad hoc committee to report on progress over six months, with the intent of furthering the motion. The motion was seconded. Council Member Morehouse commented, saying that there might be the basis here for the construction of a framework.
Council Member Monahan asked the clerk to tally the motion for the Council as understood, which would be to include the formation of an ad hoc committee to study the situation and report within six months. This would mean that the Deemed Approved ordinance would not be on the table for approval immediately.
Council Member Andrews noted that the new proposed standards may not address the C.U.P. holders and their issues over Deemed Approved. The issue is whether or not the Deemed Approved and the C.U.P. owners are being treated equally and fairly.
The city clerk called the roll on the measure with all members voting yes.
Agenda item number 16 – the mayor noted that Item No. 16 had been removed.
Public communications – Camille Harris spoke, stating that 145 Ventura homes and properties have been turned over to the county tax assessor to collect due to foreclosures. The next slide noted that the ordinance is in step with the times only if the amount of the assessment shall be collected at the same time and in the same manner as ordinary property taxes.
A slide indicated that people with families don't always have the money for compliance. Other homes are in foreclosure and up for sale only because of compliance issues. Another slide indicated that some properties are only out of compliance based on aesthetics.
Other cities have code enforcement penalties but not in the amounts that would cause excessive hardship. The speaker indicated that amnesty in some instances should be considered along with objective third-party review.
Council Member Monahan noted that the Construction Appeals Board has been working in this area, and asked Camille to expand upon this. Her answer was that residential properties don't generally fall into this area.
Council communications – two free movies, Humble Beauty, being one and the other, River Haven 2, will be screened on Saturday night.
The mayor adjourned the meeting in honor of those mentioned at the beginning of the meeting.