I play softball in the summer and I'm on the team called the Knights of Soroka and I play in the outfield.

How did you start working at the Port?

So I've been working at the Port since 2013 and I actually started as a summer intern in human resources.

And I worked there for about three years before I was hired full time in the Waterfront Commercial Real Estate Division where I've been for the past five.

What is your day like working at the port?

So my days always vary at the port, but typically I always check in with the different tenants,

see if they have any service requests.

I also work on event permits for big events like Conquer the Bridge, Cirque de Soleil,

LA Fleet Week.

So I work on those typically in the summer months.

And then I also work on new permits for new properties.

So right now I'm working on a permit for a new restaurant that's going to be out here.

So that's been a lot of fun.

What hobbies do you enjoy doing in your free time?

I like playing slow pitch here at the Port of LA.

I love going to the beach and I actually just got a new puppy a few months ago so I really

like hanging out with my new puppy Daisy.

Last one.

What kinds of challenges have you faced during your career?

Challenges.

Well, actually for the past year,

we've all been working at home due to COVID.

So that's been a challenge.

Learning to work from a laptop versus being in an office

has been a big challenge.

And being able to check in with all of our tenants remotely

over Zoom and Teams has been a lot more difficult

than being able to just call them up and meet in person

at the different sites throughout the port.

And that's it.

I'm Megan Sestich, and this has been my career report

For more information, follow us online on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.

Hello everyone, I'm Natalia Bilbao and here's what's happening in LA This Week.

Affordable housing is coming to Lincoln Heights.

member Eunices Hernandez joined the community for the groundbreaking of Grace Villas. The

development includes a mix of units that will become much needed homes in the neighborhood.

Right now we're standing on a publicly owned parking lot in Lincoln Heights in Council

District 1. We are celebrating the groundbreaking for Grace Villas, which is an affordable housing

developments that is long time in the making.

Homes for families, three bedrooms, two bedrooms, and also some homes for

transitional aged youth and for families with members that have developmental disabilities.

And all of them will receive affordable rents and services that support whatever their needs

are so that they can move forward with the lives that they dream of for themselves.

So we're excited about it.

I live in Highland Village and this organization

co-works bought the apartment complex

and they remodeled the whole apartment

for low income rents.

And I've been living there since about 20 years ago.

So it's been a great experience for us.

Welcome to the first district.

Welcome to an LADOT lot that very shortly

is going to be 48 units of affordable housing.

It's good to be here surrounded by neighbors, partners and friends to celebrate the groundbreaking of Grace Villas.

We're here because we believe that everyone, no matter their income, age or ability, deserves a safe, dignified and affordable place to call home.

Back in 2022, voters passed Measure ULA, which is creating revenue to build affordable housing, to keep people in their homes.

And so this is just a demonstration and proof that when the voters ask for creating affordable housing, we can deliver on that.

We literally completed the funding for this development on Friday and are ready to start construction in a week.

But before we begin, we have a tradition of blessing the land which will ultimately house 48 families and young people, recognizing the peoples and communities who have preserved this place for us to use.

You guys want to grab some dirt?

All right, when I count to three, you guys just toss it.

Ready?

One, two, three.

Toss.

Perfect.

All right.

Remembering Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

As part of a public art project, the city's Department of Cultural Affairs unveiled a memorial to Ginsburg,

who blazed a trail in advocating for women's rights.

A special monument will celebrate her impact and legacy.

Good morning, everyone.

It is a true honor to join you for the unveiling of the Ruth Bader Ginsburg Memorial.

and to celebrate a vision that has been in the works for years now.

We are in the community of Van Nuys, particularly at the Van Nuys Civic Center,

and we are so excited because we were finally able to unveil our Ruth Bader Ginsburg monument.

It's a project that is being added to the DCA archives, Department of Cultural Affairs.

But it's a really great story of how when our departments work together in public-private partnerships,

we can make these beautiful things happen.

So this is a very long-term project.

I've been working on it for six years.

And one of the things that I did to create the monument

was to speak to family members of Justice Ginsburg.

I spoke to Jane Ginsburg, her daughter,

and she told me about her incredible collars.

So Justice Ginsburg would wear these beautiful collars

when she would wear her robes,

and I was inspired by those collars

to create the ceiling and the floor of the monument.

I also researched a little bit about her going to Harvard Law School, and I was inspired

by the benches at Harvard Law School to create the seating area inside of the monument.

Finally, there is a door in the very back of the monument, which is slightly ajar,

kind of reminding us of how much more work there is to do to open doors for young women and girls,

but also how much work that Justice Ginsburg began to do for us to open those doors of possibility.

We hope this monument will be an inspiration, especially to young women,

to know that law and government are careers that they can aspire to.

It was built next to the library and that was purposeful because they wanted to link it to Ruth Bader Ginsburg's love of books, love of reading and writing.

But also just to enjoy a really beautiful green space.

This project is a gift to the city of Los Angeles,

and it's collectively held by all of us here in the United

States.

And that was a very important part to me of the project,

that it actually changes history,

because it becomes a part of the public record.

And I really hope that people who come to see the monument

understand that it's their monument, it's our public monument, and that it's a gift for each

and every member of the city of Los Angeles. Giving for Thanksgiving. At the Hollenbeck

Community Police Station, the Los Angeles Police Department joined My Gathering Place International

to help community members with turkeys and more during this holiday season.

We're here at Hollenbeck Station.

We're partnering up with My Gathering Place International, where we're here giving out

turkeys to the community who are in need.

Yes, well, we're from My Gathering Place International.

This is our fifth year to be here in Boyle Heights to do our Thanksgiving outreach.

We call it unity in our community.

And we love to give.

We love to sow into people's lives.

So it's a gathering from our church.

We buy turkeys from our ministry.

People donate.

And this year we bought 50 turkeys,

but we didn't have enough,

so we had to run out to the store

and pick up 38 more turkeys and some gift cards.

So this year people were lined up

all the way to the street in the rain for hours.

Some of them got here at 6 a.m.

So we're thankful that we were able to meet a need.

Thank you, sir.

God bless you.

Happy Thanksgiving.

Happy Thanksgiving.

I think it's excellent because we are helping the community a little more with the difficult times that they are going through.

And we thank them for doing this type of event to help us, the people of the community.

So we want to make sure that the community knows that the Los Angeles Police Department is aware that a lot of people are going through tough times right now.

So we always welcome the community here.

We like to foster relationships with our local churches

so that people feel more comfortable coming to us.

Hopefully that also bridges the gap

between the community and the police.

We just want to remind everyone

that behind every badge is a heart.

And our police station is open to everyone and anyone

that is going through hard times

and is in need of the police.

please come in and report whatever crime you need to report.

You are encouraged to come in and speak with any of us or call 911 if needed.

Thanksgiving in the city continues bringing community together.

Council members Unises Hernandez and Hugo Soto Martinez

got into the spirit of the holiday by teaming up for a turkey giveaway

and the chance to connect with Angelinos.

Today we are here at the Dream Center, right in the heart of Silver Lake, in collaboration

with my compañera, Eonises Hernandez.

We're giving out 9,000 turkeys to Angelenos from Council District 1, 13 and beyond to

make sure that we can fill the gap of food disparity and lack of income for a lot of

our families.

What better thing to give our families than something they can share with their entire

families like a big old turkey.

It's a beautiful display of community.

I really miss the days in which we had more community.

It's been really hard to connect with people and this is a great opportunity for different

sorts of people to connect and it's a very great cause.

I see it as a great effort to come together.

Something that's much needed for a little more unity within the government and within

the city and the people in the city.

Just showing that they care, that they pay attention.

The most important thing about doing something like this is that we are telling people that

we care about them.

we care about, that they have a wonderful experience

during this Thanksgiving.

And of course, you know,

this is how we also build community.

So when the volunteers come in today,

we struggle together, we fight together,

we support families together,

and it just builds solidarity

across so many different spectrums of our city.

It is our responsibility as council members

to be the guardians of some of our most vulnerable

community members here in the city of LA.

Today is an example of us stepping up

to make sure that families have everything they need

to have a wonderful holiday season.

shows that people care even in the moment where

there's not a lot of that going on right now.

So we do appreciate that.

And it shows that there's still a lot of love

and still a lot of compassion and empathy out there.

We need to make sure that we continue to support

because folks are struggling

and everything is really expensive from rent to groceries.

Then go to our online website

or add CD1 Los Angeles on social media

for more information on our regular food distribution

and our rental assistance program.

And as always, if there's ever a need,

our social media is CD13 Los Angeles.

Mayor Karen Bass joins state and regional leaders

to launch LA is Open, a recovery campaign

to boost LA's local economy

and help businesses impacted by the January wildfires.

The campaign invites Angelenos and visitors

to rediscover LA through Shop LA, Dine LA,

and Discover LA initiatives.

To prepare for upcoming events,

Mayor Bass launched the city's contract financing program

and announced the new centralized website, Business Navigator.

According to Bass, the new campaign sends a clear message

that the city is open and visitors will see

why LA is second to none.

For more information, visit mere.lacity.gov slash press.

LA City Housing Authority, Hakla,

joined Mayor Karen Bass along with veterans

and their families at a recent celebration

of service and partnership.

Under the House Our Vets strategy,

which began in January, 2025,

nearly 400 veterans have already moved into stable housing.

Hakla is partnering with the Veterans Administration

to increase housing referrals,

offer personalized help to match veterans to units

and reduce move-in delays.

According to Mayor Bass,

the partnership offers more opportunities

to rent to veterans and clears barriers

for the veterans to use vouchers to come inside.

HACLA is calling on potential partners

to join with them in a collaboration

to get all veterans home for the holidays.

For more information, visit HACLA.org.

Mayor Karen Bass began the 1000 day countdown to the 2028 Paralympic Games by highlighting

citywide efforts to deliver the most inclusive games.

In 2028, LA will make history by hosting its first ever Paralympic Games with the opening

ceremony on Tuesday, August 15th.

The 2028 Paralympic schedule sees competitions in 23 sports, including the new sport of paraclimbing.

According to BASS, the City Games Mobility Working Group, including the Department on Disability,

will help deliver a safe, accessible, and welcoming games experience.

The City will also establish a task force to improve hiring and retaining individuals with disabilities in the City.

For more information, visit mayor.lacity.gov slash press.

With so much of life happening in the digital world, connection to the Internet is a necessity.

Council President Marquise Harris-Dawson joined local groups and community members to celebrate new connectivity along Crenshaw.

We're here on Crenshaw Boulevard in the Hyde Park neighborhood.

We're celebrating this morning because we got live, free, 24-7 Wi-Fi internet access

to everybody that's along the Crenshaw Corridor.

So if you're between Hyde Park and Leimert Park, you can use the internet for free.

That means if you're in a coffee shop, you can use it.

If you're in a park, you can use it.

If you're on the train, on the metro, you can use it.

Anywhere you are in this community, you'll have free Wi-Fi.

There's a lot of inequity in internet availability, and we really saw it during COVID.

When all your business had to be conducted online, what you saw is people gathering outside libraries or outside McDonald's.

Even though those places were closed, they kept their Wi-Fi going.

And eventually we started doing that at the parks.

And so to have this community disconnected creates a gap.

Well, the California Community Foundation is the community's foundation.

And for us, providing digital equity to all of Angelenos is one of our most significant priorities.

Now, if you live in this community of which I'm one, I live not too far away from here, you'll be able to access Wi-Fi.

But now it also provides a quality lifeline to access to jobs, to education, to health care, in ways that all Angelenos deserve.

So we found out about this program through Destination Crenshaw.

They approached us about this new community Wi-Fi program and asked us if we'd be interested

in kind of being one of the first piloters for the program.

And we were like, absolutely, that sounds amazing.

Like, especially being like a farmer's market and an outdoor space with really no access

to like electricity or anything.

We're kind of like pack in, pack out.

So just being able to kind of have the opportunity to test out what that would look like to have

kind of free access on a weekly basis and see how we can utilize that was something that

we were really excited about.

You know, today we live in a digital world and the amount of information, the amount

of access you have really depends on your connectivity as well.

And so this is just another way for us to make sure that every resident has equal footing.

The city's Department of Rec and Parks, Play LA, is all about inclusivity in sport and

empowering those with disabilities.

They are teaching blind soccer, proving that being visually impaired is no barrier to staying

active and taking part in a team sport.

So today, the City of Los Angeles, Play LA, and the United States Association of Blind

athletes are hosting our fourth clinic where we are teaching blind and visually impaired children

how to play the sport of blind soccer. Being active and healthy is a really important part

of every child's life and so for kids who are blind and visually impaired there aren't

a ton of opportunities for them to be active and be a part of a team sport so it's a really great

opportunity to be active, to learn a sport, and also be around other kids who are just like them.

We invite anyone in our community to participate in our programs. We also like to educate the

community around us to ensure that we're bringing awareness and attention to how we can empower

our youth with disabilities. I'm here working with Play LA as a recreational coach working on blind

soccer. For visually impaired individuals specifically, it's kind of like a two-fold

game. You have the idea that you get to understand that you don't have to just sit in a corner by

yourself and not be able to do anything because you have a disability, but in fact because you

have a disability you get to participate in a very unique and individualized sport that's

tailor-made and designed for individuals like yourself. And the second benefit is the fact

that you get to teach non-disabled individuals about the sport and how it works and you can

have them play blind soccer with you as well so that way they can kind of relate and connect to

you more so it's more or less about getting disabled people out there in the field getting

them exercising and connecting with other disabled youth yet also getting it to where sighted and

non-disabled individuals can relate and kind of connect to us individuals who have disabilities

I like football!

We want to invite all the parents who are interested,

and who want their children who have visual disabilities

can participate.

They can go to the Play LA website or the Shaba,

also from the Federation,

and they will find different places

where they can come to practice football.

And the most important thing is to enjoy

and know that they can learn in Spanish and in English too.

The office of Councilmember Curran Price hosted its annual City Employee Appreciation Luncheon.

It's an opportunity for city workers from many departments to gather together and be thanked for all they do for Angelinos.

We're here at our district office for Councilman Curran Price.

We're having our City Employee Appreciation Luncheon.

We have every year.

This is basically a thank you to all the city employees for them coming out doing all the work

they do in South LA, keeping our district clean, keeping it safe, keeping it memorable for people

to live, work and play here. So thank you to our city employees.

I'm here to visit the Current Price's community events in support of all of the great things

that Current Price is doing that is uplifting the community.

We really appreciate them.

That's why we're having this luncheon because they do stuff like this.

We care about the safety of the citizens we serve.

We care about the community and we're trying to clean it up.

Every day we're doing our best for our community.

We are the city of Los Angeles and we serve its residents.

I'm always improving myself to help the community.

we enjoy working for the people.

I think this is an amazing opportunity for the community

to find appreciation, to know that they are appreciated

and that they are loved.

So whenever you see a city employee walking by doing

their job here in the city, thank them.

Thank them for us, thank them for our counselors,

thank them for everything they do.

I love my job and I love the city of Los Angeles.

In this week's feature story, we head to Herman Park, where the Department of Cultural Affairs supports art in the park.

They began with a hope that more kids could become college graduates.

Now the programs include Intergenerational Creativity and the Popular Community Band.

Art in the Park is a community-based artist-led arts organization.

We are located in Herman Park in the Arroyo Seco.

We've been serving this community since 1997 through workshops and classes and art, music,

dance.

We also do readings and screenings.

We really strive to be kind of like a space away from your home that you feel comfortable

in.

We've been working in partnership with the Department of Cultural Affairs since 1997.

This partnership allows us to connect to community, amplify our programs, and be supported by

the cultural fabric of Los Angeles.

Art in the Park is located in a building that was built in 1939 as a clubhouse for lawn

bowlers.

Bertha Souza pioneered Art in the Park to be a space where youth could envision themselves

going to college.

There was a really, really low graduation rate in this area, and her main focus was

she wanted kids to be able to envision a future in which they went to college.

We have consistent programming throughout the week and on the weekends.

We have a very robust Latin jazz program and community band.

Both those programs are multi-generational and open to all ages and abilities.

We have Creativity Club, an elder guitar class,

which is for our elders in the neighborhood.

All of these programs are free and open to the community.

Now the event that I get the most joy from putting on

is the weekly community band of community arts,

which is music happening in tandem with art,

where everybody can come out and create art or make music.

And it's consistent so you can see your neighbors and community once a week.

Because of how long we have been serving this community, we're able to see kids that have

grown up within the programming bring their children to the programming.

We want to be a space that people feel comfortable with, that they keep coming back to, that

they bring their kids back to.

Art in the Park invites everybody to come down and participate in a class or a workshop or a film screening.

For more information, you can go to artintheparkla.org.

In this week's things to do, get holidaying by the sea, catch the library's creators and residents showcase,

and celebrate 100 years of Granada Hills at their holiday parade.

All this up next on Things To Do.

There are holiday events and then there is Holidays by the Sea at LA's Waterfront.

Come celebrate with the Port of Los Angeles and Councilmember Tim McOsker on Saturday, December 6th.

Enjoy performances from the San Pedro City Ballet, Victorian carolers, and a holiday puppet show.

Celebrate the season with snow, hot chocolate, churros,

and photos with Santa.

Join the community for all the action,

including the tree lighting, and finish the evening

with the LA Harbor Holiday Boat Parade.

Holidays by the Sea takes place on Saturday, December 6,

beginning at 4 p.m.

For more details, visit lawaterfront.org.

On Sunday, December 7, join the LA Public Library

for the Creators in Residence Showcase,

when both creators will discuss their work.

Creator Ashley Walker's project called Threads of Los Angeles

reimagines LA history through the lens of fashion

and features six newly designed costumes on display.

Creator Tin Nguyen explored the library's menu collection

and created new displays tracing the history of neighborhoods

through their menus.

Head to the Central Library for the Creators in Residence Showcase

on Sunday, December 7th at 2 p.m.

For more information, visit lapl.org slash events.

Celebrate with Granada Hills as they mark their 100th anniversary.

The occasion means this year's holiday parade has a roaring 20s theme.

Over 100 entries are taking part and taking the theme to heart.

Join the Department of Cultural Affairs, Councilmember John Lee, and the community

on December 7th for the 42nd Annual Holiday Parade.

The 2025 official Grand Marshal is NFL Hall of Famer,

Denver quarterback John Elway,

who went to the local high school, graduating in 1979.

Head to Chatsworth Street for the Granada Hills Holiday Parade

on Sunday, December 7th, beginning at 1.30 p.m.

For more information, visit GranadaHillsHolidayParade.org.

And that's a look at some things to do.

And that's all for this week.

I'm Natalia Bilbao, and from all of us here at LA This Week,

thank you so much for joining us.

Remember that you can watch us online anytime at lacityview.org,

and we're also on Instagram, Facebook, X, and YouTube.

See you next time for more LA This Week.

Thank you.

There are things in every city that speaks to the heart and soul of every community.

In San Francisco, it is the Golden Gate Bridge.

In Chicago, it's the beam.

In New York, it is the Statue of Liberty.

In South Los Angeles, it's the Watts Towers.

Hi, my name is Rosie Lee Hutz. I'm director of the Watts Towers Arts Center campus.

Come visit the Watts Towers Arts Center campus where you'll see exhibitions, the Watts Towers

of Simon Ordea, our garden studio with turtles and tortoises, and California natives. This

massive man-made sculpture is made of steel, covered with mortar, and embellished with

mosaic tiles, glass, clay, shells, and rocks. The Watts Towers are truly unique and receive cultural

heritage monument status from the City of Los Angeles in 1963. Like the community, the Watts

Towers have a strong foundation and recycles different types of materials to create something

breathtakingly beautiful. The Watts Towers Art Center is a guardian of the Watts Towers.

It provides programs designed for cultural enrichment and museum and art education to the Los Angeles community and the world at large.

With the recent adaption of the South Los Angeles and Southeast Los Angeles community plans,

the Watts Towers Art Center community will continue to shine and serve as the pulse of the community.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I love you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Amen.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will

15 members present in accord, Mr. President.

All right. First order of business.

Approval of the minutes of November 14, 2025.

Council Member Price moves.

Council Member Bluenfield seconds. What's next?

Commendatory resolutions for approval.

Council Member Lee moves.

Council Member Jurado seconds. What's next?

Mr. President, today's Tuesday. It's time for the flag salute.

All right. We'll ask everyone in the chambers to rise, face the flag,

and follow along with Council Member Hutt.

Put your right hand over your heart.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America

and to the republic for which it stands one nation under God,

indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

All right, Madam Clerk, let's run through our agenda.

Yes, sir.

Mr. President, there is a request to continue item 11 to January 20, 2026, sir.

Without objection.

Items 1 through 11 are items notice for public hearing.

Items 12 through 24 are items which public hearings have been held.

items 25 through 47 are items which public hearings have not been held 10

votes are required for consideration all right without objection those items are

now before us members are there any specials mr. McHosker thank you very

much members it's good to see everybody I like what you did with the places

romantic lighting is really lovely mr. president I'd like to hold item 15 for

comments and an amending motion which is being circulated and on item 17 I would

like to continue the item for one week to Tuesday December 9th please all right

without objection mr. Lee president I'd like to ask if we can refer item 35 back

to committee to have a more robust conversation about that in committee

setting okay to housing and homelessness committee correct absolutely all right

without objection that'll be the order councilmember Hurtado good morning

Council President I'm introducing an amendment for item 22 that should be circulating shortly and I'd like to call the vote on that amendment

Special for comments. I would also like to call items 29 and 43 for a separate vote. All right

Councilmember Hutt

Thank You, mr. President

I'd like to call item 21 special for a technical amendment

The clerk and the city attorney should have a copy and can they read the technical into the record please?

yes so we do have a copy of it it will be posted on the bulletin board I think

shortly but there's no need to read them through the record at this time thank

you thank you so much councilmember hut any other specials on this side mr.

councilmember Hernandez you council president I would like to continue item

26 for one month please one month yes all right madam clerk one month would be

January a councilmember one month would be January 13 2026 all right mr.

Blumenfield thank you a couple things item 16 I'd like to continue until

tomorrow still working out some language on that item 19 technically refer it

back to committee although it actually was never it never was a technical error

to send it here it was it was continued in committee but the action would be to

refer that back to plum per the action of the committee and then item 22 I also

have an amendment which has been circulating okay all right on this side

councilmember Soto Martinez much council president like to call item number 24

for an amendment it should be related to okay for all right councilmember price

Thank you, Mr. President. I am recusing myself from item 47 because my wife's employer has worked with one of the organizations listed on that project.

All right. Thank you, Mr. Price. Council Member Rodriguez?

Yes, I'd like items 22 and 23 for an amendment that will be circulating.

Okay, that's circulating. All right. Council Member Yaroslavsky?

Thank you, Council President. I'd like to move item 23, the budget and finance report for this item.

And then on 35, I'm going to recuse myself. I own one rental property.

On 38, call special for a substitute motion, which is being introduced right now.

So if we could hold that on the desk, that'd be great. Thank you.

Excellent. Council Member Rahman.

I'm sorry, Mr. President. Council Member Yaroslavsky, is there a second to your request to

move mr. Blumenfield and that would be for item 23 and 38 is a substitute

motion correct correct thank you sorry and before we begin mr. Herman welcome

to our meeting this is your first and only formal warning there is no need to

yell out as soon as you enter the room so if you disrupt this meeting again

you'll be subject to removal pursuant to rule 7 rule 12 I'm sorry

Council Member Rahman. If we could hold item 45 until after public comment. Sure. To hold 45 on the desk? Yeah. I just have a question that I wanted to get answered about it. Okay. Got it. Before we take a vote. Thank you. Council Member Park. Morning, Council President. On item 23, I'd like to do that special to move the report from the ad hoc committee on LA recovery. And I'd also like to ask for the item to be considered after public comment. After public comment. Okay.

Is there a second to Ms. Park's motion?

Mr. Nazarian and McCoster.

Thank you.

All right.

Mr. Nazarian.

Good morning, Council President and colleagues.

I don't think the lighting system here works.

I had pressed it earlier on.

Item one for just comments.

Thank you.

Item one will be held on the desk for comments.

All right.

Any other specials members?

Council member Padilla? No? No specials? All right. All right. Madam Clerk, are there any items before us?

Yes, Mr. President.

Council may now vote on items 12 through 14,

item 18, and item 20.

2-0.

12-14, 18, and 20.

All right.

Those items are now before us.

Let's open the roll, close the roll, tabulate the vote.

15 ayes.

All right.

What's next?

Mr. President, public comment is next, sir.

All right.

We'll ask the city attorney to prepare us for public comment for this morning's meeting.

Just so folks know, according to this monitor, there are 100 speakers on the queue for this morning's meeting.

So we'll ask people to get to the podium as quickly as you can and begin speaking once you've answered the questions from the city attorney.

We want to get to as many speakers as we can.

I will just tell you we're not going to get to all 100.

So if folks can be efficient, we greatly appreciate hearing from as many people as possible.

To people providing public comment, when it's your turn to speak, please state which of the agenda items you'd like to speak to.

You will have one minute per item, up to three minutes total for the items open for public comment.

We will tell you when your time is up.

When speaking on the agenda items, you must be on topic.

Our goal is to get through as many speakers as we can if you are not on topic

Or if we cannot tell whether you are on topic

You will get one brief warning from me or the council president at that point

You need to get immediately and clearly on topic if you do not do so

If you again stray off topic you will forfeit the rest of your speaking time and we will move on to the next speakers

The items open for public comment on the agenda are items 1 through 10

items 25 through 34 and items 36 through 47

So again, let me repeat the items that are open for public comment on the agenda are items 1 through 10

items 25 through 34 and items 36 through 47

Item number 11 has been continued and item number 35 has been referred back to committee

So they are not open for public comment today

day. Members of the public may also speak for up to one minute for general public comment.

During general public comment, members of the public may speak to any of the items or anything

else in the city's subject matter jurisdiction. I have a couple more announcements if I could

have the interpreters make the first one aloud to the room, please. If you require a Spanish

language interpreter, please make sure to pause every few sentences so the interpreters

can interpret.

Don't worry, we will pause your time while the interpreters are interpreting so you will get the same amount of time as everyone else. Thank you.

Additionally, if you've made an accommodation request or would like to and need the use of the wireless handheld microphone,

please let the sergeants know by raising your hand once you hear the name that you signed up under, call it aloud.

So again, if you require the use of the wireless microphone due to an accommodation request under the ADA,

please raise your hand when it is your turn to speak,

and we will do our best to get you the wireless mic in a timely manner.

One final announcement, and to reiterate what the Council President has said,

we have a lot of people here today,

and so in order to help us run an efficient public comment period

and to hear from as many people as possible,

we would ask that you please wait until you hear the name that you signed up under

called aloud before lining up.

The order in which the names are called aloud is at random.

that is to say it is randomly generated once you hear the name that you signed up under called

aloud you can line up in any order on your left hand side of the council chambers and if you could

let us know which items you'd like to speak to and whether you'd like general public comment

at the beginning that would be helpful thank you members of the public and members of this council

just a quick note on the lights these lights are new energy efficient environmentally friendly

lights so they're being tested so your opinion is valued with regard to the new

lighting I will begin by calling the following names audit la Joel

Freda Frederico Pat Ashby Mark Smith and Kristin Peterson and as we wait for

those speakers to come up to the podium one final instruction for members of the

public after you're finished providing your public comment you can actually

just do a loop so you'll enter on your left-hand side and when you're finished

you'll exit on your right-hand side good morning which items would you like to

speak to good morning my name is Joel Frederico I am submitting a general

comment on item 23 the Palisades permit fees so you have one minute go ahead

minute thank you for taking my time I'm a board member for the lower woodies and

and I represent a community of 36.

In our community, we have many members, more than 36 people, it's 36 units,

and we have many members that aren't insured, are underinsured.

We have members who are on fixed income.

I'm 40, and I am at the very young end of the spectrum, and we are trying to rebuild.

It's tight. It's tough.

Every little bit helps.

permit fees are on the scale of grading and backfilling for us on the scale of

our plants on the scale of our driveways and our walkways and I'm here to ask for

your support any little bit helps as we're trying to rebuild and I thank you

all for your time and your support

next speaker

Good morning. Which items would you like to speak to?

Yes, I'd like to speak to item 23.

Okay, so item number 23 is not open for public comment, but you can speak to it during general.

So you have one minute. Go ahead.

General, yes. My condominium and those of five of my neighbors were destroyed by fire.

One recently died. His frail condition was worsened by the loss.

condominium and town homeowners represent one of the least affluent and most

vulnerable segments of our community but have been excluded from the fee waiver

proposal a high percentage of us are retired on fixed incomes and under

insured we all vote we pay taxes and are entitled to the same recovery resources

we've lost everything we've owned heirlooms passed down through

generations and items too expensive now to replace we suffer daily not knowing

how long we will be displaced while our HOAs struggle

to navigate a complex rebuilding process,

we're asking you to please re-include us

in the proposed waiver and pass this important initiative.

Thank you very much.

Before the next speaker begins,

I would like to call up Leigh-Anne, Crystal Pellins,

Patricia Borgeson, Rosie-Anne Lande, and Vienna Nowo.

Can we get the wireless microphone turned on, please?

Testing, testing.

You hear me now?

We can hear you.

Good morning.

Good morning.

Assume all items and general public comment?

Yes, sir.

Go ahead.

You have three minutes for the items and one for general.

Okay.

I'm going to start off with number one, our fire department, right?

Like, I feel we don't treat our fire department well enough.

We don't fund them well enough.

And when, like, fires happen and stuff, and then they're also thrown under the bus when it's, like, the city that, you know, really makes all the decisions or their mayor and stuff.

And then they get – so I'm here to stand up for the fire department, tell you to please make sure they're fully funded.

It's not fair that they have to sell merch and baked goodies to make ends meet.

You should be able to fund them.

Instead of funding, I see funding a lot of other stuff that could be, you could find funding in other ways, right?

And like, say like the ice rink, right?

Why not have Disney or, you know, the Olympics or something fund the ice rink, okay?

And yeah, and as far as the lights for the Dodger Stadium, yeah, I think that's a great idea.

but you know why don't I have the Dodgers pay for it I think they can afford it we can't right we

can't even pay for our fire department and you know I know smoke and scan cannot call in and

you know and voice you know my the whole entire smoke and scan family can't call in and voice

their opinion yet but it's coming but I think you know they would agree to this that you know

other entities could come and help pay they have money the Dodgers have money the Olympics has

money. They all have money. So why are you, you know, why are you robbing the fire department

to pay for an ice rink? That's just my question. And, um, and as far as the lighting ones that,

yeah, we need lighting. I don't know why there's all these, uh, protests to lighting. We need

lighting. I keep, I, I, I've had a couple of accidents cause I can't see at night, you know,

so please continue with the, uh, the lighting. Now I forget cause it's been so long when it

gets to the one minute, is that my public comment, Mr. City attorney, who's not listening?

You always listen.

You're always calling me off topic.

Okay, I'm going to talk off topic.

I'm going to talk on number 35.

Okay, so number 35.

So item 35 has been referred back to committee.

Okay, so is this my public comment time?

You're still on.

I get so lost.

It's so confusing.

Go ahead, continue.

I want my public comment minute.

Am I still on my minutes?

Are you moving to general public comment now?

No, no.

Then please finish your comments on the items.

Oh, okay. I didn't know because sometimes you do it all together. Sometimes you don't. You guys are so confusing. I wish you could get more systematic like that. I'm still saying no to anything that, you know, I know 35, you say we can't talk about, but anything with Mr. Lee until I get my apology, it has to be a no. I'm sorry. Right, Mr. Lee? And well, anyway, but when it comes to the lighting, I don't understand why there's protests. We need lighting. Can you provide lighting? Okay. Like instead of an ice rink, I'd rather have lighting instead of a, you know, Dodger Stadium.

lights going up on City Hall, I'd rather have a fire department that's fully funded.

Things like that. The little things in life. A fire department that's funded

and lights. Those things would be very helpful.

Okay, I'll just switch to public comment. General public comment.

You have one minute. I want to ask questions about the parade that happened the other day.

I want to know why Scientology

with their balloon that falls every year.

I mean, even the balloon is like, you know, they don't stand up.

Why they had like 20 cops surrounding them as if they're the president,

as if there's like high level personnel, you know, whatever.

I want to know why you're spending money and resources like that.

How expensive is it to have 20 overtime cops for how many hours of this parade

that, you know, you're wasting on it?

Like, I want to know, like, do they say they're under threat?

Because I want you to know that Scientology, there's not been one incidence of any protester assaulting any Scientologist here in LA.

But we have at least about 12 documented cases where the reverse is true, where protesters have been attacked by Scientologists.

So if you're going to have all this police protection, it should be for anyone who speaks up against Scientology.

They're also harassing everybody online.

Speaker, your time has expired.

Next speaker.

Good morning.

My name is Pat Ashby, and I've lived in the Palisades for 60 years.

And I don't need to tell you any more than what I had emailed all of you that we need your help.

We need the maximum help, okay?

We do not have the ability financially to build back to where it was.

but given the limited amount of time and I hope that you do read what I had sent

to you so that's got my numbers and breakdown and this and that but again

with the short time we have I just want to say thank you to Tracy for going

above and beyond and you know and and with that said by getting the help in

waiving those permit fees and the plan check fees it not only helps us but it

helps the city and the thing is is that Pacific policies is not just some

exclusive exclusive on claim it is your city too in your town and I would hope

that you would take pride in helping us like Tracy does thank you next speaker

good morning which items would you like to speak to hi a general comment and 15

please so we're still polinas you have one minute for general 15 that is not

open for public comment but you can speak to it during general so you have

one minute for general public comment go ahead thank you

one minute for folks to be able to respond to that would you like to

request it to be reopened public comment we can do that yes okay apologies item

15 is also open for public comment so you have one minute for the item and one

minute for general public comment go ahead okay thank you hi my name is

Crystal Polinas I live in Harbor City with my mom I've lived in the house for

47 years and they want to build an RV park on the same street we live on

council members Harbor City and Wilmington are both below the medium

income level, our neighborhood is a mix of 45% condos and 55 single-family homes, a diverse

working-class community that deserves the same safety and dignity as any other part of Los Angeles.

Yet both RV parks built here were approved without any of the required title 25 facilities,

no restrooms, no showers, no laundry, and no ADA access. These are mandatory buildings for

dependent RV spaces but our communities did not receive them so I need to ask a

fair question would this have been approved in a higher income neighborhood

would an RV park in West LA or studio city ever be allowed to open with zero

restrooms or showers for its residents our community deserves equity and

inclusion in how the city enforces health and safety laws we ask you to

remand this project and require the same standards here that we would be enforced

anyone else thank you my name is Patricia Borgeson and I'm here on general comment

and regarding item 23 first of all we thank our beautiful and lovely Tracy

Park for her support in our community in Pacific Palisades we support her and the

ad hoc committee in their effort to pass item 23. I'm 80 years old and my

husband is 84 years old and we lived in our home for 48 years we lost everything

like many of us. I support that you give us these this waiver of the permit fees

not only for single-family homes but for condominiums and apartment owners also.

Many fire survivors are underinsured.

We, at our age, would love to rebuild, but having been underinsured and hopefully to pass these fees would be a great support for us and enable us to rebuild.

Please consider this.

good morning which would you like to say

rithan landay public comment but reference to the fees and the

the fee waiver for the palisades one minute go ahead

please amend the fee waiver ordinance to include the affordable housing of

pacific palisades condos townhomes mobile homes and

small apartment buildings and please pass it. Rebuilding these homes is

essential for preserving the diversity of our community. In my building alone,

two-thirds of my neighbors are senior citizens living on fixed incomes. Others

work in essential fields such as education, health care, and caregiving

like me. More than half of my neighbors are widowed or single women. We're not

We're not wealthy tech millionaires and movie stars.

We're just like many of your constituents.

Not only are we paying mortgages and property taxes

for homes that no longer exist,

but also HOA fees and now rent.

The fire didn't just destroy our homes

and our possessions, but everything.

There is clear precedent with Northridge earthquake.

Eliminate these taxes on our recovery and let us come home.

before the next speaker begins I would like to call up Michael Ackerman Katie

Herman John ale sue Cole and Kim better good morning speaker which items would

you like to speak to um agenda number 23 please I'm sorry sorry number 23 please

okay so you have one minute go ahead thank you so much so until January 7th my

husband myself and my two boys lived in Palisades we had just renovated our

house we spent all our savings renovating our home and then a month

later it burns down we want to rebuild we want to move back home but between

the engineering fees and the architects fees and permits just add another layer

to that we really want to move home we want all all people to be able to move

home so I agree with the condos the HOA is over 110% everyone should be able to

move back home again and permit waiver really really would help with that

process thank you so much for your time and thank you so much to yes to Tracy

Park she's amazing and we really love her thank you my name is Leanne Sanderson

and I live on the El Medio bluffs and our neighborhood was decimated we have

so many seniors so many homes from the early 1960s where people have lived

there for decades and we are asking for your help I would like all of you to

think of CD11 if it were your district and you lost 6,637 homes in your

district what would you want from each other can you walk in Tracy Park shoes

she is pounding the payment she is fighting for us she is there every day

it is unimaginable how hard she is fighting for us and it is ethically

correct for you to give us a start out of the starting gates. I have so many seniors in our

neighborhood who just can't get out of the starting gate, and this is what is going to launch them

and get them started. And long term, you will have tax revenue from Pacific Palisades for decades

and generations to come. Okay, and before the next speaker begins, for members of the public,

I would just ask that if you when you get to the podium if you could let us know which items you'd like to speak to

And whether or not you would like general public comment

I would appreciate it if not then it will default to the one minute for general public comment. Good morning

Which items general comment? Okay, so you have one minute go ahead

So let's look at your favorite law in the whole world, which is council rule number seven

It says that public comment should take place at the beginning of meetings yet each Friday

the public is forced to wait through two hours of presentations and proclamations before speaking.

This happens because neither you nor the attorneys actually care about the law.

Maybe the attorney said that's not actually what the rule means.

Actually, it is.

Maybe someone told you it is only a minor issue.

That's not for you to determine, and it's not for the attorney to determine.

It's for juries to determine.

But the people who are supposed to put questions like this in front of juries aren't doing their jobs.

elected officials like you are supposed to be the ones who provide oversight so

please ask the governor to have investigators from the National Guard

look into public misconduct here and elsewhere

good morning which items hi I'm speaking to item 23 let's see if one minute go

Go ahead.

Okay, my name is Sue Cole.

I am the president of the Pacific Palisades Community Council.

I am not speaking for them, I'm letting you know that,

only so you understand that I hear

from hundreds, thousands of residents.

I'm speaking for myself personally today.

I'm a senior, my house burned down

as did pretty much everyone I know, lost everything,

and have been working my entire life,

and have now been forced to take retirement savings

to help pay the bill back a house.

I have no desire for a new house.

I love my old house.

Funky as it was, I would take it any day of the week.

So my request to all of you is to please,

please put yourself in our shoes

and try and think what it would feel like

to have lost everything you've ever owned in your whole life,

be underinsured or uninsured, and have to build back.

Thank you.

Next speaker.

Good morning, you have three minutes for the items

and one minute for general public comment.

Go ahead.

Yo, yo, yo, everybody, back.

Yeah, fucking public safety, motherfuckers.

The budget and finance for LA Fire Department

that burned your motherfucking houses down in Palinza.

Too fucking bad.

Which item are you speaking to?

Motherfucker, you know what item I'm on, double G.

Actually don't.

Which item?

25-1041 for the record, motherfucker.

You said 25?

Bitch, 25-1041, motherfucker.

You're not here?

Smoking skin?

Okay, I'm going to ask you politely one more time.

Which item are you, which number are you speaking to?

I'm going to move you to general public comment.

Item notice for public hearing number one, parentheses, 25-1041,

public safety budget and finance committees report,

Los Angeles fire criminals, physical fucking year 24-25.

Am I on the right subject, motherfucker?

That's fine. Just say item number one next time. Go ahead.

All right. Fuck item number one, motherfucker.

I'm the sole vanguard to save your burning bitches' yards and burning bitches' hillsides

because I'm a fireman.

But too bad.

You should have been here complaining and complaining and whining about this shit all

along, right, Smoke and Scan?

But what were you motherfuckers when they're not giving permits to rebuild due to the fire?

Why didn't you fill up the reservoir with water, motherfucker?

So this is not on topic for item number one.

You've also exhausted your one minute on item one.

How about number 38, sir?

Can I go to 38?

Hey, fool.

I'm talking here.

38?

You can speak to 38.

38.

Well, how about this one?

Bloom Bloomfield 34.

Item 34, CD 13.

Goddamn Bloomfield,

receipt of skate facility.

Fuck skating.

Let's rebuild Palisades.

How about 38, like I said before,

regarding the goddamn motherfucking Soto Martinez

and the fucking service for Council District 5, motherfuckers?

What about it?

Well, we're going to transfer appropriate fucking funds

to the fucking street furniture fund

when we can't even get fucking street services under 311, motherfucker.

and my permit to build fucking housing

with the authority of Bureau of Street Services.

This has nothing to do with item 38.

Item 38 is funding for tree trimming and maintenance services.

Yeah, yeah, I'm getting there.

I'm on section two of that paragraph, motherfucker.

Let me finish.

Do you mind?

Do you mind?

I'm on second paragraph.

It says authorize any new instructions, dickhead attorney,

in order to evacuate the intent of the motion.

That's not appropriate.

Can we hold this time in a minute?

I'm letting you know as a courtesy, you had four minutes total.

Normally we separate it out into general and into the public comment on the items.

So you're about to go into your general public comment starting now.

Go ahead.

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury,

today in the federal court as Judge David O'Carter,

representing you, the public,

you dumb fucks,

taxpayers, and homeowners at the time.

Mr. Herman, this is your opportunity to address the body,

not members of the public.

Yes, but it is your opportunity to address the body,

not members of the public.

So this is your last warning.

Address the body, or you will forfeit

the rest of your speaking time.

From discussing what Judge David O'Carter

told me this morning at 9 o'clock

in that courthouse about

you criminals, your corruption

with housing, motherfucker.

So stop fucking with my time, stop fucking with my mind, and stop fucking with my interest in the public.

We the people tell you what to do.

We the people tell you how to do your job.

We the people tell you, fuck you.

42 SC 1983 politely, on the color of all, 18, 242, and 245.

For the record, fuck you, Groot.

And your time has expired.

for members of the public we appreciate your patience and just to clarify for

anybody who's confused here again the public comment period is your

opportunity to address the 15 members around this horseshoe it is not an

opportunity to grandstand and address all the members in the public we

apologize for what was said but we appreciate your continued patience good

morning which items would you like to speak to item 23 and general comment

after okay so you have one minute for general public comment go ahead council I'm John Alley

the city should not exploit nor profit from our loss in the Palisades revenue from permit fees

should never have been considered in the first place because of fires destruction erasure of

family histories banishments were due to neglect and incompetence of the city DWP gas company and

mayor permit fees to rebuild what we had and lost in the Palisades were never

included in any year's budget as expected revenue source permanent waiver

is key to my family and thousands more property taxes from the Palisades of

subsidized services throughout LA now there's delay in rebuilding there's a

gap for any middle-income families between their insurance proceeds if any

and actual cost to rebuild.

Many middle-income households don't have an extra $60,000

to $100,000 on hand for permit fees.

Show compassion.

Be fair.

Next speaker.

Before the next speaker begins, I would like to call up Lisa Solomon,

Kathy Locker, Susan Collins, Rosie Inlande, and Louise Curlin.

this was on item 23 so item 23 is not open for public comment as public comment was heard at

committee so you had one minute for general public comment that being said if anybody would like to

provide additional public comment or if we cannot get to you today you can always do so in writing

at lacouncilcomment.com.

Again, that's lacouncilcomment.com.

You should be able to find that

either via a quick Google search

or it's at the top of every agenda as well.

Good morning.

Which items would you like to speak to?

General comment regarding 23.

Okay, so you have one minute

for general public comment.

Go ahead.

Thank you.

My name is Kim Feder

and I'm the president

of the Casa Lamari Homeowners Association

and we represent 85 million

in tax revenue annually for the city.

I want to dispel the myth that everyone thinks anybody in Pacific Palisades has the riches to rebuild.

That is not the case.

We have numerous elderly.

We have numerous people on fixed incomes.

We have numerous people that were also canceled from their insurance, and we're lucky to get Fair Plant underinsured.

I want to support Tracy Park's proposal to waive fees for not only single-family

homes but also for apartments condominiums and mobile home parks I

also want to point out the fact to you that we did not buy a lot we did not buy

a lot where you normally pay all of these fees we were burned down by a

wildfire that was out of control and could not be stopped for our from our

firefighters good morning which items would you like to speak to good morning

general comment on my 23 please okay so you have one minute for general go ahead

thank you thank you everyone my name is Louise and I'm a nurse I have a very

young child and an older husband who is set to retire this year but he

unfortunately cannot because we lost everything in the Palisades fire we

owned a very small 1920s bungalow for 29 years, which has very small setbacks, three feet,

not considered safe in today's standards, and would not allow us to participate in zone zero,

having five feet of defensible space to participate in lower insurance rates. Speaking of which,

we're underinsured, and even with SBA loans, we and many others can only hope to rebuild back

smaller than we had before.

With the current eligibility and any amendments that are made,

please get rid of any height restrictions

because it stops or punishes the lower-income small bungalow owners

from increasing their setbacks.

We need to be able to go in and up to have more defensible space in the Palisades

and have a more resilient area for everybody

and a more resilient tax base from the community.

So it took the day off work today to beg you.

We understand the square foot.

Speaker, your time has expired.

Good morning.

Which items would you like to speak to?

I would like to speak to all available items in general public comment.

Okay.

So you have three minutes for the items and one minute for general public comment.

Just FYI for everybody who's here who has not yet spoken, the items that are open for

public comment on the agenda are items 1 through 10 item 15 items 25 through 34

and items 36 through 47 so you have three minutes for those items and then

one minute for general go ahead thank you so much I'm Susan Collins and first

I would like to thank Tracy Park for her advocacy on behalf of the people she

serves if we had a government that cared as much for sorry if we had a government

that cared for its people half as much as it cares for maximizing its profits

homes and lives would not have been lost last January the fact that we're here to

beg this council to waive permit and plan check fees on properties that your

negligence burnt to the ground is almost incomprehensible but that is what

happens in Los Angeles so here we are our CAO says waiving these fees will

cause a deficit in the city's general fund by more than 278 million dollars

but how could waiving these fees created by this disaster cause a shortage in the

general fund unless members of this council knew there would be this level

of demand ahead of time and counted on acquiring those fees profiting from

devastation is nothing new for politics in Los Angeles but I still stand before

you today and I respectfully request that just for today so just for today

we don't be disgusting and for today do the right thing wave the planning and

I believe that was with regard to item 23 so that's your general public comment

because I'm 23 is not currently open for public comment is there any of the

other items that you'd like to speak to or that just 23 a general public comment

so that was your general public comment because you were speaking to item 23

which is not open so that part of that time was I advocate I thank Tracy Park

for her advocacy I talked about I've talked about other thing items so I'd

like to reclaim you know at least my one minute for general public comment so

again we have to treat everybody equally here so the items that you just spoke to

was directly related I'm 23 so if there's another item that you'd like to

speak to you can do so at this time otherwise we're gonna have to move on to

the next speaker all right thank you before the next speaker begins before

the next speaker begins I would like to call up Dana smoking scan mark Eldridge

Sophia and Jesus Rojas good morning my name is Kathy Locker I morning in which

items would you like to speak to I would like to speak to the item concerning my

house burning down okay so I'm gonna add so you have one minute for general public

comment and if I could have everybody just quiet down a little bit so I can

hear the speakers I would appreciate it thank you so one minute for general can

we restart our time please okay go ahead okay I'm my name is Kathy Locker I am 82

years old I've lived in the Palisades since 1976 I raised my family in the

Palisades my children went through all the Palisades schools Marquez Revere

Pali High we are a Palisades family we are before the fire we were four

generations living in the Palisades my my my home my daughter's home my

grandson's home they were all burned and we lost four homes and one apartment in

the Palisades and I would like to request that you consider helping us to

return to our home my family wants to go home and I would I would hope that you

would help us do that by waiving the permit fees thank you very much

good morning which items would you like to speak to good morning general comment

please. Okay, so you have one minute. Go ahead. Yep. My name is Lisa Solomon. I'm here to provide

a general comment related to Pacific Palisades, and I'm a third generation Palisadian and currently

live with my family and my 87-year-old mother who bought her home there 50 years ago.

Our home, like so many others, was a complete and total loss, everything, and I think I speak for

most of my neighbors, both in the Palisades and Altadena and anyone else who's lost their entire

home, when I say we all just want to come home. Now we all spend hours each week navigating insurance,

sorting temporary housing issues, and working on potential rebuilds, along with hundreds of our

neighbors at the very same time. The to-do list is endless, the financial impact is staggering,

and many of us were underinsured.

We pay taxes.

I'm going to be quiet because I just hear a lot of talking.

Thanks for your patience.

We pay taxes and a fee waiver for rebuilding would provide one incentive

and assist us as we work to decide when and how to come home to a town that we love

and want to support financially.

Help us rebuild this city.

thank you for consideration of 23 and any related amendments that might come

up and appreciation to Tracy Park and our amazing community and neighbors many

of whom are here today to support this thank you good morning I assume all

items in general public comment yes so you'll have three minutes for the items

and one minute for general public comment.

Again, those items are items 1 through 10,

item 15, item 25 through 34,

and items 36 through 47.

Please begin with the items.

Thank you very much, Council Member Smoking Scan.

My name is Dana.

So let's start with item number 41.

床外的天晴

就像是你多变的表情

下雨了雨陪我哭泣

看不清我也不想看清

离开你我安静的丑林

不人揭晓的剧情

我的泪流在心底 学会放弃

丹娜的声音 一滴滴清晰

丹娜呼吸像雨滴 深入我的爱里

真希望丹娜下不停

让丹娜继续 让丹娜透明

我爱上给我勇气的Dana love

Now let's move on to item number 42

Dana的余地一滴滴累积

Dana的使气想存储爱你的记忆

真希望Dana下不停

Dana的秘密能一直延续

我相信我将会看到Dana的美丽

我收够了等待你所谓的安排

说的未来到底多久才来

Now let's move on to item number 43.

Three.

Now let's move on to general public comment.

Before you go on to general public comment, just as a reminder, and I know we've offered this multiple times in the past, we cannot force you to request an interpreter.

But if you would like an interpreter and you let us know at least 48 hours in advance, we will do our best to accommodate that.

So again, you're welcome to sing, and you're welcome to sing in a different language, but if you'd like an interpreter, just let the clerk's office and let us know.

I'll call Sabra.

Thank you.

You have one minute for general public comment.

Go ahead.

Yes, general public comment.

Yes, I am providing a support for a community emotional support hotline.

The number is 424-285-4567.

Originally, I purchased this phone number for my goddess Dana,

but Dana said he does not communicate with anyone who has less than 24-inch.

So I'm using this phone number for community emotional support.

Anyone can send me a text messages.

and tomorrow night I'm going to be doing a YouTube live video phone call

and I'm going to be calling back, doing that online live or whatever.

The number is 424-285-4567.

I'm going to do the community emotional support voice phone call

once a week, twice a week.

So anyone sending me a message, I'm going to call you back tomorrow night

and do that every week, once a week.

So hopefully we can reelect Spindler to the city council.

everybody smoking scan you like Spindler City Council

before the next speaker begins I would like to call up Rosanna Rocker

Lori Kutzel, Bart Young, Andrea Setlin, Henry Wright

and Vivian Chen

good morning

buenos dias

mi nombre es Sofia Mendoza

soy miembro de ACE

y quiero hablar comentario a público en general

hi good morning my name is Sofia Mendoza

I'm an ace member and I would like to give general public comment.

Okay, so you have one minute. Go ahead.

Un minuto, adelante.

Por favor, voten en contra de la moción del concejal Lee para que no se permita que algunos propietarios aumenten el alquiler de uno por ciento adicional.

I would like to please ask you to vote against Councilmember Lee's motion to allow certain landlords to increase the rent an additional percent.

This council has already voted on the legislation regarding rent stabilization and utilities.

Although this doesn't provide the solution that the city needs to get out of this housing crisis,

we already have the studies that have already been completed.

You're making a decision at the knees of the corporate landlords and it's not right.

We need stronger regulations for LA tenants.

15, 5, 6, 8.

We're very disappointed by several council members,

such as the council members from districts 15, 5, 6, and 8.

Si hay algo que cambiar es el 90 de CPI al 60%.

And there was a change in the formula from 60% CPI to 90% CPI.

And don't touch ULA because this was a democratic vote that was taken to be able to protect

tenants. Thank you.

Hello council I'm going to speak on item number 15 and general comments okay so you have one minute for the item and one minute for general go ahead

My name is mark. I'm a 20-year resident of Green Meadows West

The approved plan set forth for Harbor City RV lot does not show a single restroom shower laundry room or service building

Even though the plan submitted by the developer themselves claim compliance with title 24 and title 25

under title 25 these facilities are mandatory in every RV park that contains dependent spaces and the

Harbor City plan contains no notation that all RVs must be self contains this means under

25 CCR all 46 RV spaces are presumed dependent which triggers mandatory service buildings a

Ministerial approval cannot stand when the plans omit state required buildings

The permit was issued on an incomplete plan said it must be remanded. How did such a

fundamental title 24 and title 25 requirement go unreviewed a

CUP must be mandatory and should be fully required for this project. No exceptions

The developer approved for 46 RV stalls

but built 48 and even rough in seven more utility hookups bringing the real

capacity to 455 RVs this is on a site of two and a half single resident houses

in our area this is unprecedented this takes and affects every single person in

this room every neighborhood including Pacific Palisades including Altadena it

is wrong and it is inappropriate aerial footage including ABC News on June 27th

shows these unauthorized expansions and extra utility islands. Yet here we are, the sixth time

I've had to take time off work, doing my job that I should be doing, to address this. A CUP must be

mandatory. I'm speaking to every council member, and I thank you for your support. I thank you,

Tim McCosker. You've done above and beyond. But now is the time for action. I think six times is

enough for me to take six days off my work. I specialize in international trade. It's the

busiest time of the year, I should be helping grow revenue in Los Angeles County. Thank you.

Good morning. Which items would you like to speak to? Yes, a public comment regarding 23.

Okay, so you have one minute for General. Go ahead. Thank you. Rosanna Rocker. Our mayor told us that we would be

supported. Our governor told us we would be supported. And our president told us we would be

supported. We need the support from our LA City Department of Building and Safety. They don't know

what's going on. Our properties have burnt down. Structures have burnt down. They're trying to find

old permits on properties that were built in the 20s and that don't exist. If our structures burnt

down, let us rebuild those burnt down structures. It's not that complicated. If Altadena were

in LA City, would this be waived much quicker?

We are a community that wants to rebuild.

Please, represent the city of angels.

We are a city of angels.

Show us that.

Help us rebuild and please waive these permit fees

and the bureaucracy that goes with it.

Thank you.

Good morning. Which items would you like to speak to?

Item number 23. And I have papers to be distributed to the council member. Is that all right?

Yes, that's perfectly fine. So the sergeants are going to come and get the papers from

you. You will have one minute.

One page for each council member. It may not be enough.

So you'll have one minute for general public comment where you can speak to the item. Go

ahead.

Okay. I lost my townhouse in the Palisades and I've lived in the city for 30 years.

So I'm here to include townhouses and condominiums in the rebuild permit fee waivers and plan check fees to be waived.

My house is just like a single family home.

We have one structure, one roof.

There is only one wall dividing my unit and my next door neighbors.

So we also pay property tax.

We're trying to rebuild.

We're the first ones who find an architect and who submit the permit.

So I'm here to plead that townhouses and condominium rebuilding fees are also being waived.

So we also pay property tax.

And it's been five months since we submit the plan, and we haven't heard anything yet.

Thank you

Good morning, which items would you like to speak to item 23?

Thanks, we have one minute for general. Go ahead. Yeah, this is a general comment. So I'm Andrea Zetlin

I've lived in the Palisades for 38 years. I've lived there with my husband and my son

We raised our son there

He enjoyed life in the Palisades, all the amenities that the Palisades had to offer,

and now we're hoping that our grandchildren can do that as well.

We're retired. We live on a fixed income, and housing costs are incredible.

We've started rebuilding, but it is unbelievable how much construction costs are.

We really hope that you can help us by passing this waiver.

And thank you, Tracy, for all that you've done for us.

My name is Bart Young.

This is 23, and I have one minute.

I want to start by publicly thanking Tracy Park for drafting the initiative to waive the permits and fees

and all the support that she has given us.

She gives us hope, but we don't have too much right now.

I need to alert the Council of two very serious matters.

Department of Water and Power is not complying with Mayor Bass's Executive Order Number 7,

which requires all city departments to suspend permits and fees for the victims.

They are charging mandatory flat, non-itemized amounts for reconnecting power and insisting

these are materials and service costs.

Under California law, a standardized, non-cost-based charge is a fee, regardless of what you call it.

And number two, I don't know what the dollar amount is.

we heard 86 million in permits and fees today i heard 200 million regardless of whatever it is

these are outrageous numbers okay we as residents are required to pay all the services to get this

job done this is nothing but exploitation thank you very much good morning which items i am going

going to speak on 23.

Okay, so you have one minute for general.

Go ahead.

My name is Henry Wright.

You burned my house down.

Pursuing your ideological agenda and you want me to pay?

Me?

You burned it down.

You have created Animal Farm.

As you sit through there at the trough and feed your ugly, distorted reality, real people,

Real families, real hardships grip every corner of my community.

LA bureaucracy has evolved to serve only itself with rules, reporting, paperwork, slogans that replace substance.

Who pays? Me! This isn't an abstract concept. It's my money.

You burned my house and everything I own down to complete ash without putting one drop of water on it.

It raged.

It raged till it was a foot high.

It was an inferno engulfing my history and my whole being.

Do the right thing.

Next speaker.

Good morning.

Which items?

Hi.

General public comment on 23.

Okay.

You have one minute.

Go ahead.

Thank you.

Thank you, council members, for taking up this very important issue today.

My name is Lori Kudsel, and I lost my home in the Palisades Fire.

I'm here today to support our amazing Councilwoman Tracy Park and the Ad Hoc Committee in their recommendation to waive all permit fees for every victim trying to rebuild.

So whether it's homes, mobile homes, townhomes, condos, respectfully, because I don't see the difference.

It's a home, it's where, so please.

Respectfully, I want to highlight that we lost absolutely everything.

So these are not, these are rebuilds.

They're not renovations.

We lost completely everything.

We don't have, so we, there's so much that needs to be paid for.

Weaving the permit fees would be an act of compassion and would provide immediate and tangible relief to families already stretched their limits.

It's a gesture that would demonstrate the city's commitment to its residents in their greatest time of need.

And also it just wasn't our fault. We don't want to be doing these rebuilds. We have to do these rebuilds.

So please, we're begging you, really, truly. Thank you.

Next speaker.

I would like to call up Thomas Doran, Hilda Solis, Haldis Topol, Sandy Tanaka, and Elba

good morning which items hi good morning public comment thanks we have one minute

Go ahead.

Hello, my name is Elva Cuevas Varelas

and I'm an eighth member.

And please vote against Councilman Lee's motion

to prevent some landlords from raising rents

by an additional 1%.

This council already voted to update the Housing

and Utilities Act, LARSO.

Although it wasn't the solution our city needed

to get out of this housing crisis,

they are not reviewing the data and studies.

They are making a political decision,

bowing and kissing ass to corporate landlords,

and they continue to fail.

Please, they oppose the strong rental assistance

that Los Angeles tenants needed.

We are disappointed in several council members,

including District 15, five, six, and eight.

If anything needs to be changed,

it is the reduction of the CPIO from 90% to 60%.

Thank you.

good morning which items would you like to speak to speaking on 23 okay so you have one minute for

general go ahead morning my name is tom doran my children are fifth generation palisadians my wife's

parents lived right across the street from us they their parents and my wife's great grandparents

all raised families here in the palisades for generations this has been our home my children

plan to grow old here in the palisades after the fire we are struggling to rebuild while construction

costs have skyrocketed many of us at our are at a breaking point waiving the fees associated with

item 23 on today's agenda would do far more than just help devastated families like mine get back

on our feet it would allow us to rebuild faster restore the tax base sooner and protect the future

revenue the city of los angeles will need in the years ahead please support fee waivers in item 23

and in tracy park's ad hoc committee it is the right thing for the residents who have lost

everything and is a smart thing for the long-term fiscal health of los angeles thank you for your

time good morning which items good morning i'd like to speak to item 15. okay and 15 in general

or just 15 15 in general okay and if you could pull the microphone a little bit more close that

would be great yes you have one minute for the item and one minute for general go ahead

thank you very much good morning everyone my name is sandy tanaka i'm a 37 year homeowner and resident

in green meadows west harbor city i would like to bring your attention to the

the performance standard number three regarding a requirement for an eight-foot perimeter fence

around an RV park.

The developer instead installed a fence that measures only seven feet,

which is a full foot short of the mandatory height.

But there's more.

The fence was placed on a slope, making it visibly crooked

and causing the entire front line of construction to shift forward.

As a result, the fence does not meet the 20 and a half foot required front setback under performance standard number four.

At gate two, the setback is only 17.3 feet and nowhere along the frontage does it reach the required distance.

General.

if the developer cannot meet the most basic ministerial standards of an eight-foot fence

and twenty and a half foot setback then this project does not qualify for ministerial approval

at all I'd like to see and my neighbors would like to see a conditional use permit council

must remand this project the setback is wrong the fence is wrong and the standards were not met

Thank you.

Good morning.

Which items?

Good morning.

My name is Haldus Toppel.

I'm speaking on item number 23.

So you have one minute for General.

Go ahead.

Thank you.

I will have two points to make.

One is for myself.

I'm 83 years old.

I've worked for the City of LA for 20 years and I'm on city retirement.

With that, I'm trying to rebuild my house, and it is stressful, and I need all the help you can get us.

Point number two is being familiar with the city's budget process.

I can assure you, all of you, council members, that you will not suffer from the general budget shortage.

These fees have never been planned.

As has already been noted, they've never been budgeted.

it will be spread over at least five years because we're not all building the same year either in 25 or 26 or 27.

I urge you and I beg you to support your colleague who sponsored this motion in her effort to help us,

our beloved Tracy Park. Thank you.

Good morning.

Good morning, sir.

Which items would you like to speak to?

23, the fires and palaces, and public and general.

Okay.

So you have one minute for general public comment.

Go ahead.

Okay.

I would like to—good morning, everyone, public and committee.

I haven't been here for a while, but real quick, I worked in the law office for 30 years.

For those people that their houses burn, I would recommend if you own a loan of 15, 30 years,

you open a claim under title home insurance.

You demand and you open a claim,

they would refer you to big corporate attorneys.

If in this corporate attorney,

there's a young attorney that you feel like

you're not working with it,

you have a right to call back title home insurance

and get referred to another corporate attorney.

You're gonna go under omission.

Remember, you will not pay a dime.

So the city will probably be receiving

like 100 attorneys lawsuits.

Trust me on this one. You need to open a claim under home title home insurance under omission, please.

And I understand what you're going through, and I understand perfectly. Thank you.

I would like to call up Nicole Paulson-Cahane, Patricia Mendoza, Rich Wilkin, Kathy Locker, and Luis Medell.

Can I get my other two minutes?

So, Speaker, you were speaking to item 23 for which public comment was already held

at committee.

So you had to speak to it during general public comment.

So we have to treat everybody fairly and give them the same amount of time for the items

requested.

So you had one minute for general.

Right now.

So that is the end of your time.

If you'd like to provide additional comments, you can do so in writing at LACancelComment.com.

But for now, we need to move on to the next speaker.

Okay.

good morning which items item number 15 and general please okay so you have one

minute for the item and one minute for general public comment go ahead great

thank you good morning everybody thank you for being here and councilmember my

name is Nicole Paulson Kahane and I'm a resident of Green Meadows West I urge

you to veto and remand the City Planning Commission's action regarding the

proposed RV park development because RV parks RVs are not housing cannot be

treated as housing under California law and the city's current regulatory

framework fails to comply with state health and safety code regulations first

under California health and safety code 18,000 865 18 through 18,007 1.10 RV

parks are classified as special occupancy parks not residential housing

these sections explicitly distinguished recreational vehicles from permanent

dwellings and prohibit local jurisdictions from treating RV spaces as

long-term housing units furthermore the LAMC reflects the same distinction

they're not permanent fixed structures they don't meet the definition of

dwelling units general this let's see LAMC fails to comply with state law

governing special occupancy parks the city departments do not coordinate on

these together, LADBS, CPC, HCD, all are segmented and not together, inconsistent.

And finally, you know, there's public health and safety issues with this RV park.

There's multiple, there's 46 squeezed in under two acres on nine capped oil wells with no

review at all from anyone.

it's and the 12 performance standards have not been met any at the at the

forefront right when it doesn't meet it should have required a conditional use

permit that did not happen in this case we please urge you to require a

conditional use permit on this project to for the safety of everyone not just

the community but those that are going to live there too so please I urge you

all to please vote for CUP thank you next speaker good morning sir which items

would you like to speak to general comment on number 23 please okay so one

minute go ahead council members my name is Rich Wilkin I am 79 years old my wife

and I grew up in the Palisades our grandchildren are fifth generation we

We are both on Social Security as are 25 to 30% of the people who live in the Palisades

are seniors.

Our home of 46 years burned on January 7th.

Three generations of our family were living in our modest 1,200 square foot home when

it burned.

With shortage of insurance coverage for even a modest home, with rebuild costs a minimum

of $500 per square foot and coverage of only $350 per square foot, we are not sure if

we can afford to rebuild and return to our home of 46 years. Building permits

and other fees from all city agencies can add up to twenty to forty thousand

dollars for even a small home. Please help us seniors have a chance to afford

to return home to our modest homes before we die.

Good morning. Which items?

Same item, 23.

Okay, so you have one minute. Go ahead.

My name is Lisa Locker. My family

has called the Palisades

home for four generations.

We've lived here since the 70s.

This community is woven into

every part of who we are.

This fire tore

through our neighborhood. It didn't just take

the buildings. It took our history,

our stability, emotional

stability, our financial stability.

my family alone lost three homes and the duplex that created a rental income for us.

During these tragic days, we worked to build, everything that we worked to build has been reduced to ashes.

My mother, myself, my son, his wife, and my grandchildren all became homeless in just a matter of a few short days.

Before this nightmare, we never imagined building new homes.

We wanted to stay rooted in the community that shaped us.

I'm asking you on behalf of my neighbors and my family and my friends to waive all building

and permitting fees for fire-related rebuilds.

Thank you.

Next speaker.

I would like to call up Rebecca Lowe, Michelle Murphy, Ed Shrimp, Roger Allen,

Daphne Gronich, and Harriet Elliott.

Hi, good morning.

Good morning.

Which items?

General comment for 23.

Okay, so you have one minute.

Go ahead.

Thanks.

Hi, I'm Rebecca Lobel.

I'm 63 and with my husband, owned our home in the Palisades for 34 years.

It's where we raised our two kids.

As a mother, there is nothing I want more than to provide the sanctuary for my family

again, especially during the holidays, of course.

The Christmas decorations that my parents made before I was born and handed down to

me, like my son's first baseball glove, and the dollhouse that my husband made for our

daughter, all gone.

Still, we want to rebuild.

We want to return, recreate, invest in the future.

We need LA's help.

We are all traumatized.

We need your help to go home.

Thank you.

Good morning.

Which items?

Hi, Michelle Murphy, general comment regarding item 23.

Okay, so you have one minute. Go ahead.

I lived in the Palisades, bought a home. I'm a single mom. I do not have a trust fund. I do not have family money. I do not get child support. I do not get alimony.

I am a business owner who bought a home in 2020 for myself and my two boys, and we lost everything.

I sold the lot, not because I don't want to be in the Palisades. My dream is to go back.

It did not make sense to have a mortgage with the carrying costs of property taxes, insurance,

while our city waits to figure out how to do the right thing.

My intention is to buy back in when you guys can figure it all out.

I can't afford to wait it out for everybody.

Thank you to Tracy Park.

I wish you were our mayor, our governor, our city council person.

I wish I could clone you.

It's a lot of pressure.

I know for you, you're just one person,

but you are hope for our community,

and I hope to see you soon in the Palisades.

Good morning. Which items?

Item number 23, general comment.

So you have one minute. Go ahead.

My name is Alice Skould. I'm 69 years old.

I bought my home in the Palisades 28 years ago,

raised my two children there,

working full time as a single parent.

I retired December 31st of last year.

A week later, my house burns down.

We lost everything.

I'm rebuilding my home, which is currently under construction.

I made this decision based on Mayor Bass' executive order

to waive building and permit fees.

Also, I assumed that State Farm would honor my policy,

yet they are holding back a significant portion of my coverage.

So I may be forced to use my retirement money to complete my rebuild until it gets sorted out.

The thought that everyone in the Palisades is rich is misguided.

27% are senior citizens, many living on a fixed income.

42% earn less than $150,000 a year.

22% under 75.

I ask that you that you that you waive the fees it's going to bring money to the city of taxes

speak here your time is expired for me personally I don't know if I'm rebuilding to come back home

or to sell

good morning which items item 23 okay so you have one minute for general go ahead

Thank you. Thank you Tracy Park. Thank you City Council. My name is Roger Allen. My family home of 62 years in Pacific Palisades was significantly damaged by smoke in the Palisades fire. It did not burn down. However, to restore our home, it's been a significant amount of money. It were over $250,000 so far and we're nowhere near being done.

Please provide some relief on the permit fees required for the restoration of my home as well as condos apartments the trailer park in the Palisades

Thank you for your time

Good morning, which items speaking on item 23? Okay, so you have one minute for general go ahead

I find it ironic that I'm here exactly

exactly 47 weeks after essentially the first emergency alert went to some of us to evacuate

or potentially evacuate.

And I stand before he was the owner of a plot of dirt in the Palisades.

Of the around 180 homes, condominiums, small units, and other small buildings in the area,

there's about eight of them left.

I'm sorry I'm very nervous and I haven't been able to really cry.

Our home of 27 years with all of its contents, family photos, childhood souvenirs, diplomas,

art, family heirlooms, clothing and furniture just disappeared.

Three weeks after we were forced onto the fair plan.

As far as we can tell, no firefighters ever came to our street during the fire, either

because there was no water in the reservoir or because they just never got there.

January it really feels that our community is waiting for the city to have

our backs other than our council person we've heard a lot of things and we

really need you to waive fees and support us so that we can help support

you next speaker good morning which items two and three and general general

yeah I minutes for the items and one minute for general go ahead I actually

I have only a second to talk about the items,

which are about lighting.

I don't have lighting in front of my house, okay.

Sometimes I have, there's lighting around the sides.

This is actually very important.

Last time there was a thing about sensors,

you're getting the newest sensors.

You know that-

Okay, so this sounds like general public,

I'm gonna move you to general public comment.

So you have one minute for general, go ahead.

Oh, I'm going to general then, let's stop, okay.

Before I talked about 20 people around me getting cancer,

it's a possibility I have the signs of cancer also.

And my doctor, I need to get away from him.

He actually prescribed esotimabri,

and I threw them out, almost 100 of them.

I don't respect this doctor.

I need to get away from him.

His name's Simiak Cohen.

Everything looks fine about him,

but we had an incident where I misunderstood him.

And it looks like it's challenging his masculinity

or something, he can't get over it.

So I'm not even accepting anything that he says about me.

And if it's true that they didn't accept my

cancer for colon test,

then they're making me wait for the new doctor

two extra months, till January 20th.

I was supposed to see a new doctor right away, chatta,

and yet what happened was,

when I'm calling Kaiser.

One minute general public comment?

That's it.

Yeah.

I think it's our next speaker.

Your time has expired.

Council President, that's all the speakers for the allotted time.

Thank you so much.

Thank you to everybody who came to give testimony for this morning's meeting.

Madam Clerk, what is before us at this time?

Mr. President, item 47 was called special by Mr. Price for a recusal, sir.

All right.

Mr. Price will recuse himself.

I indicated at the beginning of the meeting that we weren't going to get to all 135 speakers

because we've got to deal with the business that's in front of us today.

So in order to get to the business that you all came for,

we needed to close public comment after well over an hour of public comment.

Okay, so speaker again.

We appreciate everyone being here, but we do need to get on with city business.

I'm going to ask you, please don't disrupt this meeting.

And we're trying hard to serve you by getting to the items that you came for.

All right, let's open the roll on item number 47.

Close the roll.

Tabulate the vote.

14 ayes.

All right, we'll bring Mr. Price back.

What's next, Madam Clerk?

Next, Mr. President, counsel may now vote on items 2 through 10, 25, 27, 28, 30 through

34 36 37 39 through 42 44 and 46 sir all right let's open the roll on those items

close the roll tabulate the vote 49 all right mr. Soto Martinez I remember

three-fourth width without objection that'll be the order all right what's

next mr. president so in addition to item 33 forthwith there is a request

also to have item 46 go forth with sir all right without objection that'll be

the order what's next next would be item number one and that was called special

by councilmember Nazarian councilmember Nazarian

Thank you, Council President and colleagues.

I just wanted to rise and say that while I will be supporting this measure, I couldn't

help but to notice the fee changes.

And on one of them, on the fire spot check, notice that it's being reduced by $2 from

$2.87 to $2.85.

Again, while I support this recommendation, I just wanted to bring notice to the body

that we are going to be working on filming-related permitting issues.

And so there will be a lot more to come in order to address the growing needs that we've

had in the entertainment industry.

a $2 change in permitting fee does not adequately address the need,

but it'll be a step in the right direction.

Thank you.

All right.

All right, let's open the roll on that item.

Close the roll.

Tabulate the vote.

1-5 ayes.

All right, what's next?

Next would be item 15, and that was called special by Council Member McOsker.

There is an amendment McCosker Park that's been submitted and circulated sir councilmember McCosker

Thank you very much. Mr. President and members

Item number 15 we have seen a couple of times and I know it's been in committee

the narrow question if you will before us is

Is this a project for which the applicant has applied?

that can be approved ministerially over-the-counter without any further

review or does it require a conditional use permit that's the narrow question

today and I have articulated many arguments as to why a CUP is required

and as you know lawyers very often argue on the alternative and so I'm going to

lay all three of them out at least but I want to focus on one today which is the

subject of the amending motion. The use itself in RV Park, the definition of the

use itself says that it is a facility that is authorized by a conditional use

permit. That is, we should begin and end right there. The use is defined as

something that's required, that requires a CUP. I realize that there is a great

deal of angst and discussion as to why that's not the case coming from our

staff sometimes I think they over argue it but if we go to the section that they

rely on that has been relied on by the applicant and by some members of our

staff you look at section 14.00 of the municipal code it's technically a7 and

it says that an RV park is permitted because it's a public benefit public

benefit is never defined. The public benefit is never articulated anywhere in the code,

but public benefit allows an RV park to go into this residential zone, according to some people's

reading. But when one looks at the subsection, it also says that it has to be lawfully authorized

on the date of that ordinance change, which ordinance was adopted well before the definition.

Somehow our staff reads that provision out of the code as well.

There's a lot of intellectual gymnastics going on here.

So we read out of the code the definition of the use.

We read out of the code the requirement that it be lawfully established,

which of course relates back to the definition.

Those are two arguments that I'm going to set aside for a minute

because I want to go to our own staff's argument.

when one looks at 14.00A7

it says that in a residential zone

and other zones

if you meet the following 12 criteria

it is a ministerial approval

if you do not meet the following 12 criteria

and they're laid out

then a CUP shall be required

So I'm going to take the most generous reading of the code, the most generous reading of

the code for the applicant, which I disagree with because of the other arguments I just

made, but let's take staff's argument.

If you meet the 12 criteria, you can move forward.

If you don't meet the 12 criteria, a CUP is required.

Unfortunately, it took two 245 motions while this kept getting pushed forward and pushed

forward and push forward and somehow and for some reason

staff was relying upon a plan sheet

that says, from the applicant of course, the applicant wrote this,

the project meets all Los Angeles

performance standards and metrics under

14.00. It doesn't.

If the plan, and for some reason we bought it, if this plan

sheet that said the earth is flat, I'm assuming there's a whole bunch of planners and zoning

administrators who would profess that the earth is flat. This plan sheet doesn't meet the standards

itself. And on the second 245, what came back to us after numerous, many, many, many arguments made

by the applicant, by the appellant, excuse me, by the appellant on several of the conditions,

we have a zoning administrator's report that tells us that condition three and condition four

and condition 5 aren't met.

That should be full stop right there.

On the most generous reading of the code,

that should be full stop.

A CUP is required.

But somehow we don't get there.

What we do get from the determination letter,

the letter of determination,

the second one that had come out

because we had to 245 it twice.

We have a statement that an RV park,

this is in the conclusion of the couple hundred pages of report.

An RV park can be approved ministerially as a public benefit project

under the section I described if it complies with the required

performance standards. A conditional use permit, these are not my words,

these are our staff's words, is required only if one or more of the

performance standards are not met. And then we go on

to read that in fact

we are unclear and believe that Standard 3, Standard 4, and Standard 5 are not met.

3 deals with the walls, and we heard testimony today.

And walls are important because they define boundaries.

They define setbacks.

They define buffer zones.

We see that in Item 4, which is a definition of where the setback has to go,

that it's really, really clear.

that two things can't happen. They can't meet the prevailing setback of 20 feet

and also squeeze in 46 RVs. It's impossible. It's mathematically impossible.

Although when one looks at the project that they're moving forward on without permit,

they probably have 50, over 50 stub outs. So they're planning on cramming them in

as tightly as possible. We'll put that issue aside. And item five deals with the

landscaped and buffer zone, which also defines the size of the project.

So here is a very simple proposition.

If this is the project they want, and this is their application, a CUP is required.

The zoning administrator goes on to say

that the prevailing setback must be determined by a plan check engineer and added to the plans.

Added to the plans.

That sounds like a change to me.

Plans must also be updated.

updated that's a word for changed a different project the plans must be

updated to reflect the project design changes that may be needed if a

prevailing setback is determined to be greater than 20 feet which it is in

addition plans should be updated with clear labels not having clear labels on

a plan is designed for one thing and one thing only to blow past the staff and

get a ministerial approval of a project that requires a CUP with clear labels

for project elements any portion of the RV park in the required 10-foot

landscape buffer which we know today mathematically is absolutely necessary

if they want this project they're in the landscape buffer CUP any portion of the

RV park in the required 10-foot landscape buffer must be relocated and

adjustments relocated adjustments different project to the project design

and plans made accordingly. This additional information is needed to

ensure compliance with the performance standards. Numbers 3, 4, and 5. Now here

it gets really interesting. So I've already said enough that a CUP is

required by the simplest, by the clearest reading of the code and the most

generous reading of the code for the applicant. CUP is required. But we

conclude this report with therefore the zoning administration recommends that the

applicant be required to update plan sheets these are the plan sheets that's

a different project as described above to be able to move forward with the

issuance of a land a use of land building permit so give us a different

project and we'll give you a permit if the required performance standards cannot

be met approval of a conditional use permit that provides relief from the

unmet performance standards will be needed for a let use of land permit to

be issued. All of this, these hundreds and hundreds of pages are telling us that the

project they applied for in the most generous reading of the code tells us that a CUP is

required because they don't meet the standards. And yet somehow, inexplicably, we're saying,

we'll keep working with you. Give us a different project and we'll approve it. No, that's not

how it works. If your project can't be approved without a CUP and you don't

apply for a CUP, you apply for a new project. Apply for a new project. Conform

with the code or don't conform with the code. Comply with the code. If this is the

project you want, if this is the project they want and I've held it up a few

times apply for a cup and so members I'm urging you to accept the amendment of

today which says simply that this project requires a cup and that the use

of land permit shall not issue which by the way was the determination below and

that any outstanding permits although it's not clear that there's any active

permit for the site at all in fact there are statements in the record saying

there is no active permit shall be null and void reapply conform to the code I'm

going to urge an aye vote on my amendment councilmember Blumenfield

thank you thank you mr. McCosker and as you know I'm very sympathetic to the

situation that you're in and supported your 245s. You know, I don't like this

project. I don't like what it's doing in the community. But in planning committee

we voted to deny the appeal. And we did so because we exhausted all the remedies

and we went to court, in trial court, and we lost. And then we had a closed session

about the liabilities that would occur to us if we continue down this road. And

And then all of us who heard that said, okay, we cannot continue down this road.

It would just be throwing good money after bad.

As painful as that is, and I feel the pain.

I mean, I had a similar, different kind of thing with ED1.

When ED1 came out and there was a little bug in the system where it didn't get defined right away

and there were a couple of big projects in my district that are going to go next to single-family homes,

I fought against it.

This council backed me up on that.

we went to court and I don't know how we lost that, but we lost it. And at that point, I had

to go to my community and say, I tried, we fought it, but we lost in court and I can't drag this

city through more expenses when, you know, we're going to lose. This is a similar situation here.

But I also feel like you all ought to have the benefit of that closed session that we had on

litigation so I would ask that we that we schedule this for a closed session

not this item there's a related item on the litigation that we heard in in

committee that is really shapes our view on on this issue so in fairness to

everybody here to be able to hear the reasons the legal reasons and what and

have our city attorney because we can get our city attorney up here but we

know that they're never going to say very much outside of a closed session

But I cannot support knowing what I know having gone through the closed session

and as much as I'm with you and with your community on this, I can't in good

conscience support granting the appeal when I know that that's going to just

cost us a tremendous amount of money that we don't have. And that's also why I

supported the ICO to move forward prospectively so we don't get in the

situation again because we should never have been in the situation

And we shouldn't be in this situation, but we are.

So with that, I guess I would ask that we would continue this vote until this body gets a chance to hear what the committee heard in closed session,

which was dispositive enough for us unanimously to vote to deny the appeal.

Got it.

So Mr. Blumenfiller is requesting that we go to closed session, which I think we would have to at least wait until tomorrow to do that.

Mr. McCosker?

There's a lot of frustrations here.

One of the many frustrations is that my office was excluded from that closed session.

I would love to hear what the arguments of the city attorney's office were.

I would also like to know whether in closed session, so heads up, whether or not this

misinformation that the project does not meet the standards in the code was

introduced in that litigation if so what was the response of the court and if not

why not mr. president this item is on a 245 it's time limited it actually expires

tomorrow the time limit of the 245 expires tomorrow I'm eager to be in

closed session and to hear it I'm eager to hear the arguments and respond but we

we have to have assurance that this would be heard in closed if not today by

the way is there any reason why it couldn't be heard today it can't be heard today correct what

it cannot be heard today it's not on the agenda as a closed session and the clerk

will ask the clerk to issue a continuation agenda for tomorrow so that

will assure that it's on the agenda tomorrow as a closed session item in my

experience with this whole matter going back a year and a half is that there's a

whole lot of you can't get there from here and it seems to be coming from one

office and that's the office that tomorrow will be in closed session

telling us why once again we can't get there from here so I will consent to

continuing this one day to tomorrow with an assurance that we'll be in closed

Session and this item will be asked and answered

All right, madam clerk. Can you confirm that for us?

Yes, mr. President so for the record item number 15 will be continued as well as

Amendment McOsker Park will be continued to Wednesday December 3rd along with the

The closed session companion piece that is related to this matter will also be on the

continuation agenda for December 3rd.

That will be issued today, sir.

All right.

So that will be the order, and we'll resume this discussion tomorrow.

Thank you so much, everybody.

All right.

Madam Clerk, what's next?

Next would be item 21, and that was called special by Councilmember Hutt.

There is an amendment, Hutt-McCosker, that's been submitted and circulated.

All right.

Any comments, Councilmember?

All right.

Let's open the roll on that item, close the roll, tabulate the vote.

59.

59.

All right.

What's next?

Next would be item 22.

There are several amendments.

So the first vote for item 22 is item 22C, and that is motion Rodriguez-Lee.

All right.

We've got a number of items before us.

I'd ask if the CAO's office could come forward.

I'm sorry.

I'm sorry, wrong item.

All right, so let's consider the first amending item on number 22.

Sorry, I got ahead of myself, folks.

All right, let's open the roll, close the roll, tabulate the vote.

15 ayes.

All right, what's next?

Next would be Amendment 22B, and that is motion Blumenfield-Rodriguez.

All right, let's open the roll on that item.

Close the roll tabulate the vote

14 eyes 1 no

All right, what's next

Next would be amendment 22 a and that is motion head out

Hernandez

All right, let's open the roll

councilmember

let's make sure her sound is working for CD 14 hold on councilwoman there we go

colleagues I want to start by saying clearly I support our city's commitment

to build affordable housing faster and I believe in our responsibility to

deliver housing for those who need it most but I have to raise a serious

concern about what's before us today. It puts rent stabilized housing at real risk of displacement,

especially in neighborhoods in my district like Boyle Heights and Lincoln Heights. This proposal

only protects RSO buildings with 12 units or more, but that threshold simply doesn't reflect the

reality in my district. In Boyle Heights, out of the 4,400 RSO properties, only 10 would be excluded

from the streamlined process.

If we keep the exemption at 12 units,

moderate RSO buildings in Boyle Heights

become vulnerable to demolition under a by-right process.

No hearings, no appeals, no voice from the community.

What you're doing is streamlining displacement

of communities of color, historically Latino,

working-class neighborhoods that have our undocumented immigrants

that have a closer commute to their office.

So this isn't a hypothetical concern.

This is development with displacement.

Yes, we want to build more affordable housing, but for whom and what cost?

I guess the cost of the 4,490 RSO properties in that neighborhood.

We're talking about buildings that serve as the foundation of multi-generational housing,

where grandparents care for their grandkids, where neighbors support each other,

and where immigrant and working families have found stability for decades.

That's why I introduced the amendment to lower the exemption from 12 units to 5 units.

This is a small but necessary adjustment to make sure the streamlining process doesn't unintentionally become a pathway to demolish the very affordable homes our families rely on.

When we talk about affordable housing in this body, do we ever talk about the current residents that live currently in affordable housing, or are we just intending to develop over them until they're no longer here?

we can have development without displacement and so this amendment I

ask for your support or I ask your consideration to bring it back to

committee so we can discuss this further and look at the data because right now

the exemption only allows for 19% of the RSO units to be exempted and what I'm

asking for is actually 36% of the RSO units to be exempted and guess where

most of them are CD 14 thank you all right councilman Hernandez

amendment to the amendment I pick up the mic number five request the city

attorney to incorporate the provisions of request number four relative to the

number of units comma into chapter one period councilmember Hernandez okay

All right.

Mr. Blumenfield.

Great.

Well, I'd like to get planning to answer some questions on this.

Sure.

We'll ask a representative from Department of City Planning to join us at the center table.

Because it means my understanding, the mayor's office has a lot of concerns about this and,

you know, the concern is that this in many ways cuts the legs out from under the effectiveness

of ED1.

It doesn't change the zoning as I understand it in terms of which buildings can or cannot

be demolished, but it's basically saying if there's a five bungalow unit or something

to that effect and someone wants to build a hundred unit and they're deciding to do

that, they can't go through, they can't use ED1 to permit those hundred units of affordable

housing.

So if I could get planning's perspective on this, on why was it chosen in the mayor's

ED1 to be 12 units.

What is the impact in your perspective on the efficacy of ED1 if we go down to 5 units?

Thank you, Council Members.

Kevin Keller, Executive Officer, City Planning, here with Matt Glesney.

It's a policy issue in front of the Council today.

The original ED1 did not include any language about RSO demolition.

RSO demolition is covered by ELIS Act, the Residential Protection Ordinance, other ordinances

that have recently been adopted, and not all programs in the city have specific call-outs

for RSO units.

In 2024, the mayor amended ED1 to include a 12-unit threshold.

It was the first threshold, and it was responsive to, I think, some of the issues that had been

seen where larger projects had come in with significant amounts of RSO housing that were

being redeveloped for slightly more housing.

That threshold was set at 12 in the executive directive.

That was what was rolled over into the ordinance that's in front of you today.

The ordinance in front of the council today generally mirrors and matches the adopted

and functioning ED1 program that the city's been using.

I can hand it over to Matt to just give some high-level data on the overall program, but

I think like the council members have said, there are instances where projects are moving

forward with units under 12 but more than five.

So that's a policy call, but it would further limit the ability in this case of affordable

housing to be built on those properties.

Matt?

I could just provide this, Matt Gillespie, City Planning, just some data that we have.

members shared some data on the overall RSO stock we took a look quickly at

actually ED7 projects and their impacts on RSO units I know Councilmember

Nazarian had asked for that earlier so if that's helpful I could just get some

data here so we've approved about 32,000 units of affordable housing through ED1

in about 450 projects of those about 168 did require the demolition of some RSO

units it's about 37% of the projects based on an average demo of about 4.7

units per site that is about the demolition about 780 units it's a

significant number but should be viewed at the context of of the overall number

of affordable housing units that were being built through that program again

more than 30 you know 31,000 units so that's a ratio of about 40 affordable

units being created for every hour or so lost that's not to diminish the concern

which is very real and in the balancing of preservation and tenant protections

and production especially the affordable housing is a really difficult issue and

I will obviously defer to the council here what you want to do about that this

change from 5 to 12 would potentially impact about 8% of ed1 projects if that

helps based on past data we don't know if they would convert a market rate if

they would just not happen what would happen but that's our estimation of what

would be impacted if that helps the discussion.

But yeah, this is a difficult issue and where to find that.

I will just maybe just underline this was put in place, the 12 unit limit, which is

unique in planning ordinances to have a sort of threshold like that, was put in before

the adoption of the Resident Protection Ordinance and in some ways may have been a stopgap to

those enhanced protections.

And just really quickly, so make sure everyone knows, so there is protections for every low

low-income tenant that is dislocated, displaced, including significant relocation, now $100,000

up to for every dislocated tenant.

Every dislocated low-income tenant also has the right to return to that new building in

a comparable unit.

They have the right to return if the project doesn't proceed.

So just want to make sure Council is also aware of those protections that really were

meant to try to address this perplexing issue of the right balance, but we're happy to answer

any more questions.

Councilmember Rahman I just had a question about the number of units that have been entitled

over time can you just talk about under 81 number of applications like in the last quarter

or previous quarter and compared to last year at this time or the previous year at this

time?

Well, we're trying to get that data up for you.

I do.

I mean, there's been a decline from where it was a year ago, two years ago.

Yeah.

I'm just trying to understand how steep the decline has been.

Colleagues, I think ED1 has changed significantly from its original form and some ways I think

beneficially, some ways I think in ways that have undermined the effectiveness of the

intent of the ordinance.

And we have a new CHIP program that I think does a better job of building the housing

where we need it.

it's fairly thought out and you know I think has a better overall kind of shape to the system

across the entire city than what ED1 has become after all of these changes and I just wanted

to understand the effectiveness as well. I do recall looking at the changes it was sort of a

peak last summer.

I believe it may be as much as

one-sixth, the

number of units that we're seeing come in the door

today versus the peak. Now, we

can't say that's all because of changes

made. There's a lot of adjustment in the

marketplace.

There's a lot of issues around Section 8 vouchers

and the availability of those.

This was something that a lot of people bet on early on

and maybe it's not working out as well. We've heard a lot of

mixed things. There's a lot of... So we wouldn't want to

sign blame, but there has been

a decrease. Yeah. So if it's one-sixth,

of what it was in this quarter versus what it was a year ago or two years ago

what also are the number of entitlements that have actually resulted in units

being built or even starts housing starts yeah so I think the last time I

looked at this maybe a month or two ago roughly about 40 of the like 400

projects have been actually permitted gone all the way and and theoretically

started construction with a building permit so about 10% about 10% I mean

there's always a lag of people still in permitting but it's also not it's also

very difficult building environment you go to get your construction loans and

entitlements and expire after like two years right sorry the entitlements

expire after two years I'm not sure if it's two or three years but there is an

expiration yeah do you have the number the first number that I was asking yeah

I believe it's three years councilmember okay and do you have the number of the

permits from last quarter versus or even last month versus the same month last

year this is Kevin Keller we we did pull that data I don't know if we have it

here today but you're correct overall the applications into the ed1 program

have continued but they have declined since the summer of 2024 okay yeah and

And I guess I would just say, colleagues, you know, I think I'm happy to—I supported

this in committee.

I'm not sure how useful this program is in terms of pushing for actual new units.

The changes that we're making today are going to further cut into the ability of people

to be able to use it, but it may not make that much of an impact anyway given how limited

the program has already been.

I just wanted to draw people's attention to that.

I supported it in committee.

I will continue to support it today,

but I think it has already lost some of its original potency.

And I think we should be looking to an analysis

of the CHIP program to really understand

how we can generate new housing.

Thank you.

Council member Jurado.

Thank you, planning department.

I just wanted to clarify.

So if we made the material change,

it would only affect the 8% of the applicants

that we currently have.

So it seems nominal and persuasive for me

and I hope that for other colleagues that will be as well.

The other thing that I wanna point out is,

aren't, I mean from my experience, which is not a lot,

but I think aren't rent controlled units

that have deferred maintenance, that are older buildings,

maybe cheaper in a market that is depressed

to be preyed upon.

And those are the ones that people actually

want to buy, demolish, and rebuild.

And so rent controlled units and LIHTC

with their covenants expiring without a re-syndicator,

those are all up for grabs in a market like this

to redevelop over.

And the cost ends up being the human lives

of our constituents who come here day in, day out,

who came for our cap the rent at 3% movement.

And those are the lives that we're currently talking about.

And if we can't protect our current residents

from being developed over,

which is our primary duty as council members

with our land use authority,

then what are we doing here?

And it's only 8%.

So I'm asking you colleagues to reconsider.

I wish my voice didn't break at that moment,

but I really hope you reconsider.

Thank you.

All right, so you know their comments on this item

Madam clerk if you can just restate what's before us and we can open the roll

What is before council now is?

22a and that is motion Gerardo Hernandez as amended by motion Gerardo Hernandez

All right before we call the question we got mr. Nazarian mr. Blumenfield

Thank you council president I

I, when I saw this motion, I was wholeheartedly ready to support it, especially given the initial wording because it limited to CD14 itself.

But in your amendment, you've expanded it to the entire city, which I also appreciate because I've had concerns over this myself and my own district.

I have a project that is going to demolish five units and build 103 with no parking in a already overcapacity collector street.

All in the name that because it's a block away from the Orange Line,

it will ensure that all 103 unit tenants will be utilizing that mode of transportation,

which is a very big assumption.

So I completely understand.

And by the way, the five units are also RSO.

But the balance is somewhere in between.

When we take action like this to impact the entirety of this city,

we are also diminishing the intent of something that was meant to provide more affordable housing.

so instead of voting on this now would this body be amenable for this item to

go back to committee so we can find a better balance on how we address the

issue that has come up by my colleague from CD 14 because I do appreciate that

and I think it's extremely valid but lowering it down all the way to five

units for the entirety of the city I think could have consequences that we

don't want all right so that's a that's a motion to continue the complete item

or just this I guess we have to do the complete item if we don't do this

amendment but I got mr. Blumenfield on the queue can we just because it's I

think it's important we're serious about housing ed1 whether it's not as

effective as it has been, but it's been a very effective tool to get a lot done.

We should move forward with it, maybe push this amendment to the committee, just like

some of these other amendments are really going to the committee, instructing planning,

like B is also not instructing them to request them to prepare an ordinance.

These are things that are instructing, the other ones are instructing them to do something.

So along that vein, if we could send A to the committee to really get into what is that

balance what are the trade-offs but not slow down the actual ed1 I think that

would make sense and I would put put that forward as a as an option of to

send item a to committee but to move forward with the underlying 81 all right

so the motion is to refer the amendment to committee councilmember Hernandez

yes councilmember boominfield just said that a lot of great

stuff has happened under ED1. How many units have been built under ED1?

Hi, Councilmember. I don't think we have a number of constructed units. We were just

checking our dashboard. It looks like as of July there are currently 44 projects that

are under construction. That's about 2,500 units. As far as completed, I don't know that

I could speak to that. How many since the beginning of ED1? Is

it the 40 that's 4400 I've got 2500 oh sorry 24 project okay 44 projects okay

anything else councilmember not just I'm glad that y'all brought that up because

that's great and I think I've only seen so far some of the negative impacts I

don't know if y'all remember toll and way and that conversation that we had and

now we're trying to figure out how we use ULA money to buy that building

Luckily, the property owner has been amenable to those conversations, but I had 17 families on the line to be displaced under ED1.

So for us, we've been on the receiving end of the not-so-good part.

So that's why I wanted to hear if there has been movement on actually construction and if there has been expediting of that.

Because it's worrisome on some of us that have been on the opposite side of it.

All right.

so I think madam clerk the what's before us is to continue the amendment

mr. president so for for 22 a does council wish to refer this to the

planning and land use management committee if there's no objection that

will be the order councilmember Jurado can we refer to H&H as well refer to H&H

as well yes so for the record 22A will be referred to the Planning and Land Use

Management Committee as well as Housing and Homelessness Committee all right

what's next so what the final vote is now is 20 we've already got it okay

councilmember Hernandez 20 on to comment on the entire package comment on in 22

B this one came fairly quickly I have William Meade which is a hack club

project in my district and I know other council offices have hack club building

in their district.

This motion particularly goes after HACLA

and what it's doing.

I would like to reconsider the vote

and send it back to committee, please.

You got like three seconds.

Okay, so first.

So we need a vote to reconsider that?

Yes. All right.

So 22B, just real quick,

the vote to reconsider is now before council.

all right let's open the roll on reconsideration close the roll tabulate

the vote 15 eyes mr. Bloomfield yeah I'm happy to reconsider it and even to send

it back but just to be clear this isn't actually 22 B they asked us to do this

to the last minute you're right but it's just an instruction the way I look at it

to prepare the ordinance to establish the performance standards it's not

actually we're not actually doing it so either way whether we send it back to

committee to look at the instruction again or they do it I'm fine either way

but just to be clear we were not voting on amending the order underlying

ordinance to do this I would have been uncomfortable with that as well be

given that they just brought this to us today but I am I am comfortable with us

instructing them to do it we're having the committee look at that instruction

either way I do think hacla has a point but we should look at that thank you and

I hope Hakla hears me when I say this. Please come to us as well for those districts that

have these properties so that we can have the conversation because now we haven't had

the conversation and it would be good to have it in committee.

All right. So we're going to refer that item. If there's no objection, we'll refer that

item to Planning and Land Use Management Committee and Housing and Homelessness.

Can council do a quick vote on the referral please for 22B?

We need a vote on referral?

I just referred the other one without a vote.

All right.

Let's open the roll on those referrals, close the roll, tabulate the vote.

Fifteen ayes.

All right.

So there we go.

go okay and now the final vote is item 22 that's the plum report as amended by

motion 22 C and that is motion Rodriguez all right let's open the roll on that

item close the roll tabulate the vote 15 eyes all right there we go all right

thank you Department of City Planning what's next next would be item 23 sir

and the first vote is on the motion Park Nazarian McCosker and that is a motion to

to adopt the ad hoc LA recovery report as well as the ordinance that's on file.

All right.

So it looks like we have two, at least two reports and an additional amendment for this.

I'm going to ask the CAO's office to come forward and to explain the difference between the,

the variance between the reports that are before us.

Hello, good afternoon Yolanda Chavez with the CAO.

I'm joined by Andy Galan also with the CAO's office.

So let me explain.

I think the key difference between the ADHEC Recovery Committee report

and the Budget and Finance Committee report is first I want to clarify

that they both waive permitting and building fees

for all types of structures,

single family homes, condominiums, trailer parks,

all types of structures.

The difference is that the budget and finance report

recommends that we only waive the fees

for those structures that are gonna rebuild

up to 110% of their original structure.

both reports will have a major fiscal impact on the city as we will have to

pay for these fee waivers from general fund dollars the difference is that the

budget and finance recommendations we estimate that those recommendations will

cost the city up to 86 million dollars plus the cost of borrowing and the

recovery the ad hoc recovery report can cost the city up to two hundred and

seventy eight million plus the cost of borrowing come on you guys are

disrupting the meeting people come on come on folks people didn't yell out

when you were talking so let us let the council have this discussion all right

Madame CIO so based on the fiscal impact and again the fact that the budget and

and finance report does waive the fees

for up to 110% of the size of the original structure.

We recommend that the council approve

the budget and finance committee report.

I have one question and then it will go

to Council Member Park.

So you said you opened with both reports

cover all structures up to 110%.

So that's come.

Not both.

The budget and finance committee report would waive the fees for all structures that built up to 110% of the original structure.

The ad hoc recovery report would waive the fees for any, if someone wants to double the size of their structure, those fees would be covered.

so there's no limit on the size of the structure beyond the original size if

that makes sense got it okay councilmember Park

Ms. Chavez I am reading from the budget and finance report instruction number

two is to waive the building permit fees of single family structures and

and duplexes at the 110% level.

That is not all structures.

Yeah, thank you, Council Member Park,

because that was the problem I was having.

In one of them, it spells out and limits structures,

and in the other one, it doesn't.

So that doesn't match up with what you said earlier.

What Ms. Chavez said is incorrect in her description

of the two reports.

So the draft ordinance as presented before you today does not include a limiter to only single family and duplexes.

It would apply to all properties.

So it's your understanding, and I'm not sure if Council Member Park was done,

So you're saying to us that you account for the increase times three just on properties that might build over 110 percent?

That estimate is from building and safety.

Sure.

And I do want to clarify one thing, and I do agree with Councilmember Park.

The difference is that the ordinance before you basically covers all structures.

The only change the building's, the budget and finance report is asking that the change

to be made to the ordinance the city attorney has presented is that the fee waivers apply

to only structures that build up to 110%.

But the current language of the ordinance applies to all structures.

Council Member Park.

I don't know how to explain the discrepancy why the instruction wouldn't match the language in the ordinance

so

Maybe we could have the city attorney come up as well

Because that is our understanding that the budget and finance report

Request that the city attorney revise the ordinance to apply to up to 110 percent of the

the original structure the wording is very clear it is single family structures and duplexes

damaged or destroyed up to 110 percent so council members council members of with regard

to budget and finance committee they did have a limitation that it was focused on only single

family homes and duplexes that were being replaced so and again this was a request to the city

attorney to draft an ordinance this body of course could consider amending that further if that was

the desire of the body to be more expansive but this the recommendation before you in budget and

finance committee report does focus only on single family and duplexes but again it's a recommendation

for a request to city attorney to draft an ordinance

because that ordinance is not before you yet.

So my struggle with this, look, and I am not interested

in the city spending money we don't have,

but my read of this, the Budget and Finance Committee,

is excludes all properties that are not duplexes

or single-family homes.

So if there were a flower shop

and I want to rebuild my flower shop I'm out in the budget and finance committee report

or condominium that is correct for clarification this language is directly from the ordinance

the following provision shall apply to work performed to repair rebuild any building or

structure so the current ordinance that's before you that was drafted by

city attorney before the budget and finance committee consideration was very

expensive it included properties that it would it would basically include all

properties it would include single-family homes it would include duplexes it would include flower

shops it would include all properties but there is also no guidelines in terms of the size of

the rebuild so and I think that's the difference the size of the rebuild if as Miss Chavez had

indicated that if the rebuild was double then that would that that could

conceivably increase the fiscal impact and so in the budget and finance

committee report it was a request to to city attorney to prepare a new ordinance

that would focus on single-family and duplexes only and focus on rebuild and

and also be consistent with the mayor's emergency executive order that limited it to 110%.

But you're right, Mr. President, that it was focused only on single family and duplexes.

So if a member of this body were to have the nuanced position that everybody who lost a structure,

whether it's residential or commercial

should be able to rebuild without fees

but does not support

I do not support or this person doesn't support

an open-ended building permit

so you had a flower shop and now you want to make it three times bigger

if a person doesn't support that but does support the flower shop

being able to rebuild without fees

do either one of these things take care of that?

I think you'd have to amend the budget and finance report

to only amend the ordinance presented by the city attorney

to include that fees would only apply to structures

that build up to 110%.

And do you all have a cost estimate for that?

Our cost estimate is based on all structures,

all types of structures.

So wait a minute.

There are three different things here,

and you've only presented two numbers.

There's rebuilding only residential duplexes

and single family at up to 110%.

Then there is rebuilding any structure lost up to 110%.

And then there's basically any building permit anybody wants

who lost a structure of any size.

Which one of these numbers apply to those three things?

So the estimates we ran, if you look at our report from dated October 2nd,

the attachment actually outlines the cost for the various types of structures,

including single-family duplex, multifamily commercial, ADUs grading.

And so the estimate for all of those without the rebuilding limitation is, can be up to 278 million.

The estimate for all of those, if you do up to 110% of the original structure, is up to 86 million.

And I would add that both estimates provided by our office do assume

that all properties affected by the wildfires would be eligible.

It would be great if they both said that.

Mr. Blumenfield.

No, thank you.

I agree that they should say that and maybe we just need to be clear

about making it say that.

But, you know, I'm very sympathetic to the folks who, you know,

the stories that we've heard from folks losing their homes,

and we need to do what we can as a city.

The fee waiver concept is a tricky one

because there's really no such thing.

It really just means the general fund is paying those fees

because it's a fee for service.

It's not like the city's collecting this money for something else.

If we waive it under Prop 218,

we can't spread that fee onto other folks,

so it ends up being a direct cost out of the general fund

at a time that we are really struggling financially.

That being said, in budget committee, we said,

look, as hard as it is for the city to absorb this,

and it's $86 million in terms of what that means

in terms of firefighters, police, our streets,

and everything else in this city,

we want to go ahead and spend that money,

that $86 million on folks who have lost their homes

and allow them to rebuild, but to rebuild what they lost,

which is under the Executive Directive 1 means not just 100%, but up to 110%.

And I think that that is fair.

That's going to be difficult for us as a city to absorb that.

It is a lot of money for the city to pay.

Again, it's a general fund absorption fee.

It's not a waiver.

We don't get to magically waive it.

We can only pay it.

But we should pay that fee.

And I'm sorry, I can't talk what people are talking.

Sorry.

It's a reality, folks.

That's how our budget works.

I don't, I mean, I think our fees are way too high.

And I think that we ought to figure out ways to avoid having a lot of the fees that we have and have self-certification.

I've been on the forefront of pushing those things.

Do all these things so that the fees aren't so ridiculously high.

But where they are now, somebody pays it.

It's going to be the taxpayer.

It's going to come out of our general fund.

It's going to come at the expense

of everything we do as a city.

That being said, I'm willing to say to my constituents

in the West San Fernando Valley,

I'm sorry, we're not gonna pave your road,

but we, dammit, we need to do this anyway

because we need to help the people whose houses burn down.

And so we are going to take our money

that would go to something else

we're going to pay for their fees

so that they can get their houses rebuilt.

Okay, so members of the public,

we already had public comment.

You're disrupting the meeting.

This is your first and last warning.

Mr. Bloomfield.

Yeah, I mean, I hear the antagonism to what I'm saying,

but the way I'm looking at it is I'm saying

I'm trying to make a sacrifice

for the folks that are standing up here

and for the folks who live in that community.

But I want you to realize it is a sacrifice

and it is coming out of the pocket of my constituents

and out of the pocket of this entire city.

I've had to tell my city, just this weekend,

we were talking to folks from my community

who have critical capital infrastructure projects

that have washed out during the rains

and we're told you can't do that

because all those resources are going to the Palisades.

That's what we're being told by our departments

when we couldn't get a certain project done

and I've had to say that numerous times

And I say that, but I understand it because I'm very sympathetic to people who have lost everything in these fires.

But what the committee did by limiting it to rebuilding 110% is a very generous thing for this city to do, an appropriate thing.

And to do otherwise, to go on and say there's no limit that you can take a flower shop and turn it into a Walmart or something, that goes way beyond getting back to where you were.

That goes into further building.

So I think it's appropriate to limit the rebuild of the permit absorption fee that we are going to absorb as a city to 110% of what was there.

So that's why I'm supporting the budget committee proposal, which is to give $86 million of funding to paying the fees for folks whose homes have been burned down and any structure that has been burned down in the Palisades.

Yeah, we also, I mean, from our understanding,

during budget and finance liberation on this item,

we don't believe you actually limited the type of structure

during that discussion.

So we know that's in the city clerk's report here,

but we don't believe that was the decision that was made,

that it was all structures up to 110% of the original.

And as a practical matter,

most, I would imagine, a lot of the commercial structures and the larger structures are going

to be fully insured. And if they are fully insured, then this fee waiver does not apply.

Is that correct?

That's correct.

So we're really talking about, you know, we're not as concerned in some ways, you know,

making it for all structures. I'm okay with that. Because most of those other structures

that I think would would cost a lot you I mean you how are you going to rebuild

a multi-family structure if you don't have full insurance you're not gonna be

able to do it but if you have full insurance you'll be able to do it and

you'll be able to pay have these these fees paid but but I think it's

appropriate for us to go to the 110 percent counts thank you mr. Wilhelm

Phil councilmember Padilla

You know, as somebody who's not on BFI or on the ad hoc, I just got to talk about my frustrations

with how this was presented.

Because I'm listening to the community, I've talked to my colleagues, I hear what everybody's

bringing up, and I'm curious, was there any way to just simplify the language to say that

we would waive these fees if and only if you're going to rebuild to your original dwelling

size and if we know for a fact that it's housing just as a way to make sure that we don't allow

for a situation where for a flower shop to quadruple in size?

What was it, why was it so difficult to do something as basic and simple as that sort

of language?

that language of 110 percent comes from building and safety and that's what they

use for these types of rebuilding is they use that measure in terms of

building to original size okay no further questions councilman Nazarian

Thank You council president just the elementary level question so that I

understand something if the hundred and ten budget and finances proposal of up

to a hundred and ten percent waiver is passed today but an owner of a property

decides to build up to a hundred and fifty percent do they get the fees

waived on the 110% portion and then they need to pay for the remaining 40%

under that proposal is that correct or do they not get the benefit at all of

the waiver once it surpasses 110% that's a very good question and I think it's

probably better answered by building and safety I believe someone is here from

building safety

anime 10 from building safety council member can you please repeat the

question so thank you for being here and making yourself available so if if today

the budget and finance proposal that limits the fee waiver to 110% moves

forward and that's what's adopted moving forward and some a property owner who

owned the property prior to January 7th decides to build something up to 120%

130% whatever above and be slightly above the 110% limit do they get their

fees waived because the language says up to 110% do they get their fees waived

for a hundred and ten percent of the new construction and only pay the remaining

fees for ten percent overage or or do they under this proposal not get any

waivers because it surpassed the hundred and ten percent limit I believe that

will be dependent on how the ordinance is written. So because if it's a hundred and

ten percent you get it waived but if you go past the hundred the ten then it

calculates the link the all the impact fees for example the linkage fees the

arts and development fees and the LAUSD fees. Now with those I think there was a

a conversation about waiving those fees at one point at budget and finance but I

wasn't sure if it was added into the instruction but it's not for us it's also

not clear if they to be quite honest it's not clear for us also if they get

the benefit of one of the 110 permit fees being waived and only pay for the

difference it's not clear to us also as a department Ken Fong city attorney's

office I would suggest that you add additional instructions on that point

because the way that the instructions are written now it just says up to 110

percent so looking at that as face value you would only exempt those properties

but if you do want to give I guess you would say a pro rata of 110 percent even

if they go over and I think you should make that clear okay I that's when I

read up to 110% that's how I defined it and that's what I was I was more than

happy to support that now someone decides to build more than that they

shouldn't be penalized for not getting the waiver of up to 110% so I'd be

supportive of that to my colleague in the district 11 if that's amenable all

right it works out the councilmember Park is the next person on the queue

thank you council presidents and we appreciate the accommodation of a little

extra time on the public comment today as you can imagine this is a critically

issue critically important issue for so many people colleagues just a basic

reminder absolutely nothing nothing about this rebuild is voluntary not for anyone who lost their

home or their property on january 7th it doesn't matter whether it was a home rented or owned

or whether it was a beloved local business

or whether it was a multifamily building their grandparents bought in the 1960s.

Absolutely none of it, none of it is voluntary.

On January 7th, their entire community was taken from them.

Their homes, their churches, their schools, their pets, their memories, their futures, all of it.

Taken from them in a catastrophe that was no fault of their own.

These people survived terrifying evacuations and watched in horror as everything they knew and loved burned.

These are not voluntary remodels.

Literally no one asked for this.

These aren't people trying to rebuild for profit.

They are trying to rebuild their lives.

Thousands of them were under and uninsured, again, through no fault of their own.

Hundreds of them were dropped just weeks and days before the fire.

These are people who are grappling with gut-wrenching decisions right now about what to do.

These people are on the brink of calling it a total loss and walking away.

Their insurance benefits are running out.

Alternative living expenses are about to expire.

People are carrying mortgages on properties that were pulverized ten months ago, and now

they're also paying rent.

And I personally know too many of them that are holding on by a thread.

These are teachers, artists, and small business owners, and nurses, and builders, and office

workers just like all the rest of us all over LA. Some of them are grandparents, some of

them are brand new families just starting out, some of them have been there for generations.

These people are our friends, these are our neighbors, and they are Angelinos. We owe

it to them, to take care of them, just because it's the right thing to do.

While I do appreciate the fiscal concerns raised by the BFI and its report, restricting

the fee waiver to single-family homes and duplexes, which is clearly what the report

does just repeats the same falsehood that somehow the Pacific Palisades is just an island

of affluence.

The reality is what we lost is so much more.

It is rent-stabilized mobile home parks, which I have been fighting like hell to help rebuild

despite hitting one challenge after another.

of them were townhomes, nearly a thousand units of RSO housing, income-restricted condos

for seniors.

This is affordable housing in the truest sense of the word.

And for so many of them, older, modest, single-family homes, 110% just doesn't make sense.

The cost of labor and materials, having to hire architects and builders, these people

just lost everything.

Unlike the Budget and Finance Committee report, our report from the Recovery Committee captures

the breadth of the housing stock and more that was lost or damaged in the Palisades

fire.

We should not be picking winners and losers.

Telling one class of residents that we'll waive your fees if you own a single family home.

We'll waive your fees if you own a duplex.

But we're going to tell other people, too bad you own a mobile home or a condo.

Too bad your property was a multi-family building.

Too bad you lived in the ADU in the back of the main house.

Too bad you owned a building on Sunset Boulevard in the historic block.

Businesses that have served generations of Angelenos.

And worse, I can't find a good reason for the distinction.

It's not that the fiscal impact of rebuilding on multifamily or commercial properties is

any greater, according to the CAO's own report, waivers for multifamily would actually be

less than single-family homes.

And maybe in the grand scheme of things, it doesn't feel like waiving these fees is actually

going to make the difference between rebuilding and giving these folks a pathway home.

But for them who are making decisions about whether they can return or if they're just

going to pack up and leave LA forever, for us to show them that we have their back, it

might just be enough.

Enough to convince a retiree to stay and rebuild.

Maybe it'll be enough to convince an apartment owner to rebuild so that the people who were

there have an opportunity to come home to. Colleagues, I think the only thing that we

really can do here is to stand up for these victims, victims who through no fault of their

own have had everything stolen from them in this catastrophe. We have precedent for doing

this and my ask to you all is that we do the right thing and we adopt the ad hoc committee

report. I will like to ask when we take the vote, because I don't know where the numbers

are going to come, if this is going to be limited and if the BFI report is what is going

to be moved, I would ask, would you please, at least please, consider a friendly amendment

that would do the following. Include a sunset date, January 7, 2030.

Two, waive rebuilding fees for the ineligible Palisades property owners whose fees were already suspended as of the effective date of the ordinance.

If those household fees have already been suspended, City of LA can't be a collection agency.

Commitments were made to all of these people in the mayor's executive order.

Three, I think it is absolutely essential that the waiver to like-for-like rebuilds be expanded to include condos, townhomes, apartments, and our mobile home parks.

Fourth, we have to remove the 110% rebuild restriction for single-family homes and duplexes.

for the economic factors that I've just described.

And finally, for all properties up to 110%

should be waived before any fees are charged

beyond the 110%.

Thank you, colleagues.

Is there a second to Ms. Park's amendment?

I have councilmember Blumenfield on the queue a question is there any cost

estimate in terms of the the pro rata idea that that councilmember Nazarian

has because obviously what we've been told is that it's going to cost us 86

million dollars if we waive the fees to 110% if we just if it's open-ended it's

it's $278 million.

So presumably if it's pro rata between, meaning that if you build above the 110%, it's somewhere

between 86 and 278.

Is there any way to get an estimate as far as what this is going to cost us?

We haven't run that estimate.

It was just up to 110 and then if there's no limit.

But the 110 was based on the assumption that it was 110 or bust, right?

Right, right, right.

So the no limit was the 278.

The limit up to 110 was up to $286 million, could be more.

But, I mean, that's a rough estimate that we have.

But we haven't done an estimate.

If you have a portion of the properties that go, you know, to 150 and what that paratic,

you know, what the cost would be the difference on that.

We haven't done that type of estimate, but in any case, it could be up to $278.

Okay. Yeah, I mean, because I think it's a very reasonable idea,

just trying to get a sense of, you know, eyes wide open, what is this going to cost us?

Right. I mean, all we can give you at this point is that it would be

a range between 86 and up to 178.

It's hard to know who would build beyond 110%

or how many properties would be doing that.

Look, it appears to me that

I don't want to make a judgment in a way that's critical,

but it sounds to me like a lot of the questions

that have come up today just have not been calculated so when you tell me that

it's between 86 and 273 that means you don't know and so it because you can't

count it or made an estimate so so my question is and I have a question the

question is councilmember Park put a number of things on the table that I

think a lot of us would like to to take a look at I'm uncomfortable taking a look

at any of them if you can't give me any idea how much they cost.

I just can't do it.

And so I guess perhaps this is a city attorney question.

If we get this done today, if the Budget and Committee Finance Report passes today, as

Mr. Councilmember Park suggested, is this closed or can we come back to it and say let's

consider mobile homes, let's consider condominiums, let's consider senior housing facilities,

all those things?

Well, you can always adopt an ordinance and then later on

You know amend it you could do that

all right

And I just want to clarify council president this estimate was based on the number of properties destroyed and

Working with building and safety as to if those built up to the original size

What that rough estimate would be on the permits if everyone built beyond that it's very again

it's it's more of an art than a science given that we don't know exactly what

people are going to do sure I have confidence that we can do better than

what we had before us today though that's that's just my opinion based on

what I've seen going forward councilmember Nazarian is your hand going

up it was I wasn't there was a couple of side conversations happening so I

I didn't hear if that was a motion my colleague was putting forward.

And if it is, I'm happy to second it if you have something in writing that we can all look at.

But I think it covered the tenets of the safeguard that puts into place and the pro rata issue.

So I'd be willing to support that.

And I would encourage us to support that out today and then be able to look

the ordinance when it comes back so that we're not losing more time but but

gotcha all right we have speakers councilmember Park and yes it was

proposed as what I hope will be received as a friendly amendment to the BFI report

All right. I see nobody else on the queue. You cannot. Councilmember, I'm sorry, Madam Clerk, we got a lot of things in the air. Can you give us some guidance on what's before us and in what order?

Yes. So right now there is an amendment to the budget and finance report that was introduced by Council Member Park, second by Council Member Nazarian.

And the amendment covers various topics, including a sunset date and among other things. So that would be the immediate vote.

All right, Council Member McCosker.

Thank you very much.

I think there's a lot of value in the amendment to the motion.

But going to the Council President's words, I'd like to hear what the numbers are.

I mean, I think we do have an obligation to make sure that we are spending general fund dollars to relieve this crisis.

but I would like to know how much it is

and this range of 86 to a quarter of a billion

just is untenable

and I don't think what Council Member Park said

takes it to a quarter billion

I think it is artfully crafted

but I would like to know what the number is

I mean I would propose

that we take this into budget and finance

and get an analysis of what the numbers are

before we make the final commitment

Council Member Yarsoski.

Thank you, Council President.

I agree with Mr. McOsker.

You know, this isn't funny money.

It's not theoretical money, and we're going to have to do a budget in the spring that

is going to take into account general fund shifts that we're going to have to make.

We don't know how much it's going to be, and there was a lot to Councilwoman Park's proposed

amendment and I would like to before we vote on an amendment understand what the

fiscal implication of that is at a moment when we are already after our

first FSR at least 80 million dollars in the hole for this fiscal year I don't

think it's responsible for us to vote on things when we don't know what the

fiscal impact of that is so I I agree with mr. McOsker that that amendment

should come back to budget and finance.

I also am not opposed to voting today

on the underlying budget and finance report

and then hearing in the next possible,

I commit to Councilwoman Park that we will hear

at the next possible budget and finance committee meeting

once that info is available to us from the CAO

and we can layer back in additional exemptions.

We're talking about a couple of weeks,

we're not talking about months,

but I don't feel comfortable as budget chair

moving an amendment that I don't know what the fiscal impact of is.

Thank you.

All right.

So, Madam Clerk, we've got the last amendment made

was made by Council Member Park and seconded by Council Member Nazarian.

If I'm just going to defer to the makers of that motion.

Are you comfortable with it going to committee

at the next available meeting, or do you want to vote now?

Council President, these folks have been waiting for months.

They are dangling in uncertainty with their ALE about to expire.

Commitments were already made to these folks by the mayor months ago.

It has taken us weeks and months to get us here.

So I understand.

And nothing that Councilwoman Yaroslavsky said is wrong.

In fact, it is a head-scratcher to me

that we are sitting here today without the numbers

and not having taken into account the number of properties

that have already sold and what's even eligible

to participate in any of this.

Frankly, I'm appalled that we have as many questions

as we have to do and we couldn't even get an accurate answer

when we asked for it.

So theoretically, I am not opposed to sending it back

to do the work because it is this important.

But I need a commitment that it's going to come back fast.

We will, I think the committee chair

has committed to that and I'm committed to that

as chair of this body.

Councilmember Nazarian?