Torrance City Council Meeting – June 18, 2024

The Torrance City Council met on June 18, 2024, beginning at 5:07 PM in closed session and reconvening in open session at approximately 6:30 PM. The meeting included a closed hearing on a police officer termination appeal, a consent calendar with routine approvals, a major public hearing on the 272‑unit Torrance Del Amo residential development, and several administrative items. The Council unanimously denied an appeal and approved the Del Amo project, adopted the Lighting District assessment, and approved contracts, budget modifications, and insurance renewals.

Consent Calendar

• Approve Closed Hearing Date – Set August 13, 2024 for a closed hearing on a police officer termination appeal (Item 8A).
• Accept & File Investment Report – Investment report for April 2024 accepted and filed (Item 8B).
• Third Amendment – Seismic Retrofit Ordinance – $40,000 amendment to consulting agreement with Degenkolb Engineers (C2021-019), new not-to-exceed $464,770, extended to June 30, 2025 (Item 8C).
• Conceptual Float Design for 2025 Rose Parade – Approved the city’s float entry design (Item 8D).
• Animal Care & Control Agreement – Five-year, $1.6 million sole-source agreement with Los Angeles County Department of Animal Care and Control (Item 8E).
• Property Insurance Renewal – $683,925.34 policy renewal with Alliant Property Insurance Program (APIP) through July 1, 2025 (Item 8F).
• Excess Workers’ Compensation Insurance Renewal – $457,000 renewal with PRISM through Alliant (Item 8G).
• Automobile Physical Damage Insurance Renewal – $400,000 renewal with Hanover Insurance Group through Alliant (Item 8H).
• Side Letter Agreements – Approved side letters with TPOA, TPCA, and TPSA regarding pay ranges, merit pay, and classification changes (Item 8I). All consent items were approved unanimously without discussion.

Public Comments & Testimony

Oral Communications #1 (items not on agenda or on consent):

• A resident requested increased dog licensing enforcement.
• Charlie Salinas urged more painted utility boxes; staff clarified a digital‑wrap program is beginning.
• Mary Ann spoke for three weeks on police oversight, arguing community trust is broken and an independent civilian commission is needed.
• Joan Davidson asked for video recordings of Planning Commission meetings and clarified how to submit speaker cards.
• Audrey supported civilian oversight, using a hypothetical scenario to illustrate the need.
• A representative from the Torrance Rose Float Association promoted a fundraiser at Chipotle.
• Andy Porcha reported on the Transit Center’s one‑year celebration and noted a lack of ridership.

Item 10C – Torrance Del Amo Project Public Hearing:

• Appellant (Marjana Bubo, SAFER): Argued the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) is improper under CEQA. She stated the project’s construction VOC emissions (85 lbs/day) exceed the South Coast Air Quality Management District threshold of 75 lbs/day; that health risks from emissions require an EIR; and that noise analysis was inadequate because it failed to evaluate cumulative noise levels. She requested the Council reject the MND and prepare an EIR.
• Proponent (Rose Equities & legal team): Emphasized extensive community outreach (19 in‑person meetings, 25 calls, 21 email threads, 70 business visits, 34 letters of support). Counsel Andrew Fogg called the appellant’s late‑submitted expert reports “CEQA abuse” and argued the experts’ assumptions were unrealistic (e.g., assuming residents stay in units 24/7 for 70 years). He noted the city added conditions addressing soil contamination. Noise expert Noah Tansky clarified that the noise analysis used a protective 5‑decibel threshold beyond the municipal code.
• General Public (opposed):
  • Joe Odinkraz (Trias Environmental) – Licensed civil engineer; urged a soil gas survey for vapor intrusion from former oil operations, waste ponds, and above‑ground storage tanks. He stated that leaving contamination in place without characterization is “wrong.”
  • Joan Davidson – Detailed historical oil operations at the site (1928‑1948 waste ponds, active wells) and questioned cleanup records.
  • Richard Windish (President, South Bay Port HOA) – Asked the Council to consider neighboring homeowners, requested an honest environmental assessment, and noted the lack of communication from the city.
  • Melanie Hain (South Bay Port resident) – Supported the project’s design but expressed concerns about construction impacts; acknowledged the area will be developed eventually.
  • Several other speakers raised traffic congestion on Crenshaw and Sepulveda, building height (up to 70 feet), lack of bike lanes, density nearly 50 units/acre (double surrounding neighborhoods), and questioned the city’s housing element obligations.
• General Public (supportive):
  • Andy Porcha – Supported the project for increased tax revenue and population growth, jokingly offering a down payment.

Item 10B – Lighting District #99‑1 Public Hearing:

• Andy Porcha – Questioned the assessment and argued residents already pay Edison for street lighting; expressed frustration at receiving no visible benefit.

Other Public Comments (Administrative Items):

• Item 9A (Dog Park Maintenance Worker): Andy Porcha supported the $29,203 expenditure; another resident suggested using community service or school credit for cleanup.
• Item 9B (Security Guard Contract): Andy Porcha questioned the need for unarmed guards when police are present; staff responded that guards free up officers for patrol.
• Item 9C (SB1 Street Funding): Andy Porcha complained about the poor condition of roads and asked for his area to be included.
• Item 9D (Water Meter Registers): Andy Porcha opposed the $6.5 million expenditure, calling it unnecessary technology and noting meter readers may lose jobs.
• Item 9E (Liability Insurance): Andy Porcha criticized the 25% premium increase ($2.75M to $3.96M) as price gouging.
• Item 9G (Legal Services Amendment): Andy Porcha questioned why a small $70,000 item required separate discussion when millions passed on consent.
• Oral Communications #2: A resident donated dog treats and a PetSmart gift card to K9 Tango and the Torrance K9 unit.

Discussion Items

Item 10C – Appeal of Torrance Del Amo Project (272‑unit condominium development at 2325 Crenshaw Blvd):

• Background: The project proposes a General Plan Amendment (General Commercial to Medium High Density Residential), Conditional Use Permit, Planned Development, and Vesting Tentative Tract Map. It includes 244 market‑rate units, 28 affordable units for very low‑income households, a 50% density bonus (91 extra units for total 272 units), subterranean parking (461 spaces vs. 336 required), building heights of 48–69 feet, and a floor area ratio of 2.0.
• Staff Presentation: Leo Orts (Community Development) detailed the project’s consistency with the 2021‑2029 Housing Element (target density 33 du/ac), environmental review (Mitigated Negative Declaration with mitigation measures for biological, cultural, noise, and soil hazards), and parking provision.
• Council Deliberation:
  • All councilmembers disclosed meetings with the developer and site visits.
  • Councilmember Lewis confirmed the environmental analysis was conducted by an outside consultant (CAGA Environmental) and that the city must meet RHNA obligations (4,939 total units, 1,621 very low‑income). Since 2021, zero very low‑income units have been built; this project would add 28.
  • Councilmember Sheikh asked about mitigation measures, pedestrian pathways, and developer outreach (19 meetings, 25 calls, etc.). Developer confirmed they will install sidewalks, landscape buffers, and develop a construction management plan.
  • Councilmember Kaji noted the excavation costs ($68,000 per space) and the trend towards remote work reducing traffic impacts. He also asked about environmental testing history; staff confirmed a Phase I study was done when the office building was constructed in 1989.
  • Councilmember Gerson acknowledged the tension between state housing mandates and neighborhood concerns, noting that 3/4 of Torrance’s RHNA obligations have not been addressed during the 2021‑2029 cycle.
• Decision: The Council voted 7‑0 to deny the appeal, adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration, and approve all five resolutions (General Plan Amendment, CUP, Planned Development, Division of Lot, and Vesting Tentative Tract Map).

Item 10B – Lighting District #99‑1 Assessment for FY 2024‑25:

• Staff presented the annual levy of $1,866,272 for street lighting services. Councilmember Sheikh asked about revenue and SCE rate increases; staff clarified the assessment is based on special benefit and any surplus is carried over.
• The Council closed the public hearing and unanimously adopted Resolution 2024‑41 confirming the diagram and assessment.

Item 9A – Program Modification for Dog Park Maintenance Worker:

• Staff requested authorizing a 0.5 FTE Maintenance Worker ($29,203/year) for the new off‑leash dog park at Columbia Park (pilot program). Councilmember Sheikh confirmed it is a pilot; if successful, more parks may follow.
• Motion carried unanimously.

Item 9B – Award of Unarmed Security Guard Contract:

• Staff recommended Citiguard, Inc. for $546,415.44 over three years (five guards at City Hall, Council Chamber, Library, and Farmers Market). Councilmember Sheikh noted a significant price increase (from ~$108K/year to ~$182K/year). Staff explained the market response; 18 proposals were received, and Citiguard scored highest on qualifications and price. The city’s current front‑desk guard (Kevin) will be offered a position.
• Motion carried unanimously.

Item 9C – SB1 Road Repair and Accountability Act Projects:

• Staff requested $928,686 in appropriations ($353,686 from current year projection increase; $575,000 from prior year surplus) for residential pavement improvements (slurry seal or grind and pave). Councilmembers Gerson, Mattucci, and Kaji recused themselves due to living within 500 feet of identified areas. Remaining Council (4 members) adopted Resolution 2024‑40 and approved appropriations.
• Motion carried (4‑0).

Item 9D – Sole‑Source Purchase Order for Water Meter Registers:

• Staff requested $6.5 million for 26,500 Neptune AMI registers to replace aging AMR units (10‑year warranty expired). The new registers communicate via cellular, enabling customer portal and leak detection. Councilmember Mattucci clarified only the register top is replaced, not the meter body.
• Motion carried unanimously.

Item 9E – Excess Liability Insurance Policy Renewal:

• Staff requested $3,957,200 (up from $2,754,822 last year). Councilmember Lewis welcomed the new risk manager; Council approved unanimously.

Item 9G – Third Amendment to Legal Services Agreement:

• $70,000 amendment for Liebert Cassidy Whitmore for civil service appeal matter (total not‑to‑exceed $320,000). Approved unanimously.

Key Outcomes

• Police Officer Termination Appeal: The Council voted 7‑0 in closed session to deny the appeal and uphold the Civil Service Commission’s decision to sustain termination.
• Torrance Del Amo Project: Denied the appeal (7‑0); adopted the Mitigated Negative Declaration; approved all five resolutions (General Plan Amendment, CUP, Planned Development, Division of Lot).
• Lighting District #99‑1: Adopted Resolution 2024‑41 confirming the assessment for FY 2024‑25.
• Dog Park Maintenance Worker: Authorized a 0.5 FTE position for Columbia Park, funded by $29,203 annually from the General Fund.
• Security Guard Contract: Awarded three‑year contract to Citiguard, Inc., not‑to‑exceed $546,415.44.
• SB1 Street Funding: Adopted Resolution 2024‑40 and appropriated $928,686 for residential pavement improvements.
• Water Meter Registers: Authorized sole‑source purchase from Ferguson Waterworks, not‑to‑exceed $6.5 million.
• Liability Insurance Renewal: Approved $3,957,200 policy with PRISM.
• Legal Services Amendment: Approved $70,000 amendment.
• Deferred Items: Item 9F (South End Racquet and Health Club lease amendment) was rescheduled to July 2, 2024.
• Next Meeting: The next regular meeting will be Tuesday, July 2, 2024, at 5:00 PM (closed session) and 6:30 PM (regular business) in the Toyota Meeting Hall. June 25, 2024 is a Council Dark Night.