City Council - Regular Meeting

10 o'clock, it's time for the council meeting session. Ms. Stachowski is here. We have two members present. We need eight more for a quorum.

Thank you. Thank you. so . . Thank you for watching. Thanks for watching! Thank you.

Ten minutes after 10, and we have Mrs. Chick, Mr. Hernandez, Mrs. Misikowski, Mr. Pacheco, Mr. Padilla, Mr. Fuhrer. We have seven members present. We need three for a quorum. Sergeant, would you go see if you can find the three?

they should be huh

Do we have your attention, please? Do we have your attention, please? Call the roll.

Okay, this is a meeting of the City Council for the City of Los Angeles on the 15th day of December 1999.

Nine, there are 15 council districts in the city. The regular meeting days are Tuesday, Wednesdays, and Fridays. We are currently being viewed by cable subscribers throughout the Los Angeles area on Channel 35, and we're also being monitored by council phone. First order of business.

Approval of the minutes.

All right, Mr. Bernson moves, Mrs. Chick seconds. If there's no objections, unanimous vote. The next item.

Commendatory resolutions for approval.

If there's no objections, unanimous vote. Next item.

Before beginning the regular agenda, there are several items to be continued. Item number three, the applicant requests continuance to January 5th.

If there's no objections, unanimous vote.

Item number six, applicant consents to a continuance to March 1st.

If there's no objections, unanimous vote.

Item number eight, applicant consents to a continuance to January 5th.

If there's no objections, unanimous vote.

Item numbers 38 and 39, a request to continue to January 14th.

There's no objection. Unanimous vote. Next item.

There are several confirmation of city officials.

Let's take those up.

Item number 18, Gregory A. Evangelatos to the Commission on Disability.

Is he here? Is there... And motion is required. Mrs. Waller's moves. Is there any discussion on this?

To the committee, and we have no cause for concern here. We appreciate his service, and we look forward to his contribution to the city.

Thank you. So Mrs. Waller's moves. Prepare the roll. Tabulate the vote.

Ten ayes.

Mr. Evangelinas, you've been approved. We want to thank you for serving the city. Forthwith on that. The next item.

Item number 19 is confirmation of Bernardo Silva to El Pueblo, Los Angeles Historical Monument Authority.

Mr. Silva. This is another one, Mrs. Walters.

Yes, I had the opportunity to meet with Mr. Silva as well as to hear him in committee, and I think he'll be a great asset to the Pueblo. We submit his recommendation with enthusiasm.

Mr. Hernandez.

yes was for the council we were trying to find yet that's part of the man's report on mister so can you tell us something about your background and why do you feel specially qualified to serve a monument

I'm a general business litigator with a law firm in downtown Los Angeles. I grew up in Los Angeles my whole life. You grew up where in Los Angeles? In Silver Lake. I currently live in Los Feliz now. The El Pueblo area is an area close to my heart because I used to go there as a child with my family for mass. believe there's great potential there that hasn't been realized. And I think there's a lot of work that can be done to improve the area and make it an asset to all of the city and all of its residents.

Okay. What do you think are some of the issues pending there?

Well, I believe in terms of creating an area that brings in all areas of the city, I think there's a lot of work that needs to be done in that regard. I certainly haven't seen the materials that are pending before the commission, so I'd be a bit hesitant to give you any specifics without knowing the specific agenda at this point.

All right. Could you forward a copy of your resume to my office? I'd like one. Normally the mayor does that. On this instance, I didn't get one. And I was the author of Proposition H, which created your authority, by the way. And so I just have a special interest. I also sat on a previous authority, and for whatever reason, I didn't have a chance to talk to you prior to. And I'm assuming Mr. Pacheco strongly endorses your appointment? Okay. Okay, thank you.

I'll let him speak for himself. Mr. Pacheco, did you want to be heard?

I was just going to strongly endorse his appointment. Mr. Silva is an individual who I've known for a while, and he actually gets a great benefit from having graduated from the same high school I graduated from, which is Loyola High School. No, that's in my district.

Okay, prepare to roll. Tabulate the vote.

Ten ayes.

Mr. Sewell, you've been approved. I think Mr. Wax is here, so let's make it 11. Forthwith on that, and thank you for serving the city. Next item.

Item number 31 is an extension of appointment Lydia Kennard for interim general manager of the Department of Airports.

Is there any discussion on this? If not, prepare the roll. Tabulate the vote.

12 ayes.

Lillian Kennard, you've been reappointed interim general manager. There's a forthwith on that item. Next item.

Item number 50, Mr. President, should be taken up before item number 32. It's a salary for the interim general manager of the El Pueblo.

Item 15.

Item number 50.

Item what number?

Item number 50. 50. And the council's received information from the EERC, and the council may wish to recess to close session to consider this.

I know, but you guys didn't get it. You never picked it up. Okay.

I'll just go to the EERC recommendation.

Yeah. You heard Mr. Fuhrer's motion to any discussion. If not, prepare the roll. Tabulate the vote.

12 ayes.

That is approved. Now we have...

Item number 32.

32. Prepare the roll. Tabulate the vote.

12 ayes. Mr. President, there's also the salary to establish on this. Do you wish to take a separate vote on that?

Yes. Which one?

32B. It's a salary for Mr. Luna.

Okay. Prepare the roll on 32B. Tabulate the vote.

12 ayes.

That is approved. Mr. Luna, you've been approved, and your salary's been set, and we want to wish you the best. Mr. President, Mr. President.

Before Mr. Luna leaves, I would like to be recorded as an individual that was in strong support of this nomination. I cannot think of a person who has worked so hard for this city to be placed in this capacity. My working with him with the housing department, I have seen Sam do so many things so well that this is an appointment that will serve the city well and offer him the heartiest congratulations. You're one of the good guys, Sam. You deserve this appointment. Congratulations.

Thank you very much.

Okay. I second that.

Yeah. Let's, yeah.

He's a good guy.

He is a good guy.

Rudy?

Sir?

He's actually a guy who said he could get something done, which is so rare. Call him. I've got to make a point.

okay thank you the chair recognizes council president ferraro for presentations

Mr. President, under the council, I have two presentations. And the first one is a certificate of welcome to the National Commander of the Jewish War Veterans of the United States. And that's Monroe Moni Myers. Would he please come forward? Moni, we want to welcome you to the city of Los Angeles. wish you the best and I have great admiration for your organization. I attend many of the meetings and I want to present this on behalf of the city of Los Angeles.

I accept it gratefully on behalf not only of our national Jewish war veterans but also on behalf of the Department of California. Members who are represented here this morning, we appreciate your recognition of the organization as a whole. Thank you, sir.

Monty, thank you very much.

Okay.

With all your delegation, please stand, Steve, and we want to welcome also you to the council chamber. Members of the council, we... We have another resolution to present today. And sometimes it's with happiness, and mostly with happiness, but because she's leaving. But Pat Healy graduated with honors in January of 1968 from Arizona State University, where she played football.

Thank you.

She started her city career with the Public Works Department in June of 1969. She was promoted through the ranks and then joined the city clerk's office in 1978, managing the budget of the council, general city purposes, and the city clerk. Pat promoted to chief management analyst in 1984 as a manager of the council and public services. She effectively managed the day-to-day operations of the council and all of its committees. Pat then promoted to executive officer in August of 1997, over my objections, the number two position in the city clerk's office. Pat has always been extremely helpful to the city council and always willing to resolve problems. She has always tried to assist the public and other city departments in getting their issues and programs before the council and its committees. Pat has twin sons in 1974, Daryl and Dwayne, who are here. Daryl is the West Coast manager of Ingram Micro. Dwayne has worked for the city council member Nate Holden from 1993 and 94 and now is in management assistance in the Department of Building and Safety. Pat is retiring after 30 years of dedicated, I really don't know how dedicated, outstanding and I don't know how outstanding the services to the City of Los Angeles residents. She will continue to work having been selected to be Clerk of the Council in the City of Santa Ana. Now therefore be it resolved that the City of Los Angeles hereby commends Patricia E. Healy on her dedicated and outstanding career with the City of Los Angeles and wishes her the best in her new position as Clerk of the Council for the City of Santa Ana. Can you believe that they would hire this person?

You're so sweet.

Mr. President, I do believe there are some There are some council colleagues. There are some council colleagues that would like to speak also. The chair recognizes Councilwoman Walters.

It's OK. All right. I'm very sorry to see Ms. Healy leave the Los Angeles city clerk's office. And we're going to miss her smiling face every day here. She's been a real problem solver and assists us greatly in her work through the city clerk's office. It's hard to think that you won't be here. You've been a real asset to the city. And now you're going to take all that to Santa Ana. I think they have good taste. They chose a champion, and we're going to miss you.

Chair recognizes Councilwoman Chick.

Yes, I'm not going to give Pat a rough time about leaving because I'm rather awed at the courage and energy to make a change at this point. But I'm very much going to miss not only the level of professionalism and honesty and hard work and good work, but the smile and the warmth and the caring that emanates from you, Pat. It's most exceptional.

Chair recognizes Councilman Feuer.

Obviously, Pat, it's with a lot of affection that all of us are congratulating you and wishing you well. And it's a real testament to how widely you're loved throughout the city of Los Angeles that you could draw a standing room only crowd to the City Council Chamber Day just to see you off. We're really going to miss you. You're going to do a great job. I'm sure there's going to be a line of well-wishers about a mile long as you leave the Council Chamber today.

Chair recognizes Councilman Bernson.

Pat, I'm not going to take a long time because we've got a long day here ahead of us, and you've seen many of them. I just want to wish you the best. I really hate to see you go because you've been really great up here in helping us in our work. And I wouldn't pay any attention to Ferraro. He's getting up in years, and he's getting a little senile, you know. So just overlook some of those comments. But we're really going to miss you, and I wish you the very best.

Chair recognizes Councilman Wax.

When Diane Titus left recently, I thought the only thing worse that could happen if Diane left is Diane and Pat both left. And now we have our kind of worst fear. I think you've just done a remarkable job to keep this place together, to keep it working properly. And you're not going to be easily replaced. or your boss over there standing on your right, I'd be really worried right now. You've lost really a right-hand person that you've come to rely on. And I, who have been critical quite often of city employees at times, also really admire when I see a city employee that exemplifies what public servants should be. And the way that you've handled your job, and raised your wonderful family at the same time and the fact that you're all here today really is kind of really nice to see that you're here together because I've always thought you were part of our family and I've always admired the way you made your family a part of it and I wish you Godspeed. You deserve the very best.

Chair recognizes Councilman Holden.

Isn't Santa Ana in Orange County And you know what? If you're going to work for Orange County and then you're moving to Orange County. Deaton never did that. You know, he came up here, he takes all of our money.

That's near the marina, I think.

That's near the marina, that's right. They got a marina down there also. But Pat, you know that there's just nothing, anything they could say bad about you if they just wanted to roast you. They just can't roast you and they can't toast you because... That's not the way we know you. We know you to be really a genuine, fine, helpful person, not just in your job, but just as a friend. And what's always impressed me, Pat, is that you've given everything you had to this job. You've given it all. And yet at the same time, those two young men there you raised, when the day goes by, if I ask you that, you wouldn't with a smile say, They're doing just wonderfully well. And I know when I had an opportunity to send, did we send both of you guys to Korea? Yeah, one at a time. They were twins, but we didn't have enough money to go around, so they all stepped up to the plate, and there they were. But I admired you for support and encouragement for your sons. And you gave them a lot of time. You did not neglect them. It's quite obvious today that being here at your side. You guys, I know, should always love and protect your mother to the end of times because she's always been there for you. And I'm very, very pleased to say that.

Chair recognizes Councilman Pacheco.

Pat, you know I've only been a council member for a few months, but you were one of the first city employees that I worked with on the Charter Reform Commission, and I always felt that you did a great job and served us very well. I know that everyone else will take something from your example, because I did, and I really appreciate all the work you've done for me personally as a commissioner and for the city. So I just want to say thank you and good luck.

Chair recognizes Councilman Hernandez.

You know, and I just want to stand and almost make it unanimous here. Ever since I came onto the council, Pat, you've represented what the city clerk's office has been about in terms of its objectivity and its professionalism, and it's serving the council as well as all the committees. And I just wanted you to know that I don't know how we're going to function without you. I don't know what Mike's going to do without you. The reality is I think you've given him a lot of freedom out there to do other things as the city clerk. I just know, to me, you're the city clerk's office. You're someone who have always said, I'll represent that. And it's going to be hard to figure out how we're going to function without you. Thank you very much for serving us.

Chair recognizes Councilwoman Misikowski.

Thank you, Mr. President. Pat, as you know, there are tens of thousands of city employees and we expect them to all do their jobs and provide services with professionalism. But there are really only a few, I think a handful, who not only do their jobs but know how all the other jobs are supposed to be done and how the entire city is supposed to work. You're that one person. So your leaving is more than just leaving one position. The city is going to have a tremendous hole to fill. because of your experience, your knowledge, and as has already been said, the care and consideration and spirit with which you provide it. So I know Mike is going to have a very, very difficult time, but so is the rest of the city. However, it's Santa Ana's gain, and they are very, very tremendously lucky.

impact on the chair i would like to thank you uh... six-and-a-half years ago you were the first person to welcome me as a new council member to the city of los angeles with me and my colleagues then taught me councilman one oh one what button to push, the terminologies, everything in regards to being prepared for that first meeting and to serving on the council. You're awesome. Thank you for everything. I'm personally going to miss you. Los Angeles has lost a cent in its gain. You're a terrific person. God bless you. You're terrific, Pat.

Thank you, Mr. President. Let me ask the city clerk to find some kind words, if it's possible for him.

Basically, I think you've hit on the critical point. I've worked with Pat since I joined the clerk's office in 1983, and she is going to take from this building an incredible amount of knowledge, and that is impossible to replace. And the other thing she walks out with... is an attitude that we can fix most things, and we can accommodate what people really want. We may not be able to do it the way you want to do it, but we can figure out a way to accomplish the goal. And too often we forget that that probably is our basic mission here, is to get things done. So I'm going to miss her, but the neat thing is she's going to be down in Santa Ana probably bugging me every day about the Brown Act. government code and now she gets to play the election game as the elections are in Santa Ana so that's a whole different wonderful world of joy but we will miss her and I will personally miss her and good luck Patricia Pat on behalf of the city council and really all the people of Los Angeles thank you for a great job done for the city

This is your boy.

Actually, it hasn't set in what I'm about to do. The last 30 years have been truly wonderful. Of course, my greatest accomplishments are standing right here with me. And that's my twin boys, Daryl and Dwayne. But the next best thing I did was come to the city clerk's office 21 years ago. It's been truly a rewarding experience. And I want to thank Mike Carey and the wonderful city clerk staff for all their support. And I'm going to miss each of you also. So thank you very much. You okay?

Pat, good luck on your new job.

Thank you.

the chair recognizes councilwoman chick for an introduction yes colleagues i wanted to share with you today those of you who haven't had the good fortune yet to meet with them we have a very special delegation from the west valley uh... jewish community relations committee And if they would stand, please, so we could recognize you. Eddie Klein is the chair, if you wave your hand. Jack Mayer is the executive director of the Valley Alliance of Jewish Federation. And Barbara Cream is the staff director. They've come down to observe us, to learn more about what we're doing, and to go back and become very active in the community, even more than they are already. Thank you for joining us.

Thank you, Councilwoman. Madam Clerk, next order of business.

Next item, Mr. President, required public hearing items are 1 through 17. Items 1 and 2 are street lighting district ordinances to levy the assessments.

Okay, I do not have any speaker's cards on items number 1 and 2. Are there any persons in the audience that would like to be heard on items 1 and 2? Items 1 and 2? Okay. Any colleagues like to be heard on items 1 and 2? If not, Madam Clerk, would you open the roll on items 1 and 2? Tabulate the vote.

12 ayes.

Those items are approved. Next.

Item number 4 is also a required public hearing item. You have cards on that item.

Okay. We do have some speaker's cards on item number 4. We do have Bonnie Kopp.

Go right ahead.

Good morning, council members. My name is Bonnie Kopp, and I'm with the AFRIAT Consulting Group, and I'm here today to represent people in progress. As the agenda is long and there are many people who have come here today in support, I'm not going to ask them to speak, but I would like to ask all the people that are here in support of people in progress to please stand up right now. Thank you. This is a skateboard park that is proposed for Councilman Hernandez's district in the MacArthur Park area. Through this long process, we feel that we have crafted a project that has responded to everyone's concerns. We have worked closely with Rampart Division of LAPD. We have worked with the church, St. Nicholas Cathedral, in order to fashion conditions that we hope will minimize the impacts on the surrounding area and also provide maximum benefit to the kids of this area. This will be a carefully controlled program with strict eligibility and residence requirements. And in addition, I'd like to point out that the project has been slated to be funded by three grants which are currently on hold pending the resolution of this conditional use permit appeal. And those grants are from the Staples Foundation the Amateur Athletic Foundation, and the Weingart Foundation. In addition, it will be supplied by numerous in-kind donations. Councilman Hernandez is here to speak, and I would like to turn the podium over to him. So please accept our entreaties.

We'll have Mike speak last. We have those opposed. Saul Abjelet, Father John Ryman. Dr. James Marotti. Go ahead. Thank you.

Saul Agilat on behalf of the cathedral.

Pull the microphone up, will you, Saul?

Thank you. We've submitted detailed letters expressing the cathedral's concern regarding the project. Council Member Hernandez has said, repeatedly asked uh... why the cathedral is opposed to the project and i'd like to somewhat address that initially uh... we uh... recognize the need for skateboard parks and and like activities uh... the the need for that in the city is tremendous we all know about gang activity uh... the need to bring in our newly acquired members of the community into the community and the cathedral is taking and has been taking active steps in that regard. This Saturday we're going to have a function at the cathedral where we're bringing in approximately 2,000 kids in the community to the cathedral where they're going to be fed, they're going to be given gifts, they're going to be talked to, and they're going to be worked with. We invite and request uh... the members of the council to it to at least attend and see what we're doing because i think it's a movement that needs to be made uh... citywide to bring uh... various groups into the community and make them a part of the community will get rid of hopefully our gang activities and like uh... problems at this kids club function we're going to have uniform security guards At every function that we have at the cathedral, we have learned that we need uniformed security guards. So our concern with this project commences with the fact that it's a hit and miss project. They are underfunded. and we've got some real concerns. We know that skateboarders tend to congregate. This council passed an ordinance regarding Hoover and Jefferson prohibiting skateboarding in that area because of the danger of the activity and the fact that skateboarders congregate. Our particular area has hills, The skateboard project is 50 feet across a 50-foot street from where our services are conducted. We have a senior citizen's home. We have a preschool that's there with 140 children at that preschool. If these skateboarders do congregate, which we can anticipate they're going to congregate, the literature of People in Progress states that they intend to draw on a community of 100,000 youth to that skateboard project. If they do congregate, which we can reasonably expect that they will do so, there's got to be control. And this is what we're concerned about. Yes. Am I going too long?

Yes.

I'm sorry. Again, we request that you do come tomorrow to see the kinds of activities that we have. We urge you to attend. We urge you to put in conditions that are effective to control the problem that we're concerned with. Thank you. Thank you.

Father John Ryman.

Yes, council members, my name is Father John Ryman. I'm the second priest at St. Nicholas Antiochian Orthodox Christian Cathedral. We are a church with very, very deep roots. Indeed, in the book of Acts, it says that the disciples were first called Christian at Antioch. We have had an unbroken tradition of Christian worship and practice since the time of Christ and the apostles handed down to us. Our existence in the community there in the Westlake area has been even before the 50 years of this cathedral at an earlier church of St. George. And since the changes that have taken place in the area, the faithful have determined to stay there and seek to respond to some of the changes and make a difference because we are cathedral church we have had many daughter churches who have come outside of us who have uh... been created in the whole southland area and we're in communion of course with the large orthodox community at large which includes all of the orthodox churches in the southland area and are associated with the Coalition of American Orthodox, including both Oriental and Eastern Orthodox churches. Part of our two concerns, because our parish is a parish that is very large, and we do extend all the way from Simi Valley to Thousand Oaks to Temecula and to Upland. The area has become very, very central for us and many of our faithful still choose, even though they may live in those far-flung out areas, they choose to stay there. Our two big concerns at the cathedral, at least I can speak as a priest, I celebrate the holy services and the altar which is right across the street, at the back of the church, right across the street from where the skateboard park would be. Our services are very ancient services. When our services were formed, there were no musical instruments as we know them today. And so all of our services are done a cappella. They're done only by the human voice. And there is already sound impacts on some of the services. Even one, the last time we did the kids club in November, we had to ask some of the construction that was going on outside if they could please stop during the services because we couldn't hear ourselves. So there is an impact already in the neighborhood with what's going on. And our concern is that This may impact negatively upon how we do our sacred services, which are not just on Sundays, but are throughout various times of year. And finally, of course, the concern is also on congestion and the safety in the area. Our concern is what happens if we do have some of our elderly who are in the elderly home that's adjacent to the cathedral who like to walk the streets there. What happens to our children who are coming in and out of the complex for the daycare as well as all the other church functions, the sacraments that we have there. Our concerns are great, and we ask that you consider that in your final decision. Thank you very much. God bless you.

Thank you. Dr. James Jamil Harani.

Thank you, council members. My name is Dr. Jamil Harani, and I'm president of the parish council for St. Nicholas Cathedral. I want to first state that St. Nicholas Cathedral does care about the community. We think what's good for the community is good for St. Nicholas Cathedral. And while we may not live in the area, we do worship in the area. And between that and our place of work, I dare say that many, if not most, of our parishioners spend more time at the cathedral than we do in our place of residence. While this project is laudable, I do feel that with the increased congestion in the area, with our senior citizens home with our daycare center with our elderly parishioners that with skateboard uh... skateboarders in the streets that there may be some increased danger in this may be present an increased uh... problem with liability uh... both on on uh... parishioners parts and also on skateboarders parks and perhaps on city uh... part i feel while while that there may be other locations that may be more beneficial than this one however i understand uh... COUNCIL MEMBERS HERNANDEZ'S DESIRE TO HAVE THIS PROJECT GOING THROUGH BECAUSE IT IS A GOOD PROJECT. IT DOES HAVE A LOT OF MERIT. AND I DO APPRECIATE PEOPLE IN PROGRESS' CONDITIONS, PARTICULARLY THAT OF DRUG TESTING, AND I APPRECIATE COUNCIL MEMBER MIZAKOWSKI PLACING THAT IN HER CONDITIONS AS PART OF THE PLUM COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS. But with all this and said, I would like you all to think carefully about this and see if indeed a residential area may not be the best place for escape. Thank you.

Thank you. Mike Hernandez.

Members of the council, one reason why I'm speaking on this side of the podium is I have to recuse myself from the vote itself. And I have to do that because I was the original appellant of the zoning administrator's decision. And I want to clarify a little bit because this project is going on fourth in Grandview. If any of you know where St. Vincent's Hospital is, the ear clinic next door to it, it's right behind it. And it is 50 feet from the church, probably a little bit farther than the 50 feet, but they're talking about the street width itself is 50 feet. And what you need to know is working with St. Vincent's, they basically agreed to donate the land. It came from people in progress talking with St. Vincent's and them wanting to do a project for the youth. Now when we talk about a residential neighborhood, this is one of the most dense areas in the entire city. If you're familiar with 3rd and Alvarado and 6th and Alvarado, it's in between there. And you know the apartment buildings that are there and the fact that there are no recreation facilities whatsoever for youth. Now to share with you what this project is about, it's a partnership not only with People in Progress, but the Rampart Division and St. Vincent's Hospital. As a youth center, that basically is going to have, as part of its conditions, the kids have to join. And part of them joining is going to require them to basically participate in counseling, produce report cards, in some cases do drug testing, so that we can make sure that the youth that are there are basically headed in a positive path. It's the kind of center the Ram Park Division has been trying to establish in that area for a long time. And with the grants that we have, it's right now scheduled to be a two-year program, and one of the conditions asks for a review of the operation. We tried to take into account some of the cathedral's concerns in the redesign of the park itself. But it's a very noisy area as it is. I just want you to understand that. And so I don't believe that this park is going to increase any more noise. What this issue is about is the fact that these are skateboarders. And there's concern about skateboarders congregating in one place. While the reality is there is no place for skateboarders to go under supervision to basically work with counselors, to basically work with police officers, community-based policing, and to basically create a positive opportunity in a positive venue in which they can do much more than just ride their skateboards, but actually receive some counseling, actually be part of some direction in a positive manner. And that's what this project is about. And I just would ask that you would approve it at this time. Thank you.

The public hearing is over. Ms. Mistakowski.

Thank you, Mr. President. The Planning and Land Use Management Committee did have a public hearing where we heard extensively from a number of people who were opposed, as well as a number of organizations and a number of youth, and I think we see some of the youth in the back today, testified themselves. This was supported, although it is controversial and was appealed by the church across the street. The project area committee for the proposed Westlake Recovery Redevelopment Project area supported this, so the local advisory committee involved in redevelopment of the area. It was also supported by our own Children, Youth, and Their Families Commission, People for Parks, and as we know, this is an area which has a dearth of open space, a much lower percentage of parks, and a much higher concentration of families living in high-density multiple apartments and not having that relief. This area, like every other area with the growth and interest of skateboarding, is being inundated with skateboarding on our streets, on our sidewalks, in our business areas, on any kind of retaining walls. And so it's important, if not imperative, that we try to provide a relief in an organized, structured environment. That's what's being provided here by a community organization strongly endorsed not only by all of our organizations that are for children, but also by the LAPD, because they believe that they can be a partner in this, working with People for Progress, the entity that's going to be providing it, and as was indicated, create a structured, enclosed environment. As a consequence of the church, there were conditions added. The park, the skateboard park, will not be open during times of the church use on Sunday, And at any other time that the church indicates that because of its high holidays or holy days, that there needs to have absolute quiet. So there is a committee structure that is created in the recommendation of the community groups with the church to work out that liaison and make sure that the skateboard park itself is not utilized on times when it would be most negatively impacting the church. There is also going to be security on site at all times. And as is indicated, a threshold for entry. Not all children will be allowed to enter here. There will be structure, there will be membership, and that membership will be maintained as a consequence of grades and other performance. It will also be locally controlled so that the majority of the membership will be for those in that immediate area. So I commend the community and the community groups for working something out, for finding a piece of property, and particularly working with St. Vincent's Hospital, which is offered its land for this opportunity, and the committee report was unanimous in recommending a grant of the appeal for people in parks with conditions and with findings to allow this to go forward, and it's indicated to have a review in a few years to make sure that everything is working according to the standards and the conditions that we're imposing.

All right. Mr. Wax? Someone from the staff tell me, who owns the land and more particularly, what role will the city play in either owning this land or managing it or staffing it or in any way participating? Any city participation?

None other than the allusion to Rampart Division being participant in the program.

My concern with skateboard parks is that they could result in a lot of injuries which the city... I'm always leery about the city being subject to liability getting sued. And I know that we have somewhat discouraged skateboard parks on our own park land. I don't know if there are very many, if any. And one of the reasons is potential liability for injury to people. I don't want the city to in any way, I would want the city attorney to somehow assure me that the city would not in itself be subjecting itself to liability should we approve this.

Well, the truth of the matter is that we basically subject ourselves to liability every time that we approve something and we have been sued. But on something like this, it would be the person who ran it would be the people who would be responsible for the injuries that occurred in that area.

What I'm asking about, not necessarily the liability in the approval of the conditional use or whatever, is it a conditional use permit? Yes, sir.

Yes.

But in terms of the actual then, the ongoing operation, if it, for example, had been a city facility, we would have ongoing potential liability. Do we have any interest in this that would subject us to liability beyond the actual act of approval today?

Only the Rampart Police Division's participation and any accidents that would occur on city streets nearby as a result of it. That's the only thing I could see.

We can also ask for an indemnification.

Is there an indemnification as a part of this? No. I'd perhaps like to add that we add that in something to the city attorney's satisfaction. I just don't want to sort of get ourselves into a liability issue here with something that... seems to have a number of occurrences. Ms. Chick, were you going to address this?

Well, I wish I could definitively, and now with what I've just heard from our city attorney, some concerns are caused for me, but I was going to let everyone know that, for instance, with our Prop K dollars, that one of the uh... facilities for recreation that i have supported from the beginning and made sure was funded as part of what went before the voters is a skateboard park that will be run by our city's department of recreation parks in the west san fernando valley because i feel very strongly that this city needs to keep finding ways to have neighborhoods that have churches, schools, playgrounds, dog parks, recreation centers, and safe, legitimate places that minimize accidents of a sport, an activity that is not only a legitimate one and growing in popularity, but is an alternative for young people who need and want something to do. There are other cities that have successfully opened and run uh... the skateboard parks and it was on the absolute reassurance from the department of recreation parks with involvement from our professional legal staff that i was told because it was one of my first questions even making it safer there are injuries that in parts with swings instead of skateboard parks uh... i was reassured that there was a way to do this WITH THE CITY OWNING THE PROPERTY AND THE FACILITY TO INDEMNIFY OURSELVES AND NOT HAVE AN INCREASED LIABILITY RISK.

THAT'S VERY REASSURING. COULD WE JUST PERHAPS ADD A CONDITION FOR INDEMNIFICATION ON THIS SINCE WE WON'T, SINCE THE CITY WON'T HAVE THE ABILITY IN THIS CASE, THE CONVERSE, TO ACTUALLY ASSURE SAFETY MEASURES. WE'RE RELYING UPON THE OTHERS. PERHAPS WE CAN JUST INDEMNIFY OURSELVES FROM ANY LIABILITY THAT ISN'T DUE TO OUR OWN ACTIVITY. Is that possible, Madam City Attorney?

Yes, we can ask for an indemnification.

Satisfactory to the City Attorney?

Right, and this is, in fact, not on City property.

I would move that we add that as a condition that the indemnification be satisfactory to the City Attorney.

Ms. Sikowsky?

I just wanted to add, for Mr. Wax's information and following up with Ms. Chick, there are some skateboard parks that we are beginning to pursue. Aside from the one that Ms. Chick has talked about, there is one in Mar Vista Park that the Rec and Parks Department is working with with the local advisory committee. And there has both been state legislation regarding liability on skateboard parks and for local governments. And for those cities that have throughout the state started to install them, there have not been lawsuits filed over a period of time if there are some provisions provided that the state provides. And so I think what we should do is ask the city attorney to make sure that those are provided in this instance, which gives fair warning, notice, et cetera, require the helmets. And so there have been some evolving changes in the issue of skateboard parks as it relates to liability, but I think there is the issue of addressing the focus that, in fact, it is a growing phenomenon, probably the fastest growing sport among our youth today, and it needs to be a part of our array of opportunities that we are giving our youth today in organized, structured ways. This one is not a city facility or a city sponsor in any way, but I think that we need to know and explore those, and Reckon Parks has that information in front of them.

Okay, Mr. Bernson.

Previous question, please, on the entire matter.

Mr. Bernson moved the previous question, which would cut off debate. Prepare the roll. Oh, shucks. I would like to vote. Twelve ayes. All right, the matter is before us. Now, we have an amendment by Mr. Wax. Prepare the roll on that amendment.

And the language should read indemnification and defense.

Prepare the roll. Tabulate the vote. 12 ayes. That is approved. Now we have the item as amended. Prepare the roll. Tabulate the vote.

12 ayes.

That is approved.

Okay.

Members, we've got ordinances, and there's 12 members here, so let's take up the ordinances.

Maria. Item 16, 21, 22, 33, 34, and 35. All right.

Is there anybody who wants to be heard on 33, 34, 35? We don't have any cards, so the public hearing is closed. Any specials by council members? 35. 35. All right, prepare the roll on 16, 21, 22, 33, and 34. Tabulate the vote.

12 ayes.

Those are approved. All right, the next item.

Item number five is required public hearing.

Members of the council, we have a lot of cards. Mr. Bernson, we have a lot of cards on item five. Mr. Holden.

There's been a lot of public hearing on this. Can we get five minutes on each side? No more?

Five minutes on each side?

Yeah. I move five minutes on each side.

If that's the case, then I'd ask those who... Opposing? Who are, well, do they realize what opposing and what isn't opposing? All right. The committee...

There are some amendments coming in, Mr. President, so let them speak.

All right, can we, I'm not going to call names out. Who wants to be heard? Who is the spokesperson for item five in favor and in opposed?

I would ask that we strictly limit this to five minutes on each side. We had a public hearing.

Yeah, we are.

And we have an agenda. I don't know if we're going to get through it today or not.

Okay. Who's going to speak?

Mr. President, do you want the opponents to go first?

Proponents, go ahead. Yeah, opponents or proponents. You start talking.

We're opposed to it, so we'll wait. We'll get our group together and limit the number of speakers so we can make it short.

Opponents speak first.

Okay. Council members, item five, my name is Ben Resnick. I'm here representing a group not only of other owners in the area but also property owners and residents known as, and some of them are here, neighbors for a better life in the area. We've had a plum committee hearing last week where the committee unanimously recommended denial of the dance permit. There are many reasons why they recommended denial, many legal irregularities and other problems. But primarily, I think the reason was that last year this very applicant came to the city council with an application for a conditional use permit for alcohol and for dance permit. And he voluntarily withdrew the application for a dance permit. and represent it to the city that he does not need it. He will operate as a supper club as long as he got his alcohol permit. Well, he has not yet opened his business. They're still building it out. They have not been operating. But after he got his alcohol permit from the city, he immediately then came back and refiled again for the dance hall permit. This has gotten the community very, very upset because the difference between a supper club and the difference between adding a huge dance hall permit with a huge facility for dancing is the difference between a supper club and a nightclub. And what the community is very upset about is that not only did the applicant come back now and ask for the dance permit, having represented to the city that he won't do it, but he's also extending the hours or wishes to extend the hours to 2 a.m. every night. He is parking cars in an R4 zone right next to apartment buildings. And so therefore, what you ought to do is do what the Plum Committee did, which is deny it. Let them open for business for a year. And if they can operate in a fashion that's reasonable and quiet and they want to come back and convince the community and convince the council that they ought to have a dance permit, then go ahead and in a year let them do that. Meanwhile, I want to show you an advertising which you can pass around, which was in the Korean press, and we've highlighted it and enlarged it, and we have the translation behind it. If there's any doubt that this applicant is building a nightclub, his own advertising, which I'll distribute, calls this the biggest nightclub on Western Avenue. And at the bottom it says, job opportunity, the biggest nightclub, La Preve in L.A. So don't let the applicant get away with disguising a nightclub by calling it a supper club, and you ought to deny the dance permit. We have other exhibits, but I'd rather the community speak. Thank you.

Okay. Could you give your name, please?

Ed Corbett with Community Watch and Neighbors. And I'd like to thank you, Mr. Chair.

Talk into the microphone.

I'd like to thank you, Ed Corbett from Community Watch and Good Neighbors. And I'd like to thank you, Mr. Chair, and to the other city councilmen. I just got some very key points. It seems like we're back here again. I would also support that the city council members support the committee recommendation on these points. Number one, it seems that the city planning is ignoring community input and participation. There's a question about the saturation of liquor license in this particular area. This particular area have private clubs have more liquor license than the grocery stores in the area does. Also, we kind of feel like the process of community has been compromised and contaminated with a lack of public hearing and a lack of community input in these type of issues. For an example, the Wilton Theater, as I understand, when the Wilton Theater has an event there, there's very limited parking in that particular area, especially for the resident, let alone some other business. And right around the corner, we've got a supermarket, we've got the sizzler, we've got a lot of other businesses who use parking spaces. This area is not fit for a larger expansion because there is no parking. And as I said, I would like to see that the tactic of planning and zoning be more open for community participation. Thank you. Vote for the community recommendation. Thank you.

I'm just amazed. My name is Loretta Jones and I'm a community resident there. And I'm just amazed that we can go through this process over and over and over again. Nate Holden, you know that this is a community where people live and that club is not going to have people in there that have a stake in this community. And the families in this community are not going to be able to take and have parking, nor are they going to be able to live there. I'm amazed that you don't listen to us in the community. It keeps going on and on and on. And they started off saying they wanted to be a supper club. I'm not opposed to a supper club. I am opposed to a dance club.

All right, thank you. The time, the five minutes is up. Now we're going to hear those in favor of the supper club or whatever it is. Would you give your name, please?

Ray Cordova. President Ferraro, members of the council, staff and attendees at today's council meeting, my name is Ray Cordova. I'm a relative and spokesperson for the applicant at today's council meeting. I want to begin by thanking you for the opportunity to address this August body as we make our presentation on behalf of La Preve Dinner Club. I will begin by first addressing the issue of the appeals process. The appeals process is an integral portion of the CUP applications. It was designed to protect the populace from unscrupulous individuals or merchants who would take advantage of those with little means of self-protection. However, there are those who will use the appeals process to place stumbling blocks in the way of the free enterprise system which we in this great country fully subscribe to. The applicant in this particular case is not an unscrupulous merchant who would use our free enterprise system to take advantage of anyone, and yet the process is being exploited to its fullest extent by competitive business interests engaged in a similar or like business. It is because of fear of La Privé Dinner Club being granted a conditional use permit and their business perhaps suffering a loss of revenue. We respectfully request the City Council to uphold the findings and determination of the Board of Zoning Appeals and the Zoning Administrator. To date, the applicant has complied with all of the conditions imposed by the BZA and in many cases gone beyond what is fully expected. The applicant has invested nearly $3 million in this project, fully expected to have the CUP granted. This was done with knowledge that they, the applicant, would have to comply with all land use regulations and statutes of this city. All that was expected of this applicant has been complied with and then some. The applicant does not ask for special favors. All the applicant asks for is fairness. You have in front of you a packet prepared by the applicant which details concerns expressed at the recent plum hearing. There were questions expressed about the dinner club and having a full dinner menu. Attached is exhibit A, which has a copy of La Preve Dinner Club luncheon and dinner menu. Exhibit B has a few of the site photographs with exterior and interior photos of the dinner club to include the full kitchen, which would be utilized to the fullest extent at La Preve Dinner Club. The kitchen is a full kitchen with a walk-in cooler and a walk-in freezer. Questions were raised regarding occupancy of the dinner club. Exhibit C addresses these issues. A certificate of occupancy was issued on November 26, 1999, with a health permit issued on October 15, 1999. The ABC license was issued September 17, 1999, and all city tax permits issued on December 3, 1999. Discussion was held regarding parking at the facility. All parking is valet parking with entrance on Western Avenue only. There are two exits. One is which directly onto 7th Street and the other directly onto Western Avenue. There is no self-parking on or off the streets. Exhibit D has copies of the parking valet covenant, valet parking documents, and parking covenants with two sites providing over 700 parking spaces. One of the covenants expires in the year 2005. Petitions were talked about at the plum hearing. The applicant also has petitions from over 350 nearby Koreatown residents in total support of the La Privé Dinner Club. However, the petitions that really count are those whose buildings abut the dinner club. We have in hand an additional 37 declarations supporting the dinner club, and it must also be further stated that since the dinner club has been an ongoing project, the two apartment buildings and dinner club property are no longer infested with vagrants and gang members. For these two reasons, if nothing else, the residents support the project. The La Privé Dinner Club dance floor has been mentioned in previous hearings. A recent analysis of other like or similar dinner clubs which provide dancing proved that their square foot ratio in comparison to La Privé is more than double the size of the dance floor at the La Privé Dinner Club. The La Preve Dinner Club dance floor is a modest 30 by 30 foot in a building with over 17,000 square feet. The building sound system is engineered with state-of-the-art sound system in order not to be a noise pollutant to its neighbors. Security guard contracts are in place to ensure that the clientele who frequent the dinner club are entertained in a safe environment. The applicant now requests that the City Council approve the CUP application and uphold the findings of the Board of Zoning Appeals and the Zoning Administrator. In closing, there are many in the Korean community who have expressed great relief that at long last their community will have a facility which they can utilize for Korean American functions rather than traveling to the downtown area to rent a large hotel facility and having to forgo having their traditional meals. The La Previa Dinner Club will be a good neighbor and give back to the community by allowing the use of the facility several times a month by seniors groups and community-based organizations. Thank you for your patience and consideration.

Okay, thank you. The time you used, you were perfect. You used five minutes. There are a lot of people who wanted to be heard, and obviously we cut off the debate. We will make the cards part of the file. Okay, Mr. Holden, you... You want to be first.

Mr. President, members, what the applicant is requesting today is what the council approved 11 months ago. The opposition to this facility was then and now. They made arguments, false, that they were being given favored treatment. And so I came to the council and I says, now look, I don't think that should be the case. Would you reconsider what you've already approved? And that is to operate as a supper club. Board of zoning administration said it is a supper club. It is written a supper club. with a small dance floor which was approved by the City Council. I respectfully requested the City Council they reconsider part of that approval and rescind the approval of dancing and let them go through the conditional process so that no one could ever say that the City Council showed any favor to anyone and that's what they have done. Now, some concern was raised regarding the parking. They're providing for 600 plus additional parking spaces, valet parking, as a covenants. They've adjusted the hours being recommended by the zoning administrator and also by the planning committee, where they were closed at 1 o'clock Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and 2 o'clock to be competitive Thursday, Friday, Saturday, or whatever. Personally, I don't see anything wrong with that at all. What we have before us today is one business interest spending lots of time opposing another business interest in the community. I can see one person in the audience who is protesting a lightfoot business in Mr. Hernandez district across the street from the park at the big theater upstairs. And they came saying it shouldn't be there. I went out and saw with my own eyes there was nothing wrong with it. But they kept harassing, harassing, harassing until they got them out of business because they don't want competition. That's not the way we do it here in this country. You go through the process, you abide by the rules, and you should not be denied arbitrary anything. Sure, there was an article in the newspaper which upset me until I learned that there was no translation from Korean to English about supper or nightclub. No translation. So it was not with malice or intent. Lack of knowledge. And so, hey, the fact of the matter is that They're played by the rules. They got a copy of the menu. They got a copy of the facility. They just got the certificate of occupancy just about three weeks ago. How could they have opened? What, are we going to hold them to a different standard? How could they have operated until they got their liquor license from ABC? The police commission had already approved this operation, and we rescinded it. Now we should grant it because they had no right to do that in the first place. There's an amendment coming up, Mr. Ferrara, I mean Mr. Bernstein, would you just in my closing read that amendment?

so that you didn't include Nate.

Okay, Mr. President.

But you go ahead and read it, and then I'll add the amendment.

I move that the matter of the Planning and Land Use Management Committee report relative to the condition of use appeals for a property located at 721 Southwestern Avenue, item number five on today's council agenda, et cetera, be amended to deny the appeals file by four Protestants, adopt any necessary finding consistent with this denial, and grant the conditional use permit in this case with the following additional two conditions. Hours of operation shall terminate 2 a.m. on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday, 1 a.m. on all other days, notwithstanding what the zoning administrators had to say about this. also a parking agreement of 340 off-site parking spaces with valet parking. But since then, Mr. President, they've put up another 300 parking spaces and assigned agreement in the packet before you, much more than we even asked for. So they've gone beyond.

Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. Bernson?

Yes, members of the council, even though the committee unanimously at the time denied the application for the dance permit, I did comment at the time that if they came back with a proposal that limited the hours of operation, which Mr. Holden's motion does, and they demonstrated the fact that they could move the parking away from the residential area, which is directly behind the club, uh... there's one amendment i would also like to add to this and under those circumstances i can support it and that would be that alcoholic beverages be served only with the serving of meals and i would so move i think that will make the determination of what is a dinner or supper club and what is not If it is in fact a properly run supper club, dinner club, where food is served, people go there and have a meal and watch entertainment and may dance, such as we've had in the San Fernando Valley. The Moonlight Tango, which is no longer there, was an outstanding example of such a club that did not cause a problem in the neighborhood. except for the fact that there was no parking but which there is none along ventura boulevard but aside from that uh... if the parking issue is settled and if they can demonstrate that they're going to be good neighbors uh... i think that i can support this and i'm going to uh... i seconded mister holins motion and i would add my additional amendment relative to the serving of of alcohol beverages with food only and i would ask for a second on that And give me a second on that, would you please, Mike? Mike gives me a second on that, okay? Yeah, either Mike, I don't care. Both Mikes. Give me a second on this, Nate. Okay, very good. So we have a motion and a second that limits alcoholic beverages with meals. And I would, under those circumstances, I am going to support Mr. Holden's motion in that we approve the dance permit and the zoning administrator will be carefully monitoring this particular project to make sure that all of the Conditions are strictly adhered to and if there is a problem They will not be allowed to continue their dancing and and possibly other activities Miss Misakowski

Thank you, Mr. President. As was indicated, the Planning and Land Use Management Committee did hold a hearing on this and recommended against the provision of dancing. We had this case in front of us, as Mr. Holden indicated, a year ago. At that time, it was for the sale of alcoholic beverage and the opening of what was then called the Supper Club. It was allowed to have entertainment but specifically no dancing. I'm reading from the 1998 June report that this council adopted indicating that the applicant's representative addressed the planning committee and indicated that his client voluntarily agreed to not request dancing at this location. As such, the committee moved to delete conditions relative to dancing and then the council adopted that report. Consistent with that report, there were conditions of hours of operation, a operation of a supper club. and eight normal review as we always do as was indicated back to that process project that location has not opened yet we haven't had as mister holden indicated that first year's review of how it operated under the initial and original grant we're dancing was not allowed i do believe that as was indicated in the ad that was uh... circulated that the primary intent now is to make it a nightclub the indication of the pictures in the advertisement, show dancing, promote dancing. That's what this is meant to be, and that was precisely what the council meant not to be when we adopted this case, which was controversial a year ago. I think we need to let that first year's approval stay in place, let it operate, and then on that one year, two year review, let's see what the police department says, how it's been operated, whether or not they've conducted this in a manner that allows us to consider whether or not further expansion should be done. I think to grant expansion now, when a year ago this council had problems with it and it was denied, is the appropriate action. So the original Planning and Land Use Management Committee report, which 5a would amend and change entirely, is what I am recommending. A no on the amendment and to stick with the original council action of a year ago and the Planning and Land Use Management Committee report.

Mr. Hernandez?

Members of the council up. Mr. Holden referred to a nightclub in my district on Park Plaza It was the Park Plaza Hotel. And if you remember correctly, we closed it down and the reason we closed it down is they came in and basically were seeking permits use the banquet facility and using the kitchen of the hotel and saying it was going to be a supper club and I went to look at the facility and clearly it was a nightclub and Not only was it nightclub, but there was bottles of alcohol at the tables. There was young people who I didn't believe were 21 drinking. And there was dancing. And it was a nightclub. And then I had to go through the process of revoking a conditional use permit that I felt was issued wrongly. And we accomplished that. Now, their advertising also said nightclub. Now, what's bothersome to me in this process is that we're either opening a nightclub or we're opening a restaurant with entertainment. I mean, we shouldn't pretend we're opening one to allow something else to happen. And as Council Member Misikowski stated, what came before us the first time was a restaurant. And they were asking for permission at that time to serve alcohol for those meals, no different than the motion that Mr. Bernson has presented to us. And we agreed to that. And then they removed the whole aspect of it being a dance hall or having dancing at this restaurant. And we were waiting for them to open, and there would be a review. Well, to this date, they have not opened. And now they're before us asking for permission to include the dancing provision in the hall. Now, I just feel that they should apply one way or another. But I think that if we were looking at it as a nightclub, we'd be having different kinds of conditions and different kinds of perspectives. And again, Western Avenue is a very appropriate area for that. I don't have a problem with it. But at the same time, the conditions and the mitigations would basically protect the residents. Before my time is up, Mr. President, is anybody here from the police department that could comment on this issue? Because I think it's important we hear your comments as to whether you support this venue or not at this time.

Good morning, I'm Captain Powers from the Wilshire area. the operation of the club, whether a dance club or a dinner club, was originally proposed. The department's been opposed to it. We have no objections to the applicant itself. However, I was concerned when I saw the newspaper article this morning or the advertisements in the Korea Times. But our objections, frankly, have to do with Western Avenue, with the oversaturation of licenses in the area, and with the sizable outcry from the neighboring community. I might remind some of the council members, while each one of our 18 areas is very busy, Wilshire Division had over 61,000 calls for service last year. It was the number one area, as I know Councilman Holden and Councilman Ferraro both know, the busiest division in the city. We also had over 13,000 part one crimes. Unfortunately, we were the number one area for crimes, and I'd like to say proudly we were the number one in reduction last year. But nevertheless, we still lead the pack. Because Western Avenue is such a major thoroughfare, it's one of the few north-south access between the 10th freeway and the 101. And the blocks on either side of Western, two or three blocks to the east and two or three blocks to the west, form what we refer to as the Western Corridor, which is the busiest section of Wilshire area. As a result, it is our policy, and we have been opposed to all ABC license applications along Western Avenue. We have 11 on sale. Licensed locations recommended by ABC. We currently have, excuse me, there are eight that are recommended. We currently have 11 that are there. And the department's position has been the same all the way through each one of the steps of this process, and we still remain opposed to it. Thank you, Captain. Mrs. Walters.

Thank you, Mr. President. I find it nothing short of appalling that a liquor license, another liquor license, would be granted in this area that the police department says is oversaturated. It also concerns me that in a neighborhood, Western Avenue is a busy business street. but directly behind Western Avenue, both east and west, are apartment buildings, homes, a very densely populated area with lots of children. The Wilton Place School is not very far from this address where this nightclub, restaurant, supper club, whatever it's supposed to be, proposes to be located. Before this had been remodeled and converted some years ago, it was a restaurant. And I went to lunch there and had a very good lunch. But what impressed me about the place was that it was cavernous. It is just huge. And for a restaurant to make it there, they're either going to have to have just a stupendous traffic at all mealtimes or they're going to have to do what this operator is trying to do, take the back door and get his nose under the tent and get a liquor license, which he's already gotten, and then turn it into a nightclub. I don't think that we should allow people to subvert our laws and ordinances this way. And I think that all of us should vote no on this. It does not deserve to be operated as a nightclub and staying open until 2. The amendment says Monday through or Sunday through Wednesday, they'll close at 1. children go to school monday through friday and they have to go to bed early and get their rest do their homework so that they can be ready for school the next morning people who are working every day don't need to be troubled by nightclub noise at one o'clock in the morning with saying well we're closing down at one instead of two i don't know anybody that goes out for dinner at midnight on a regular basis and so for this to be considered a supper club they've got to have a steady dinner business after nine or ten o'clock at night and i don't see that happening the uh... i don't believe the demographic of the neighborhood calls for that this is uh... residential area where people are working and trying to raise their families and i think we need to support them and say no to this club this is check yes uh...

I take very seriously how our Planning and Land Use Management Committee, who I regard as our planning experts on the Council, vote. And so it was very much drawing my attention that it was a unanimous vote. I'm surprised that it no longer is. After listening to Council Member Misikowski explain that There was understanding and interest on the part of the committee that a community is interested in having the kind of establishment that Mr. Holden is arguing for. But I think they handled it in a very thoughtful and responsible way, with a good process. They were saying, let's take a first step. uh... went further than for instance i think councilmember walters would have liked uh... and maybe even some of the community members uh... but we're not going to go any further because this is exactly the kind of facility a neighborhood in situation after hearing from l a p d that we want to be thoughtful and cautious we want to track record We want to know that there's a history, so we feel comfortable pushing the envelope, particularly when many members of this community are expressing fears and concerns. I think we need to pay attention to how we do things in this room. And I think the process that was recommended to us by our plum committee is exactly the way we need to go. I will not be voting against the committee's original recommendation.

All right, Mr. Wax. I think also, Mr. President, in following up, I really agree with Ms. Chick, but I think we have a problem in our district that we share, the aftershock on Ventura Boulevard. It's a lot harder to do something after the fact. than it is before the fact. Closing down or modifying a business that's acting improperly is a long, difficult process. You have all kinds of due process requirements. You have an endless effort to try to rectify a situation that's bad. You saw that with the aftershock. We had all this here and then the guy claims he didn't get notice or something. We had to start all over again. We're still trying to deal with problems like that. Nuisance abatement is not an easy, is not an easy process. I get very leery when people don't lay their cards out on the table up front and aren't straightforward. I get very leery when there seems to be a deviousness about what one is doing. What do people have to hide? When people indicate they have something to hide, I think you're on good notice that your worst fears may come true. That is all the more reason to argue for caution. That is all the more reason to say, start as Ms. Misikowski recommended, and let them have the burden of proof that they can be a good business and work with the community. Because if we are already on notice that there may be more here than meets the eye, and believe me, if there is, it will be a lot harder to undo it than it will be to regulate it here up at the front end. So I feel very strongly that we should accept the approach that Councilwoman Misikowski recommended and put the burden of proof on the business to prove that they can be an asset to the community rather than a detriment.

Mr. Pacheco?

Can we call the previous question?

Mr. Holden speak.

I'll close. I was just going to ask the zoning administrator to take about 30 seconds, 45 seconds, and tell us what you have in mind before I just close out.

Well, there's two things that I'd like to see come out of this discussion. One of them would be that someone on the council come forward.

You made certain recommendations, that's all we're saying. I just need to know that so they can hear it.

Yes, the recommendation here was for the approval of the dance permit as previously approved by the zoning administrator that preceded me on this case and to carry forward those conditions.

Okay, very good. So what I was asking is that we impose additional, but the lobbying and the politics subsequently followed. I would ask for the amendments because I think they're going to even make it stronger than what came out of the border zoning appeals recommendation. And if that should fail, then I'll ask for no vote on the committee report. So, Mr. President, in closing, I ask an aye vote on the amendments. If we have the aye votes, fine. If not, then no on the committee report.

Point of information. What is your point, Mr. President? Just a clarification. It will take 10 votes. to uh... if we don't have ten votes to approve the committee's action then the action of the zoning board of zoning appeals and the zoning administrator will stand without the conditions that have been imposed so i would urge uh... whatever we do we we should vote on the conditions first and we we will justin okay i just want to make it clear that otherwise if these conditions including the serving of alcohol beverages with meals only are not included they will not be part of the thing unless there's ten votes you know can i just elaborate on that if we vote on the conditions

and vote for them by 10 votes or more, does that in itself add those conditions? It adds the conditions to the BZA's thing. If we vote to adopt the original planning committee report after we do those conditions, what happens?

Depends on your motion. If the motion was to add it to the approval, then that's what it would go to.

Gail, here's the question. Whether for or against... If there aren't ten votes either way, Mr. Bernson is saying, at a minimum, you want to have the tougher conditions no matter which side you're voting on. My question is, can you vote for the conditions, and then if the underlying motions don't get votes either way, what happens?

First of all, you only need eight votes one way, ten votes the other way. eight votes one way is... That's to sustain the Board of Zoning Appeals. Okay. Would be eight votes.

No, it's the other way around. It's the other way around. No, she's wrong. The Board of Zoning Appeals, we need ten votes to override the Board of Zoning Appeals. Which approved the dance hall, the dance... You need ten votes to override...

Right.

You need eight votes to approve.

Right. Point of order, Mr. President. If we were to vote on the committee's recommendation, if we vote on the committee's recommendation and that fails, okay, because it doesn't get to ten votes, do we then vote on the zoning administrator's recommendations? And at that time, we could vote on the amendments.

Yes, and that should be eight votes.

And that would take eight votes.

All right. We have the 5A before us.

Yes, Mr. President.

Prepare the roll.

First, my amendment on the meals.

Including your amendment.

Maybe the zoning administrator should clarify this, because I don't have the file in front of me.

All right, they don't have the file. The caller wants to be heard.

Thank you, Mr. President. I want to ask for some additional information from the city attorney. We've been talking about how many votes we need to cast in the affirmative for this or that. What happens if we vote completely no on both the amendments and the report?

Yes, they don't.

If they don't have here because I have to know what happened.

If they don't have the 10 votes, the zoning administrator and the decision will stand.

Then if they're not 10 votes to approve. No, by January 4th, you have January 4th. They could continue this. Yes.

Point of order.

May I finish getting a response because I didn't hear him respond to it. If there are not ten votes to approve either the amendments or the report, what happens? You only need eight votes to approve the amendment. I'm talking about disapproving.

okay okay if they're not if if they're always if they're really about eight votes to do whatever you're going to do to the amendment that was brought in okay the action in front of you which is to deny is a ten vote item the approval would be eight votes

TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENT.

MR. PRESIDENT, THE SAFE IN A SITUATION WHERE THE AMENDMENTS ARE APPROVED AND THEN THEY'RE NOT THE TEN VOTES TO DENY THIS, WHAT HAPPENS? IT'S INACTED?

Yes.

So to disapprove the main report, we need 11 votes. Ten votes. Ten votes. Okay.

Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, I'm going to suggest that since the amendment is clearly at variance with the committee report, that we vote first on the committee report. If there are not ten votes, then the amendment is appropriate. And if there are not eight votes for that, then the matter can go over because this is a time limit file until January 5th. So if there are not ten votes to adopt the committee report to deny the entire action or eight to adopt the amendment with affirming the zoning administrator, then the matter can go over. But I think the first vote should be the vote on the committee report to deny the entire action.

Ms. President, I deny Ms. Bernson.

Yeah, I just want to ask the city attorney, if there are not ten votes to turn over the action of the planning committee, the report, what happens? Does the Board of Zoning Appeals action stand today? Yes. At the time limit. Let me have the city attorney answer.

You have until January 4th to act on this. Therefore, you could keep it on the table and take an eight. You can vote by eight votes affirmatively to do what you want today.

Yes, but suppose there are neither votes to approve either one. What happens then?

Then it would stay on the table until January 4th.

And then what would happen on January 4th?

And then the previous action would stand.

The Board of Zoning Appeals action would stand, which I want to remind all of you that they have approved the dance permit. It's important that the conditions are put in if there are not the votes for this. So I would urge that we vote for the conditions first, Cindy. If we have to keep the other thing on the table, fine. But I would like those...

Mr. Brinson, the reason I'm asking is let's see if there are 10 votes to adopt the committee report. If so, then there is no dance hall.

I don't know if there are 10 votes.

All right. Well, wait, wait, wait. No, no, no. There's a very important legal question I want to ask. to the city attorney. That's what happens when you get an attorney on the council. I know, it's really important. If we vote for the committee report first and it does not get the 10 votes, and I anticipate it will not get the 10 votes, it's gonna fall short.

Okay.

Do we then lose jurisdiction over the whole item and cannot amend any of the conditions? No. Okay, I just want to make sure we can then move to the conditions.

You can then, then what you may do is move to amendment, amend it, and then adopt by eight votes.

Okay.

That's fine.

All right, Mr. Savornich moves the previous question. No objections to the previous question. The debate is closed. All right, what do we have before us first?

The committee report. The committee report. Ask for an aye vote.

Prepare the roll on the committee report. Tabulate the vote.

Seven ayes, five noes.

That failed. Now we have the conditions.

Mr. Holden's amendment.

And Mr. Bernson's motion is included in that. Prepare the roll.

I should have been registered as a no vote on the last one.

All right. Let the record so show. Prepare the roll on the conditions. Tabulate the vote.

Eleven ayes, one no. Okay.

That is approved.

Now. That's it. It was approved.

Prepare the roll on the report as amended. Prepare the roll. Tabulate the vote.

Seven ayes, five noes.

That failed.

That'll stay on the table until it'll go over to the next meeting and then to January 4th, unless the council wants to continue it to the 4th.

I move the public hearing be continued closed. Yeah, it is closed.

Mr. President, if you'd record me as a yes vote on that middle vote, I thought we were voting against the whole proposal.

All right. Okay, the letter is still recorded. Members, let's get the routine items off the agenda. So can we... We have 10, 11. We have somebody that wants to be heard on 12 who's in favor. And if he's going to be in favor, we won't get to it for an hour or so.

So I hope he understands.

13, 14, 15, 20, 23 through 30.

36 and 37, 40, 41 through 49, 50 through 63. Any specials by council members?

Yes. I'd like 13-14 special, and I thought that 15 had been continued to January 19th. That's the information I had.

Well, we don't have that information.

That the request was going to be made.

Who's going to make the request? It's on the agenda that it's going to be made. Ms. Walters is correct about 15.

Oh, applicants request continuance of the 19th. There's no objections. That will be the order. So we have all those that I read off except 13 and 14.

John, I was unclear. 24 and 25 are not before us now, correct?

They are before us.

Okay. I'd like to 24 special and 25A, please.

Okay, we'll call those special, too. All right, you got the rest?

Also number 23. Huh?

Oh, yeah. 23 you want called special?

Right.

Okay. All right, we... 21, Mr. Wax, did you say? Speak up, I can't hear you. We did that already, Mr. Wax. 24 is already called special. All right, we have 10, 11, 15, 20.

Mr. Farrar, I understand that item number 20 was going to be continued. The planning department wasn't prepared with the ordinance, and that was going to be continued to January?

I didn't hear anything on that. It doesn't say anything about that. Do you know that, Cindy? Okay, 20 is continued to when?

January 10th.

January 14th, okay. All right, let's go now. 10, 11, 12, 15.

No, 15 is continued.

15 is continued.

Not 10.

10 is called special. 15 is continued. 26, 27, 28, 29, 30. 36 and 37. 40 through 63. Prepare the roll on those.

Mr. President, I thought I heard Ms. Misikowski call 10 special.

9 and 10 are called special.

OK. All right.

Prepare the roll on the balance. Tabulate to vote. Tabulate to vote. 12-5. Those are approved. Forthwith on all the items.

And 35 was not voted on, right? No. That's special. Yes. That's right.

Okay. Okay.

What about 47? Did you vote on call 47?

No.

Good. Okay.

It's been approved.

Great.

Okay, we're going to take up 9 and 10 now. Before we take up, we'll recess the council meeting for the session, and we'll have a special session, which is a consent deal. Call the roll on the special council meeting.

Brinson, Chick, Fuhrer, Galantra, Goldberg, Hernandez, Holden, Miszkowski, Pacheco, Padilla, Ridley, Thomas, Swornitz, Wax, Walters, Ferraro, 12 members present. The quorum, Mr. President.

Okay. What do we have before us? Item number one?

Item number one is a variance appeal filed by Dean Gittleson from the Board of Zoning Administrators Determination.

Is there anybody who wants to be heard on this? You want to speak for the applicant? Yes.

So one minute. One minute.

No, you did not fill out a card. But go ahead, give your one minute.

I did fill out a card. Well, we don't have it.

This is... Okay, go ahead.

My name is Roger Diamond. I'm the attorney for the applicant, Dean Gettleson, who seeks to overturn the BZA's decision denying the application for an exception under the Los Angeles municipal code if the city council is going to deny the application for the exception under 1270 the municipal code the council has to make a specific finding as to what particular property in the city is available for an adult business that finding was not made by the zoning administrator was not made by the board of zoning appeals it's up to the city council to make a specific finding as to the location of property that would meet the requirements of the code that was not done we believe that's error on the part of the council the burden is on the city to demonstrate availability of property and if the city should deny this request we ask for expedited preparation of the administrative record under 1094.6 of the CCP so we can seek immediate judicial review. There is urgency because of the First Amendment. Thank you very much. Thank you. All right. Mrs. Chick.

Yes. Mr. President and colleagues, I believe we usually rely on city legal expertise to advise us. And from the zoning administrator to the BZA to PLUM, This has been a thumbs down all the way. It's in my district, and it's a thumbs down. And there are very specific reasons why. It is too close to residential, et cetera. But Gail, if you would, is there any reason for you to comment to us? We've been advised to go ahead and deny this.

I'm assuming that the attorneys who handled the plumb ADVISE YOU ON THIS IN TERMS OF THE FINDINGS THAT WERE NECESSARY TO MAKE ALONG WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND THEREFORE I'M ASSUMING THAT THEY ARE IN THERE.

ABSOLUTELY. AND COLLEAGUES, WE ALSO HAVE CERTAIN SPECIFIC AREAS, LOTS OF THEM THAT HAVE THE PROPER ZONING FOR THIS REQUEST ALL THROUGHOUT THE CITY. IT'S NOT THE BURDEN ON THE CITY TO FIND A LOCATION FOR THIS APPLICANT. THANK YOU. I ASK FOR A YES VOTE.

BERNSON, DID YOU WANT TO BE HEARD?

Mr. Diamond is incorrect. The council is never wrong. Remember that, Mr. Diamond. We may err sometimes, we may be foolish sometimes, but we're never wrong. Members of the council, the committee felt very strongly and supported the action of the zoning administrator. There are other locations that are available. It's not the duty of the planning department to go out and find a location for the applicant. That's his responsibility. He tried. Please, your time is up anyway. The location is within 500 feet of residential use, which clearly...

uh... gives the city the option of not approving this application and i would urge and i vote on the uh... committee report special one uh... special agenda prepare the role tabulate the vote that is approved forthwith on that now we'll go back on our regular session nine and ten All right. Do we get a presentation first?

Mr. President, members of the Council, I'm Larry Friedman with the Planning Department. And to my left is Emily Gable Luddy, the Associate Zoning Administrator. There were three matters before the Planning Commission which are here on appeal today. Those are two conditional use permits, one for the Getty Villa Museum itself, one for alcoholic beverages incidental to the museum, and the other was a coastal development permit. Before the zoning administrator and board of zoning appeals was a proposed reduction in code required parking. I'd like to use the aerial photograph behind me to illustrate the site. Getty Villa is a 64-acre site. Much of the existing development in the Getty Villa is concentrated in a bowl or a canyon. The 76,000 square feet of additional floor area constitutes mostly improvements or renovation to the existing facility. There are, however, two additional parking structures which are proposed. One would be a new visitor parking structure on the side of an existing 83 space surface parking lot. The other would be a 200 space parking structure primarily for employees and museum staff. Access to the museum will continue to be for visitors as it has been in the past along Pacific Coast Highway traveling north through the access driveway off the Coast Highway and you would exit the museum property along its previously approved exit onto Coastline Drive. Visitors who, not visitors, but invited guests to the museum would be allowed to access the property from Los Leonis Drive, which is on the northeast side of the museum. Part of the improvements for the Getty Villa include extensive landscaping, construction of a six foot high landscape block wall along the westerly property line, also construction of a six to eight foot earth berm which would abate noise coming from the site to protect the westerly property owners. That would extend 880 feet northerly of the new parking structure. The outdoor theater performances would be permitted only outside of regular museum visitor hours. There would be a maximum of 45 performances per year in the new outdoor theater. There would be no amplified music permitted. There would be only a voice enhancement system permitted. The city planning commission would review the operations of the outdoor theater after three years of its operation. The conditions included an independent third-party sound consultant to monitor the sound related to the theater, and that would be done annually for the first three years and could be extended beyond that. There's also a requirement for a $2 million neighborhood protection plan. The appeals were considered in the Planning and Land Use Management Committee yesterday. The committee voted to recommend granting the applicant's appeal, which was to reconcile the number of parking spaces, particularly the visitor parking structure, with the action taken by the Board of Zoning Appeals. That would be to permit up to 560 parking spaces. One of the key changes also made yesterday in the Plum Committee was to reduce the size or the capacity of the outdoor classical theater from 600 people to 450 people maximum. The committee recommended strengthening the enforcement provisions, including financial penalties for any violations in the operating requirements of the outdoor theater or any violations of the neighborhood protection plan. It recommended to broaden the scope of the neighborhood protection plan to include improvements to the adjacent Los Leones State Park. There was also a new requirement recommended for the Getty to develop an educational and community outreach program that would extend the Getty's cultural programs to off-site venues throughout the city.

Okay, thank you, sir. What I would like to ask is, Councilwoman Misikowski, do you move 10 minutes on each side?

Yes.

Okay, 10 minutes on each side. And what I would like to ask those persons in the audience who are either the proponents or the opponents, 10 minutes on each side means that we're going to be able to accommodate five speakers on each side. So I would like you to take a moment among yourselves and choose who the five speakers on each side are going to be so we don't have to go through the cards. And then I am going to call the opponents first and then the proponents with the Councilwoman's permission. And I'll just give you a moment to do that, if you would. And then we will proceed. And after you prepare yourselves in regards of the five persons on each side, as you come up to the podium, if you would identify yourself for the record so the clerk can have your name on file, that would be appreciated so we don't have to go through the cards. We are going to have to expedite this process in that there is a strong likelihood that we are going to lose a quorum at approximately 1245. Okay? So I would like to ask first the opponents if you would please come forward and line up behind the podium, the five speakers. and you may begin your testimony in order and please identify yourselves for the record opponents are you prepared okay let us go with the opponents please first if the five speakers to please line up identified yourself for the record and proceed to go right ahead sir

Thank you. Mr. President, members of the council, my name is John Murdock. I'm the attorney representing Pacific Coast Homeowners, which comprises six separate organizations in the Pacific Palisades area. We have filed this appeal not to impede the Getty from reopening their art collection museum. What this appeal is concerned about is the opening of a new venue for a theater. At this site, a theater is not allowed by the Los Angeles Municipal Code. They have attempted to reconcile that with the code by calling it an accessory used to a museum. That's not correct. It is a separate theater. It's going to have separate hours of operation. It's going to have separate reservations. It's going to have separate parking. It's going to have separate patrons. So therefore, the Planning Commission exceeded its authority in granting the permission to operate a theater. Secondly, we want to go back to 1975 when the theater was allowed to operate under a conditional use permit The issue then was traffic. Pacific Coast Highway, as you know, is the most notorious state highway as far as traffic congestion is concerned. In 1975, those concerns led the Commission to adopt limits on the number of cars that could go into and out of the site. Those limits are by conditions in the CUP at no more than 216 spaces. What you have before you now is a proposal to increase that to 560 spaces. However, there's no justification in the record to allow that to happen. We'd like some discussion among the council members, if you would, about how these findings could be adopted. There is no evidence that there's any change in conditions on Pacific Coast Highway that enables you to override that condition. Not only that, it was in the specific words of Mr. Getty's attorney, a representation by Mr. Getty that he was not going to come back later and ask for more increased parking. Now the council office yesterday at the hearing, and I believe it's the position of the Getty, is insisting that the condition in 1975 sort of tagged on at the end that any future changes or expansions would be subject to a public hearing is being read as an invitation to come back in the future and have more public hearings for expansions. That was not an invitation at all. It was put in there at the insistence of the homeowners because the Getty had operated the museum illegally and without public hearings. Now we have a public hearing and it's their burden to show that the conditions have changed which would allow them to operate at the expanded use. Conditions haven't changed.

Okay.

I'm going to refer you to my letter of the 13th and save time for other speakers, but precisely this case of Edmonds versus County of Los Angeles held that the binding commitment made at a public hearing was binding on the applicant.

and under conditions of promissory estoppel both the applicant and the city cannot go beyond that thank you very much thank you sir may have the next speaker if you could please identify yourself ma'am thank you mister president and members of the council my name is ellen stern harris i'm with the fund for the environment i was among the co-authors of proposition twenty which created the coastal act i served as vice chairman for the first four years of the commission's life One of the most important reasons that 55% of the voters passed Proposition 20 was to protect their access to our beautiful scenic and recreational resources at the coast. And as you all know, PCH has become untenable for passage. The geology is such that no matter what Caltrans does in buttressing the cliffs, they will move toward the ocean, pipes will break, and traffic will be impeded. I am here on behalf of the public's interest in those resources. I am not a homeowner, and I know that they're very well represented by Mr. Murdoch and others, but I really beg you to omit the adoption of the amphitheater as one impact too many for this fragile area to sustain. Thank you very much.

Thank you, ma'am.

I'm Rebelle Helgeson speaking for Pacific Coast Homeowners. Contrary to the Getty's public relations campaign, there have been no meaningful compromises on any of the issues that are truly important to the community and the neighborhood. Also, there have been no real mitigations for significant traffic impacts to Pacific Coast Highway. Those that are proposed may never be constructed because they're not in the city's jurisdiction. This should have been ironed out in the EIR because mitigations are proposed that will probably mitigate absolutely nothing. Even if they are constructed, some of them do nothing to solve the real problems. This is not something, a situation that you can build your way out of because of the conditions of PCH. Fourth item, we have a letter submitted to you yesterday that shows that property values are dropping as much as $40,000 per unit with the news that this theater is going in. Houses are not selling in the immediate area the way that they did, and when second offers are made, they're at a significantly lower price. Fifth, the coastal permit. My letter yesterday details why it's just simply impossible to consider a coastal permit. I won't go over the details, but clearly it prejudices the ability of the city to prepare a local coastal program, a project of this enormity in size and impacts. Finally, the Getty has set a fine example for other art institutions in returning the pillaged plunder that really belongs to others. It's time now for the Getty to return what it has stolen from its neighbors, their trust in the Getty's promise, their faith in government, their property values, and the quiet enjoyment of their homes. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am. May I have the next speaker?

I'm Garrett Hank, and I'm speaking on behalf of appellants Greg and Jocelyn Cortese. What I'd like to focus on is parking. Basically, when the conditional use permit was granted for this use, a limited amount of parking was accepted. And that was a very important accommodation between the interests of the residents and the operation of the museum. Traffic is severe. The impacts would have been great to have more parking because it means more trips. That accommodation was agreed to by the Getty, enforced by the city, and lived with by everyone. If it worked for as many years as it has worked, why must there be more parking now? Have there been any changed circumstances? No, there have not. There have, but not that justify more parking. Traffic is worse. That suggests less parking. The collection and the viewership at the museum should be less than it was before, because a large portion of the collection has moved elsewhere. Why does that justify more parking? There is no justification for an increase in parking. What was there worked adequately and would continue to work adequately. Even if there were a justification for more parking, it need not be on site. There are plenty of opportunities to buy parking or buy land to provide parking and shuttle people in. Why burden this neighborhood on a heavily impacted thoroughfare with more traffic because you have to have more cars on site. You don't need to have more parking spaces to make this facility accessible to people throughout the city. If our concern is school children, they generally come in on buses. They don't need car parking spaces to facilitate school use. If our concern is with regard to generalizing this use, you don't need the parking to do it. Thank you, sir. May I have the final speaker?

Yes, my name is Jim Dyer. I live in the Sunset Mace area, and I'm here representing myself, and I'm also a member of the Board of Directors. I believe it was read into the record yesterday. I'm speaking towards the Getty Entertainment Center, not the core museum. Resolved that representatives of the Sunset Mesa Property Owners Association are authorized and instructed to provide clear notice to representatives of the Getty Museum, the Getty Trust, and the City of Los Angeles that vehicles will not be permitted to utilize the Sunset Mesa Property Owners Association property for purposes of attending performances at the outdoor theater should such theater be constructed on the museum premises. In 1974, we lived through Getty 1. A few years ago, we all saw Getty 2 in Brentwood. This may be Hollywood, but I don't want to see a sequel and have the Getty 3 inflicted upon us.

Thank you, sir. And before I go on with the speakers on the other side, may I ask all those in the audience who have taken the position of the five speakers who previously spoken to please stand. Okay, folks, thank you for being here this afternoon. Your cards will be made as part of the file. Before we move on to the speakers on the other side, I have been informed by the city attorney that a chief assistant city attorney needs to go on with other business, and so at this time we're just going to hold this item for one moment in order that we can act on item number 24, and then we will go back to the proponents, please. Okay, Mr. Feuer needs to excuse himself a moment. I remember 24. You could stay here. I don't believe so, Mr. Wex.

Excuse me, Mr. President, but I don't think, first of all, that this can be taken this lightly. This is $1.3 million.

Mr. Wex, if you have questions...

I called this special because it's a policy issue that deserves... attention and I think we should continue with this hearing with all these people and we could continue this to another meeting when one city attorney can be back here. This is a million plus dollars to go to outside attorneys which raises a lot of issues that I don't want to just sort of sweep under the rug. Well, thank you, Mr. Wax. I was going to extend you the courtesy to grant you that. So I would move that, in fact, we continue item 24 to the next meeting, which time Mr. Hokanson can be here or whoever they want to send, and we continue with this with all the people who are here. Okay, that would be fine. Let us continue to hold 24 on the desk.

Okay. We are now going to ask the five persons who are for the proposal on item number nine to please prepare yourselves to speak. Go right ahead, sir.

I'm Donald Baker of Latham & Watkins representing the Getty Trust. The Getty Villa Master Plan, which is before you today, is the culmination of years of study, review, and refinement. It has been a subject of a lengthy EIR process and many meetings with the neighbors in the community. It has resulted in a modified and conditioned program that balances between protections for the neighborhood and the programmatic needs of the Getty to create a center for the study, display, and conservation of antiquities in a unique community resource and educational institution. The Planning Commission, the Board of Zoning Appeals, and your PLUM Committee have all done an excellent job of striking this balance and come up with a highly conditioned project which can allow this to go forward with protection to the community. It has approved key elements of increasing parking to provide adequate parking at a site which has historically been under-parked and to provide the outdoor theater, which is an integral part of the educational programs of the Getty. And part of this museum program is an accessory use, not a freestanding theater or an entertainment center. Its use is restricted to those things related to the collection and to the programs of the museum. Therefore, we urge you to approve the Getty Villa Master Plan as now conditioned by the action of Plum Committee yesterday. This is an important resource to the city as a whole, and I would like Marian True, Curator of Antiquities of the Getty, to speak to you for one moment on that subject.

Thank you, sir.

Go right ahead, ma'am. Mr. President and members of the Council, I'm Marion True. I'm the curator of antiquities from the Getty Museum, and I am also the assistant director in charge of villa planning. In 1982, when the Board of Trustees of the J. Paul Getty Trust decided to build the new Getty Center in Brentwood, they also made another critical decision, and that was to leave the antiquities in the facility on Pacific Coast Highway, in the building which was most appropriate for their exhibition. This decision presented us with both a challenge and a great opportunity. We had a challenge to rebuild a constituency with only one collection, a collection of ancient art, to something close to the 400,000 visitors we had entertained there. when we had the collections of paintings and drawings and photographs which were so popular with the public. But it also gave us a great opportunity to expand the use of the entire site, as Mr. Getty had envisioned, to actually redefine its mission to be a center for comparative archaeology and culture, which would be a resource unique in the world. We also saw it as the possibility to expand our educational potential, to make more available, to make more accessible to the public with an expanded exhibition program and educational facilities, the great resources that we had been endowed with. For over the past 15 years we have worked to define a program which would meet these objectives and over the past six years we have worked with a team of gifted architects to find a physical realization for this. The key elements in this project are the creation of a proper entrance for the site which would allow for all the public facilities that were much needed including access for the disabled which we had found ourselves sadly lacking in. We wanted to recreate something of the experience of a visit to an archaeological site by having visitors discover the villa as an artifact in the landscape. We also wanted to improve our galleries for the display of ancient art incorporating more natural light to offer better public services including more parking as we had traditionally been under parked and a larger bookstore, an auditorium that met all codes for fire safety and disabled access, and also an expanded restaurant that was also accessible for the disabled. We wanted to incorporate a proper space for public performances of the music and ancient drama that has become such an important and integral part of our program. We feel that the performance of ancient drama, which was essential to the understanding of ancient culture was really a very important asset that we uniquely could provide and would help for a greater appreciation of the collections on display. We also wanted to provide the facilities for the training of young conservators with a special interest in preserving archaeological and ethnographic materials around the world. Bringing these all together, we felt we were able to make a unique contribution to this country. And as ancient art is a critical part of the curriculum of schools in grades five through six, it is our hope that the renovated villa will be able to further extend our educational possibilities to these programs. Over the past year and a half that the Getty Center has been open, 55,000 school children have visited that site. When the villa was opened, we entertained 30,000 a year, and we hope we'll be able to do more of that. We want to extend our accessibility further through community partnerships, family festivals, and specially organized tours. And finally, to be a cultural resource for the whole city. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am. May I have the next speaker, please?

Mr. President, members of the council, my name is Lawrence Sherman. I live at 1300 Chautauqua Boulevard in Pacific Palisades. I am here today representing Palisadians for the Getty Villa Master Plan, a grassroots organization of 1,200 residents from throughout the Palisades community. The members of our organization fully support the Getty Villa Master Plan, including the theater, the 45 performances each year and the 610 on-site parking spaces. We believe that the Getty Master Plan represents the spirit of compromise of which the Getty Trust should be proud and the Palisadians should appreciate. In order to save some time, I'm going to steal your prerogative, Mr. President, to show you the support that we have. I would like everyone in this audience who supports the Getty Villa Master Plan to please rise.

Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, sir. May I have the next speaker? Was that it? Okay. If I could have the clerk please reset the time to three and hold please. The Chair recognizes Councilman Holden.

No, I'm second.

Mr. Holden, would you like to defer to the Councilwoman of the District? Yes. Chair recognizes Councilman Misikowski.

Thank you, Mr. President. As was indicated, we had a very lengthy hearing in Planning and Land Use Management Committee yesterday, and that had followed some many, many, many hours of testimony that had gone before the Planning Commission, the Hearing Examiner, and the Board of Zoning Appeals. This is a case where we have both a variance for parking and a conditional use to allow a modest expansion of the site. You've heard some of the opponents say that what is being proposed here is an entertainment center. That is not the case. What is being provided is an outdoor classic theater, which is being limited by this application to no more than 45 performances a year, of which 10 must occur during the daytime for school children. I'd like to read a letter that was submitted to the city by Dr. Ruben Zacharias of the Los Angeles Unified School District. On behalf of the Los Angeles Unified School District, I want to take this opportunity to support the important service that the Getty intends to provide for school children throughout Los Angeles through the Villa in general and its planned theater programs in particular. The performances of the ancient drama you have presented in the past are, as you know, closely related to the fifth and sixth grade curriculum throughout the city. The outdoor amphitheater you propose to build, as well as the program of ancient plays you intend to present there, will present an extraordinary asset for the city. We added conditions that reinforce that, and I'd like to add just an additional sentence today to the condition of the committee report yesterday, that the educational program's performances shall be reviewed as part of the three-year plan for the outdoor classic theater. So again, that is 45 performances, 10 of which are going to be mandated for schoolchildren and working with the school district to provide them. The other issue that is at issue here today is the question of providing more parking, not less. There are those who want to limit this to only the 219 parking spaces for visitors that was provided 20-some years ago. As we have seen in our city, there is interest in museums. There is interest across the board from our city to come to venues like this, and we ought to be able to provide for them. I think the Environmental Impact Report adequately addressed that. adequately addressed the question of reservations still being appropriate, adequately addressed other hours and time limitations, and as indicated, adequately addressed in the site itself buffer, verming, and separation from any activity that will occur at the Getty Center from the nearby residences. It is why I believe that there has been the support, as you saw standing here today, for this application. It is moderated by appropriate conditions, supported by the school district and other institutions. In fact, the state parks has indicated they want to work cooperatively with the Getty, looking at antiquities at the Getty and then looking at the state park system and some native Californian antiquities as well. So I'm asking for an aye vote for the committee report as amended, which added tougher conditions and more conditions and also limited not only the number of performances, but the size of the theater itself to 450, which is less than the commission had recommended.

Thank you, Councilwoman. To all of the... To all of the ladies and the gentlemen who attended this afternoon, who filled out cards in favor of the proposal, I wanted to let you know that your cards are being made part of the file also, and to thank you for being here. The chair would like to recognize Councilman Holden.

Thank you, Mr. President. I'm going to ask you a question. How many people in the audience who live near the Getty Center would you please stand? So that means the yes and no don't mean that much. But I will say this, that another question. The commission talked about the entertainment center. Well, you know, I just heard the commission saying something else early on, and then people say yes, some say no. Sometimes I don't know when I'm going to be with them. Maybe I'll select the one that I want to be with them on and the one that I don't want to be with them on. And they're going to sell alcohol, too? When children are up there, they're going to sell hot liquor? Oh. You know, if you sit at this circle, I deal with it and say it always comes around. which means that it's the individual they're after, not the idea. The fact of the matter is that Larry Sherman is a good person, a good friend, and has cared about this city, this community, for many years. And it's because of him that I put my trust that it would not violate the rules across the line as it relates to improving this Getty Museum. I must tell you that I wish I could always say that about all the people that I know, but I'm consistent. And for that reason, Mr. President and members, I'm going to go along with the elected official from this district. I'm going to take the position that she knows it best, And so she's making that recommendation for approval to us. I go out there to the Getty Center. I mean, are they going to have any dancing out there? You're not going to come back and ask for dancing, are you?

Only if you can have supper at the same time.

We're going to have supper. We're going to have alcohol. Next thing you're going to be asking for is dancing. And you know what? If that should happen, you've got to have a good argument. But in any case, I'm going to join with the esteemed elected official from the 11th district and vote aye per request.

Thank you, Mr. Holden. The chair recognizes Councilman Wax.

I think that there are two basic issues that have been raised, one regarding the potential noise impact from the theater, from the amphitheater, and the other the parking. I'm told that in terms, I think first of all in terms of measuring impact from noise from an amphitheater, it's almost impossible to totally do so on either side until it's actually in operation. All the acousticians in the world aren't always able to predict impact. I'm told that if in a three-year period of monitoring, oh, we have the right to exercise, if the impacts are greater than the Getty believes they will be, that we cannot, we have jurisdiction and we can put either more conditions or even stop the theater. That's correct, Councilman.

There was also a...

I don't know that I would want to get to that point, but theater in the times that these plays were written didn't have this kind of an amplification system. So it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world if we went back to the true form in which they occurred. And if that were necessary, I think we have a chance in terms of noise impact to see, in fact, whether the worst fears of the homeowners... adjacent to it are correct or whether the assurances of the Getty are correct and adjusted accordingly. And I think all of us would be sympathetic to looking at it at that time. In terms of the traffic, however, I think traffic is a lot more about just the traffic to the people in the neighborhood. Traffic is about values in this city. And in this case, I disagree with some of my friends who are opposing this. Pacific Coast Highway is a well-traveled route, one of the most well-traveled routes. It serves many purposes. It serves access to the people who live up and down the coast. It serves as a throughfare for people going through. It serves as the main access to the beach, which is used by millions of people. And it serves as access to facilities like the Getty. And we place so much emphasis on only going to the beach. Why can't this city be – the greatness of this city is that we have a beach and we have a Getty. And we have to put more emphasis on getting people to the Getty as we do to the beach. We have to put more emphasis on these things. This is what a great city is all about. And the fact that a few hundred more cars may go on a... I guarantee you that with all the cars that would be added for the Getty, if you took a survey, for every hundred cars that go there, 99 plus would... would be going to the beach, as opposed to less than one going to the Getty. Probably of 1,000, that might be 999 versus one. So in the terms of balancing, we're not restricting the access to the people who live there. We're not restricting the access to people going up and down. We're not restricting the access to people going to the beach. But somehow or other, when we get a blessing in our community of something like the Getty Antiquities Center, we're going to restrict access to a few more hundred people there. That, I think, is really misplaced. I am very sympathetic to the noise issue. I am willing to come back and say that if the noise is greater than they say, if the 65 dBLs are exceeding all, that we will either place more restrictions on it or even stop amplification because that wouldn't be the worst thing. But in terms of adding a few more cars, I think that this road is there just as much for the Getty as it is for all the other uses that we now have. Enormous cars. Ten degrees more in weather one day will bring far more cars out there to that highway than will ever go for going to the Getty. We ought to be thankful we have a Getty. We need more things like that. And the fact that we can live in a city that has a beach and a Getty is what makes us really great.

Thank you, Mr. Wax. The chair recognizes Councilman Pacheco.

Thank you. Colleagues, I want to stand and rise. in support of the Getty Villa primarily because I've spoken to Mr. Roundtree and Mr. Yellen from the Getty and they've assured me that the Getty is going to run a quality show there, that they're going to work hard with the city to make sure that any of the concerns raised by the community are mitigated and the committee report is accurate. in terms of providing the quality facility for the city of Los Angeles. And as a regional center, they've assured me that they're going to be working throughout the city to make sure that the children from all parts of the city are going to participate in everything that Getty has to offer. So I stand in support of the application and ask that you vote in support.

Thank you, Councilman. The chair recognizes Councilman Fuhrer.

I move the previous question.

The previous question has been moved. Is there any objection to the previous question? Okay, that will be the order. Madam Clerk, what do we have before us?

You have item number nine and item number 10. Do you wish to take them separately?

Yes.

Item number nine.

Open the roll on item number nine. Tabulate the vote.

11 ayes.

That item is approved. item number ten please open the role on item number ten tabulate the vote eleven eyes that item is approved both of those items forthwith next item on the agenda item number twelve is a hardship exemption there was a card turned in however the card the person was in favor and uh... the it can be voted on

But not if this takes forever.

Are we doing this? Item number 12 before us, colleagues. Is there any person in the audience wishing to speak on item number 12? Colleagues, anybody on item number 12? If not, Councilman Walters, would you like to speak on item 12?

Yes.

The chair recognizes Councilman Walters. Councilman, could you wait for one moment while we get some order?

Absolutely.

Ladies and gentlemen, as you leave the council chambers, could you please do so quietly in order that the council can continue in its deliberation of other matters, please? Thank you. Chair recognizes Councilwoman Walters.

uh... thank you mister president and with your permission i'd like to also speak to thirteen and fourteen because the issues are similar uh... each one of those uh... the issues here in these three cases council members are people who have acquired property uh... on oceanfront walk at the beach in venice and now are asking for hardship exemptions to enlarge their properties. I don't think it's a hardship exemption. They knew what the property looked like when they bought it and when they proposed construction on the project. There has been just probably after property that has ignored that property lines is built over the walkway out there they have taken liberties with land that is not theirs that i think needs to be stopped uh... and so i'm going to be voting no on now both of these on twelve and on thirteen and fourteen it's uh... also a height risk a requirement uh... as well as uh... item twelve uh... the height requirements are the same in thirteen and fourteen they want a forty foot structure right on the beach where it's supposed to be a low-rise construction uh... and the other uh... construction on item number twelve wants to expand an existing two-family dwelling uh... thirteen and fourteen art new structures and uh... mister wax tells me it's the same property owner i'd just think or same property owner or developer i think it's time to say no to this there's nothing hardship uh... about building higher than your uh... allowed. There's nothing about allowing a higher deck than the code requires or allows that's a hardship on any of these property owners. 13 and 14 want a higher deck, a deck at 10 feet rather than 6 feet, and buildings that are 40 feet as opposed to the height requirement in the area of 30 feet. I think we need to say no to 12, 13, and 14. Thank you, Mr. President.

Thank you, Councilwoman. I do not have any cards on these three items. Is there anyone in the audience who would like to be heard on 12, 13, or 14? Seeing none, Mr. Bernson moves items 12, 13, and 14. Would you open the roll on those items, Madam Clerk?

Mr. Wax, did you want to speak on these items? Yeah, yeah.

Could you push your button, please? I thought I did. I'm sorry.

It's not here, Mr. Wax.

I'm sorry. Okay, the chair recognizes Councilman Wax. Ms. Walters makes a good point. You know, we're talking about choice beach residential properties. Someone wants to build four-story single-family homes and wants to get wants to get an exemption from the laws that regulate our coast. Why? What is the public purpose in deviating from the community plans and the plans that govern what could be to allow someone to have one of those huge four-story singly homes right on the beachfront? I need to hear more about this. It sounds wrong on its face, but I'm willing to hear the rest of the story if there is one. Can someone?

Mr. President, members of council, Councilman Wax, Jack Sedwick. There's a request for a hardship exemption. But what's the hardship? The interim control ordinance is now in effect. And on the 22nd of this month, a specific plan will be in effect. At that point, they would have needed an exception from the specific plan. Currently, the only way that they are able to go above the limits of the ICO.

But what is the reason for granting someone this? Why would you give someone the right for this kind of an exception? What's the public purpose of saying, no matter what the laws are, we're going to allow someone to build a 40-foot single-family home on the beachfront?

They have brought this application before the council indicating in their application that other properties adjoining and along oceanfront walk are at higher limits.

You know, you talk about values of rich and poor and who gets to enjoy what and who gets to use what. I don't see any hardship and I don't see any public purpose. A three-story single-family home on the beachfront is going to be worth more than any of us will ever be able to live in. I don't know why we have to go beyond that. There's reasons why we have height limitations in all of our community plans and all of our areas. We have height limitations for reasons. And the beach, the reasons are even greater than sometimes that you find regularly in single-family areas. So to give an exception to that through a hardship exemption, there has to be some findings, some justification. I don't see anything here at all that indicates what that could possibly be. And you're not able to tell me other than the applicant thinks he needs it. You've got the same guy building both of them, by the way. This is already now someone building two homes 40 feet high next to each other. This is a hardship in the city of LA? This is why we deviate from our land use plans and our carefully crafted beach plans? I mean, I don't understand this. Tell me. Why do you recommend it? Do you recommend it?

We have provided information as to the applicability of the plan. We find that other properties are higher than this, at least in item 13 and 14. We've not provided a specific recommendation.

You haven't provided a recommendation. There's something wrong with this picture. There is something wrong with this picture and something wrong in the way the staff is handling it or not handling it, and I cannot vote for it without having a much... Something is wrong with this picture. We should continue. We should move to continue to Friday.

There is a request from the council office if we could continue these three items until Friday. We do have other additional council speakers, but colleagues, with your acquiescence, I'd like to ask that we move this until Friday. That's fine.

I just want to go on record as sharing the same concerns as Ms. Walters and Mr. Wax. So if we're going to get briefed, can someone come by from the department?

If any of my council colleagues would like to be briefed on this prior to Friday, please request so of staff.

I really think the whole council, though, should also be briefed because these are public questions and the issues of height of the beaches. Thank you, Mr. Wax. Mr. Bernson?

I think perhaps when the council member of the district is... is here she can explain why she thinks this should be exempted that was basically the action of the planning committee was based upon her recommendation and review of the fact of other properties in the area mr wax okay this item is going to these three items twelve thirteen and fourteen without objection are going to be continued until friday

Mr. President, could we take item 25, please? I know we're going to lose a forum in just a second.

12, 13, 14, continue to Friday. We're now going to have item 25. Item 25 is before us.

Item 25 contains a majority report from Budget and Finance, Ms. Mizikowski and myself, and a minority report from Ms. Walters. The majority report, which is 25A, which I'm moving. authorizes the department to fill 31 of 79 positions which they sought to upgrade. The department's original request was for substantially more than 31 positions, and we asked them to conduct a prioritization of their requests. There are three categories of officers to be upgraded here. The first is for risk management. The second is for the Metro Division, and the third is for the Bomb Squad. In addition to the intrinsic value of the Metro and Bomb Squad officers being upgraded, there is the fact, as was pointed out to us, that the Democratic Convention is coming up, and those positions are all necessary for the DNC. The risk management piece is necessary because of Rampart. So even there's intrinsic value in this and there's a timing issue. And while the DNC is not by any means the sole reason to approve these things, it provides an additional rationale. And I move 25A. Okay.

Chair recognizes Councilwoman Walters.

Thank you. Council members, I voted against A in committee and urge that we vote for 25B, primarily because of the financial constraints in budget and finance today, this very afternoon, if we ever get out of here. uh... we have a report from the c l on budgetary shortfalls and it is not a pretty picture it is not a pretty picture so i support uh... twenty five b and i hate to think that every time we have a big convention we're going to have to increase the size of metro and the bomb squad you know I just find it very difficult to buy that but primarily my concern here is the added dollars that the general fund does not have and apparently the police department budget does not have either so we need to pay attention to that and vote no vote no on a and yes on councilwoman are you moving the minority report as a substitute for the majority yes okay do I have a second for that

Okay, I do not see a second at this time. Chair recognizes Councilman Pacheco.

Call the previous question. Okay.

There has not been a second to a substitute for the minority report for the majority report, so we do have the majority report before us at this time on item number 25. Madam Clerk, would you open the roll on the majority report on item 25 and tabulate the vote?

nine eyes one now that item is a corporate with the mayor next item before us is item number twenty three i'm moving quickly uh... i asked uh... which if i want to move the communication from the chairman of twenty three that the contract awarded to all access entertainment be for one year instead of three years, and that to go out for RFP next year.

so that would be uh... the position of the council we do have decided before us chair recognizes councilwoman walters we heard this in the arts health and humanities uh... monday and uh... we uh... agreed with mister check those requests that these being one-year contracts as opposed to three-year contract

We do have item number 23 before us. Madam Clerk, would you open the roll on this item and tabulate the vote?

Ten ayes.

That item is approved, forthwith. Next item.

Mr. President, before you continue, the City Attorney has notified us that the item number 64, closed session, can be continued to January 5th.

Madam Clerk, I do believe we have lost a quorum, so I am going to need to rule that all of the items that are presently on the agenda that have not been concluded be continued until Friday. And as a courtesy to any colleagues that have any adjourning motions, we are going to take those at this time. Okay. We've lost a quorum. Okay, there are no adjourning motions. And since we do not any longer have a quorum, the meeting is adjourned.