Agenda packet, first session — Glendale City Council, January 28, 2025

A G E N D A

GLENDALE CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL CHAMBERS
613 E. Broadway, 2nd Floor
Glendale, CA 91206
Meetings

are

broadcast

live

Glendale

TV,

viewable

Spectrum

Cable,

channel

and

AT&T

U-
verse,

channel

99. Meetings

are

also

streamed

live

high

definition

(HD)

the

City

webpage,
glendaleca.gov/live
,

YouTube.com/myglendale
,

and

Apple

TV,

Roku,

Amazon

Fire,

iOS

and
Android

devices

using

free

app

called

Cablecast

and

choosing

"Glendale

TV"

from

the

menu.

Meetings

are

also

archived

the

City

Website

for

viewing

anytime

glendaleca.gov/agendas
.

Call

(818)

548-4013

for

program

schedules.

For

public

comments

and

questions

during

the
meeting,

call

(818)

937-8100.

Public

comments

specific

agenda

item

will

taken

when

that
agenda

item

discussed.

you

have

any

question

about

matters

the

agenda,

requests

for
assistance, please contact the City Clerk at (818) 548-2090 during regular business hours.

PLEASE TURN OFF CELLULAR PHONES WHILE INSIDE THE MEETING LOCATION In

compliance

with

the

Americans

with

Disabilities

Act

(ADA)

1990,

auxiliary

hearing

aids,

sign
language

translation,

and

Braille

transcripts

are

available

upon

request.

Assisted

listening

devices
are

available

same-day

upon

request.

The

City

Clerk’

office

should

notified

72 hours

(three
business

days)

soon

practicable

for

requests

regarding

sign

language

translation

and
Braille

transcription

services.

All

documents

open

session

items

this

agenda

that

are
received

less

than

72 hours

prior

this

meeting,

and

are

public

records,

will

available

for

review
in the Office of the City Clerk, 613 E. Broadway, RM 110, Glendale, CA 91206.

Translation

services

are

provided

for

meetings

through

the

use

bilingual

staff

for

speakers

who
wish

utilize

the

service

available.

Speakers

should

state

their

request

contacting

the

City
Clerk’s

office

(818)

548-2090,

least

72 hours

prior

the

scheduled

meeting

soon

as
practicable.

Please

specify

the

language

for

which

you

require

translation.

The

exclusive

use

City
provided

interpreters

not

required

and

persons

are

welcome

use

their

own

interpreter

speak
in their native language.

JANUARY 28, 2025

ROLL CALL

1. CLOSED SESSION
– 1:00 PM ( To Commence at 3:00 PM)
a.

Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation: Najarian v. City of Glendale, L.A.S.C. Case No. 24STCP02101; Claim of Najarian, No. 25-0009 b.

Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation: Pogosyan v. City of Glendale,

1 TYPED 1/24/2025 10:37:36 AM
01 28 25
CC

L.A.S.C. Case No. 22STCV30492
c.

Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation: Initiation of litigation pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Government Code Section 54956.9:

One potential case

2. REGULAR BUSINESS AGENDA
– 6:00 PM
Roll Call
a.

Flag Salute: Mayor Elen Asatryan
b.

Invocation: Dr. Suzie Abajian, City Clerk
c.

Report of the City Clerk, re: Posting of Agenda. The Agenda for the January 28, 2025 Regular Meeting of the Glendale City Council was Posted on January 23, 2025, on the Bulletin Board Outside City Hall.

3. PRESENTATIONS AND APPOINTMENTS
a.

Agenda Preview for the Meetings of Tuesday, February 4, 2025 b.

Nominations for Appointment
•
Stefan Chraghchian, Planning Commission (Seat 5 – Vacant) (Najarian (A)/Brotman (B), 1/21/2025)
•
Ronnie Gharibian, Community Development Block Grant Advisory Committee (Seat 5 – Vacant) (Najarian (A)/Asatryan (B), 1/21/2025)

4. CONSENT ITEMS
(Including Minutes)
The following are Routine and May be Acted Upon by One Motion. Any Member of Council or the Audience Requesting Separate Consideration May do so by Making Such Request Before Motion is Proposed.
a.

City Clerk, re: Minutes of the Special City Council Meeting of January 15, 2025 b.

Community Development, re:

Use of City Days at the Alex Theatre: Star Productions
presentation of Gevorg Chakmanyan’s dedication to Armenian Folk Singer Ofelya Hambardzumyan’s 100-Year Anniversary

1. Council motion to approve use of one of twelve annual City Days at the Alex Theatre for Star Productions presentation of Gevorg Chakmanyan’s dedication to Armenian Folk Singer Ofelya Hambardzumyan’s 100-Year Anniversary on April 3, 2025 c.

Community Development, re:

Use of City Days at the Alex Theatre: Wild Honey
Foundation / Zevon Estate

1. Council motion to approve use of one of twelve annual City Days at the Alex Theatre for a celebration of the music of the legendary Los Angeles singer/songwriter Warren Zevon, presented by Wild Honey Foundation and Zevon Estate, on May 24, 2025 d.

Fire Department, re:

Verdugo Fire Communications Center - Call Recording
Software Expansion

1. Motion authorizing the City Manager, or designee, to execute a contract between the City of Glendale and Dictation Sales & Service Inc., dba Equature, in the amount not to exceed of $158,604 with a contingency of $15,860 for the expansion and standardization for the City’s digital logging recording system and to procure related hardware, software, parts, maintenance, services, and upgrades for the life of the software

2 TYPED 1/24/2025 10:37:36 AM
01 28 25
CC

Public Works, re:

Adopt Motion Setting Date of the Hearing to Vacate the First Alley Easterly of Brand Boulevard, Northerly of Fairview Avenue (Alley 130)- Alley Vacation Case No. 188V

1. Motion Authorizing the City Clerk to Set a Public Hearing for the Subject Alley Vacation f.

Public Works, re:

Award Professional Services Agreement (PSA) to Stearns, Conrad and Schmidt Engineers Inc, dba SCS Engineers (SCS Engineers), to conduct a study of the feasibility of opening the Scholl Canyon Landfill (SCLF) wasteshed, to prepare a CEQA Analysis in relation to opening the wasteshed, and to perform a cost analysis comparing the existing flexible membrane liner/geosynthetic clay liner composite cover to evapotranspirative cover systems

1. Motion authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to execute a PSA with SCS Engineers, to conduct a study of the feasibility of opening the SCLF wasteshed, to prepare a CEQA Analysis in relation to opening the wasteshed, and to perform a cost analysis comparing the existing flexible membrane liner/geosynthetic clay liner composite cover to evapotranspirative cover systems in the not-to-exceed amount of $142,500
g.

City Attorney, re:

Request for Conflict of interest Waiver in Legal Representation by Holland & Hart LLP

1. Motion Authorizing the City Attorney to Consent to the Southern California Public Power Authority’s Execution of a Conflict of Interest Waiver

5. CITY COUNCIL/STAFF COMMENTS

6. COMMUNITY EVENT ANNOUNCEMENTS (3-Minutes; 5-Speaker Limit) Per Mayor Policy, This Item Also Permits Speakers Wishing to Speak Under General Oral Communications, Subject to the Three Minute Time Limit. Discussion is Limited to Matters Not on the Agenda.

7. ADOPTION OF ORDINANCES

8. ACTION ITEMS
a.

City Attorney, re:

Report on Rules for the Conduct of Council Meetings: Options for Oral Communications and Public Comment on Agenda Items; Matters Related to the Order of Business for Council Agendas; Rules Governing Council Deliberation and Debate; Discussion of Policy for Removing Items from Agenda after Publication; and Rules Governing Decorum and Removing Disruptive Individuals from Council Meetings (Moved from 12/03/2024 and 01/21/25, Council Meeting)

1. Motion Providing Direction to Staff
b.

Community Development, re:

Dispense with Competitive Bidding for the Acquisition
of Pedestrian Safety Landscape Planters to be Installed on the Brand Boulevard and Central Avenue Over-pass Bridges and in the Orange Street Alleyway

1. Resolution dispensing with the competitive bidding required by Glendale City Charter, Article VI, Section 9, based on the single source availability of 60 concrete pedestrian safety planters in downtown Glendale from QCP Corp. and authorizing the purchase of such planters for a not-to-exceed amount of $297,008

2. Resolution of Appropriation in the amount of $266,525 in Transportation Development Act (TDA) grant funds
c.

Community Development, re:

Dispense with Competitive Bidding In Order to

3 TYPED 1/24/2025 10:37:36 AM
01 28 25
CC

Purchase and Install Specialized Broadcast Quality Multi-Camera A/V Equipment at the Alex Theatre

1. Resolution Dispensing with Competitive Bidding Required by Glendale City Charter, Article VI, Section 9, and Authorizing the Purchase and Installation of Specialized Theatre Control Room Equipment from TV Pro Gear at the Alex Theatre d.

Management Services, re: Introduction of an Ordinance Amending Glendale Municipal Code, 1995, Title 8 Chapter 8.42 To Amend and Restate the City's Adopted Prohibitions on the Use of Polystyrene Products and Single Use Plastics.

1. Ordinance for Introduction

2. Motion directing staff to develop incentive programs to support the transition to the proposed Plastic Waste Reduction Regulations ordinance

3. Motion recommending City Council direct staff to engage the services of a consultant to provide continued education and support to organizations impacted by the Plastic Waste Reduction Regulations ordinance
e.

Management Services, re: Voting Delegate for the 2025 Southern California Association of Governments
(SCAG) General Assembly

1. Motion Designating a Voting Delegate and Alternate Representative(s) for the 2025 Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) General Assembly

9. HEARINGS

10. REPORTS - INFORMATION

11. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS

12. DISCUSSION OF COUNCILMEMBER FUTURE AGENDA REQUESTS
a.

Councilmember Kassakhian’s Request to Agendize a Report for Information Regarding the Forest Lawn Drive Active Transportation & Traffic Safety Project in the City of Los Angeles and Sending a Letter to the Los Angeles Department of Transportation Regarding Concerns
b.

Councilmember Gharpetian’s Request to Agendize a Discussion of Rescinding or Revising the La Crescenta Avenue Rehabilitation Project c.

Mayor Asatryan’s Request For the City of Glendale to Support and Endorse Assembly Bill 91 Pertaining to the Collection of Demographic Data By State and Local Agencies

13. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Discussion is Limited to Items NOT a Part of this Agenda. Each Speaker is Allowed 5 minutes.

Council May Question or Respond to The Speaker But There Will be no Debate or Decision.

The City Manager May Refer the Matter to the Appropriate Department for Investigation and Report.

14. NEW BUSINESS

15. ADJOURNMENT

4 TYPED 1/24/2025 10:37:36 AM
01 28 25
CC

5 of 169

6 of 169

7 of 169

8 of 169

9 of 169

10 of 169

11 of 169

1 M I N U T E S
SPECIAL MEETING: GLENDALE CITY COUNCIL

THIS WILL BE A REMOTE MEETING
JANUARY 15, 2025
The Special Public Meeting of the Glendale City Council convened in the Glendale Central Library Auditorium, in said City, at 5:03 P.m., on the above date, pursuant to a call for such meeting signed by the City Clerk of the City Council, and on file with the City Clerk, a copy of which is as follows:

January 14, 2025
Date
Written Notice of said meeting was given, which Notice consisted of a copy of the foregoing Call, and was served on each Member of the Council not joining in the Call, and upon the in said City not less than 24 hours before the time fixed in said Call for said meeting, as follows:

Upon Dan Brotman at 5:00 p.m. January 14, 2025 Glendale, CA Upon Vartan Gharpetian at 5:00 p.m. January 14, 2025 Glendale, CA Upon Ardy Kassakhian at 5:00 p.m. January 14, 2025 Glendale, CA Upon Ara Najarian at 5:00 p.m. January 14, 2025 Glendale, CA Upon Elen Asatryan at 5:00 p.m. January 14, 2025 Glendale, CA Mayor Asatryan called the meeting to order at 5:03 p.m.

ROLL CALL
- All Present
- Report of the City Clerk of the City Council, re: Posting of Agenda. The Agenda for the Wednesday, January 15, 2025, Special Public Meeting of the City Council was posted on January 14, 2025, on the Bulletin Board Outside City Hall.

A SPECIAL PUBLIC MEETING of the City Council is hereby called to meet at 5:00 PM on Wednesday, January 15, 2025,this meeting will be remote to consider the following item(s) of business, to wit;

1.City Attorney, re: Findings Pursuant to Government Code Section 54953(e) that the Director of Emergency Services issued a Proclamation of a Local Emergency – Windstorms and Fires on January 8, 2025; and That as a Result of the Ongoing Emergency, Meeting in Person at the January 15, 2025 City Council Special Meeting Would Present Imminent Risks to the Health or Safety of Attendees Moved: Najarian Seconded: Kassakhian
Vote as Follows
a.

Staff Comment:

Mike Garcia, City Attorney
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Brotman, Gharpetian, Kassakhian, Najarian, Asatryan
None
None
None
4A
12 of 169

2 2.City Attorney, re: Report of Wind Event 2025 Ratifying the Proclamation of the Director of Emergency Services declaring a Local Emergency a. Resolution 25-04 Ratifying the Proclamation of the Director of Emergency Services declaring a Local Emergency
Moved: Kassakhian Seconded: Brotman
Vote as Follows
b.

Staff Comments:

Mike Garcia, City Attorney
Roubik Golanian, City Manager
Councilmember Kassakhian stated that the City of Los Angeles is removing two traffic lanes, for a protected bike lane, along Forest Lawn Drive. He stated that existing conditions already have caused traffic backup into the 134 freeway. Kassakhian asked staff for a report on what the impact would be on Glendale when these two traffic lanes are removed.

Adjournment:5:12 p.m.

Moved: Kassakhian Seconded: Brotman
Mayor of the City of Glendale
City Clerk of the City of Glendale
Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Brotman, Gharpetian, Kassakhian, Najarian, Asatryan
None
None
None
13 of 169

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Use of City Days at the Alex Theatre: Star Productions presentation of Gevorg Chakmanyan’s dedication to Armenian Folk Singer Ofelya Hambardzumyan’s 100-Year Anniversary

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Consent Calendar
Approved for January 28, 2025 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Glendale’s Community Development Department is requesting use of one of the City’s 12 annual rent-free dates at the Alex Theatre to sponsor Star Productions presentation of Gevorg Chakmanyan’s dedication to Armenian Folk Singer Ofelya Hambardzumyan’s 100-Year Anniversary for a performance on April 3, 2025. This request would represent the second community sponsorship request for the 2025 calendar year.
14 of 169

24b
5 0
0 6

RECOMMENDATION
Provide direction for utilization of one rent-free date at the Alex Theatre.

ANALYSIS
As part of the Management Agreement, Evnsong (formerly SAS) agreed to provide the City with 12 annual days of Theatre use, free of facility rental charge. In addition to events hosted by the City, the City may sponsor community groups, who meet the minimum criteria and receive City Council approval, by providing them use of one of these 12 dates. The facility rental fee is waived by the Theatre for these groups, but all other costs associated with the use of the Theatre are to be paid for by the group requesting the sponsorship.

This is the second request received by the City from a community group for the 2025 calendar year. Community Groups which have received, or requested, a City day:

1. Los Angeles Youth Orchestra (May 31, 2025) *approved

2. Ofelya Hambardzumyan’s 100-Year Anniversary with artist Gevorg Chakmanyan (April 3, 2025) *current request

3. Wild Honey (May 24, 2025) *request on same Council agenda Staff and the Alex anticipate the City will use the Theatre for reoccurring events and are cognizant not to bring forward community events which would surpass the number of allocated dates considering these anticipated date uses. The Council may direct staff to set aside additional dates for anticipated events in addition to the three below:

1. Armenian Genocide Commemoration Event

2. Glendale Tech Week

3. Women’s Equity Day
The requested City day is for a special concert dedicated to Ofelya Hambardzumyan’s 100-Year Anniversary. Presented by Star Productions, it will feature artist Gevorg Chakmanyan. Mr. Chakmanyan has hosted concerts at Alex Theatre in 2017 and 2018 to large audiences, and is expecting 800-1,000 guests for this show on April 3, 2025.

Ofelya Hambardzumyan was born in Yerevan, Armenia SSR on January 9, 1925. She was recognized for her beautiful voice at a young age. She trained at the Musical College after Romanos Melikyan. In 1944, she became a soloist for the Ensemble of Folk Instruments of the Public Radio of Armenia, where she dedicated her efforts to the ensemble headed by Armenian composer and conductor Aram Merangulyan.

Hambardzumyan’s repertoire included classical Armenian music and folk songs composed by Armenian classical troubadours. She was especially recognized for her interpretations of notable medieval Armenian composer and poet Sayat-Nova’s songs.

In 1959, Hambardzumyan was awarded the People’s Artist of the USSR. In 2011, she was awarded the Mesrob Mashtots Medal, named after early medieval Armenian linguist, theologian and composer Mesrob Mashtots. She died on June 13, 2016, in Yerevan, Armenia.
15 of 169

34b
5 0
0 6

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
Marketing for the event will take place through the organization’s base, and all regular Alex Theatre ticket marketing outlets.

Details for those interested in requesting sponsorships can be found on the City website at: glendaleca.gov/government/departments/community-development/cdd- administration/alex-theatre-sponsorship
And the Alex Theatre website at: https://www.thealex.com/sponsorship

FISCAL IMPACT
There are no costs to the City of Glendale for sponsoring this event.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
CEQA does not apply to projects where the lead agency determines "with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment." CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs.) § 15061(b)(3). Here, the action involves hosting a show within a built environment. There is no possibility that the action of hosting continued shows within the Theatre may have a significant effect on the environment.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements.

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Alternative 1. Do not approve utilization of one of twelve of the City days at the Alex Theatre.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

Bradley Calvert, Director of Community Development
Prepared by:

Tamar Sadd, Deputy Director of Community Development
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
16 of 169

M O T I O N
Moved by Council Member _________________________, seconded by Council Member ___________________________, that the Council hereby approves use of one of the twelve annual City Days at the Alex Theatre for Star Productions presentation of Gevorg Chakmanyan’s dedication to Armenian Folk Singer Ofelya Hambardzumyan’s 100-Year Anniversary on April 3, 2025.

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
17 of 169

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Use of City Days at the Alex Theatre: Wild Honey Foundation / Zevon Estate

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Consent Calendar
Approved for January 28, 2025 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Glendale’s Community Development Department is requesting use of one of the City’s 12 annual rent-free dates at the Alex Theatre to sponsor the celebration of the music of the legendary Los Angeles singer/songwriter Warren Zevon, presented by Wild Honey Foundation and Zevon Estate, to benefit the Autism Healthcare Collaborative and The Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization on May 24, 2025. This request would represent the third community sponsorship request for the 2025 calendar year. 18 of 169

24c
5 0
0 6

RECOMMENDATION
Provide direction for utilization of one rent-free date at the Alex Theatre.

This is the third request received by the City from a community group for the 2025 calendar year. Community Groups which have received, or requested, a City day:

1. Los Angeles Youth Orchestra (May 31, 2025) *approved

2. Ofelya Hambardzumyan’s 100-Year Anniversary with artist Gevorg Chakmanyan (April 3, 2025) *request on same Council agenda

3.Wild Honey Foundation’s celebration of Warren Zevon (May 24, 2025) *current request
Staff and the Alex anticipate the City will use the Theatre for reoccurring events and are cognizant not to bring forward community events which would surpass the number of allocated dates considering these anticipated date uses. The Council may direct staff to set aside additional dates for anticipated events in addition to the three below:

1. Armenian Genocide Commemoration Event

2. Glendale Tech Week

3. Women’s Equity Day
The requested date is for a performance on the evening of May 24, 2025, to celebrate the music of the legendary Los Angeles singer/songwriter Warren Zevon to benefit the Autism Healthcare Collaborative and The Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization (the cause of Zevon's 2003 passing). The concert will be presented by the non-profit Wild Honey Foundation, in association with the Zevon Estate. Wild Honey and Zevon's son, Jordan, will assemble an all-star cast of friends and admirers of the legendary Zevon and dig deep into his amazing catalog of songs and deliver an unforgettable night of musical celebration. Warren Zevon's admirers including Jackson Browne, Don Henley, David Letterman, Bruce Springsteen, REM, along with many young songwriters, and invitations will be extended to them to ensure the evening’s success.

In in the past, Wild Honey benefit shows have included performances by Brian Wilson, Members of REM, Dave Davies of the Kinks, Jackson Browne, Garth Hudson of the Band, Richie Furay of the Buffalo Springfield, Al Jardine of the Beach Boys, the Lovin' Spoonful, and many others.

Wild Honey has consistently filled the Alex Theatre and many other venues over the past 12 years, but rising venue cost has traditionally cut heavily into the amount that we 19 of 169

34c
5 0
0 6
are able to donate to various autism and health-related organizations, so support for rental cost at the Alex (Wild Honey has presented shows at the Alex since 2015) would allow the non-profit to do more community good with box office proceeds.

Wild Honey is an all-volunteer organization and work on a grass roots level to support the causes closest to the organization’s heart: supporting the non-verbal autism community, including Jacob Rock (20), the founder's son, who has struggled with this affliction since the age of 3.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
Marketing for the event will take place through the organization’s large base, and all regular Alex Theatre ticket marketing outlets.

FISCAL IMPACT
There are no costs to the City of Glendale for sponsoring this event.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements.

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Alternative 1. Do not approve utilization of one of twelve of the City days at the Alex Theatre.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

Bradley Calvert, Director of Community Development
20 of 169

44c
5 0
0 6
Prepared by:

Tamar Sadd, Deputy Director of Community Development
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
21 of 169

M O T I O N
Moved by Council Member _________________________, seconded by Council Member ___________________________, that the Council hereby approves use of one of the twelve annual City Days at the Alex Theatre for a celebration of the music of the legendary Los Angeles singer/songwriter Warren Zevon, presented by Wild Honey Foundation and Zevon Estate, on May 24, 2025.

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
22 of 169

4d
24-87197

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Verdugo Fire Communications Center - Call Recording Software Expansion

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Consent Calendar
Approved for January 28, 2025 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Verdugo Fire Communications Center utilizes a digital logging recording system to record and manage all 911 telephone calls and radio transmissions for the 14 agencies it serves. VFCC aims to align its call recording software with Equature, the platform currently used by the Glendale Police Department Dispatch Center to record their 911 calls. Standardizing on the same software simplifies the system management and maintenance and aligns recording capabilities across the VFCC and GPD emergency dispatch centers.
23 of 169

4d2
24-87197
5 7
7 4

RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council approve the motion authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract with Dictation Sales & Service Inc. in the amount not to exceed of $158,604 with a contingency of $15,860 for the expansion and standardization of the City’s digital logging recording system and to procure related hardware, software, parts, maintenance, services, and upgrades for the life of the software.

ANALYSIS
The recording of all telephone and radio transmissions at the Verdugo Fire Communications Center (VFCC) is a critical component of its operations and is required for legal, investigative, historical, quality assurance, and improvement purposes.

The current system used by VFCC, purchased in 2014, is at an end of life and needs a major overhaul of the hardware and software. To address this need, it was decided to standardize on and adopt Equature, the call recording system currently used by the Glendale Police Department (GPD) Dispatch Center for 911 calls. This transition will align recording capabilities across both dispatch centers, establishing a unified and consistent approach to call logging while improving reliability and operational efficiency.

In addition, the Police Department’s existing Equature system is scheduled for upgrade to add the latest standards and functionalities. With the completion of the implementation of Equature for VFCC and the upgrade for GPD, it will result in both departments being equipped with the latest advanced recording tools to support their critical operations, while being on the same standard and single platform.

Equature’ s platform will streamline processes for accessing, reviewing, and sharing recorded calls, which is essential for post-incident analysis, staff training, and quality assurance. Consistent recording formats will benefit both Police and VFCC operators by enabling a unified approach to training and performance review. Furthermore, standardizing on Equature supports the Information Technology (IT) Department’s objective of consolidating system management and maintenance, reducing the complexity of supporting multiple platforms and increase the ability for data sharing amongst departments.

The cost of the Equature expansion and standardization project is $135,604. The maintenance cost for year 1 is included in the project cost. The maintenance cost for year 2 totals $23,000. The total project cost is $158,604 as outlined below:

Item Equature
VFCC System Set Up $64,032
GPD System Upgrade $71,572
Year 1 Maintenance
Included
Year 2 Maintenance $23,000
Total $158,604
24 of 169

4d3
24-87197
5 7
7 4

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
N/A

FISCAL IMPACT
The Equature expansion project will cost $158,604, of which $71,572 was included as part of the FY 24-25 ITD’s Application Fund budget, and $64,032 was included as part of VFCC’s FY 24-25 budget. No additional appropriation of funds is needed. The Council approved funding is outline below.

Existing Appropriation
Amount Account String Funding Source
$64,032 51000-5800-GFD-4005-P0000 Fire Communication Fund $71,572 43110-6040-ISD-5502- P0000 ITD Applications Fund For the VFCC and GPD Equature systems, year 2 and all future maintenance, hardware, software, maintenance, upgrades, support, licensing for the life of the system will be annually budgeted within the ITD Applications Fund and approved by City Council as part of the annual citywide budget process.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
N/A

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
The names and business addresses of the members of the board of directors, the chairperson, CEO, COO, CFO, Subcontractors and any person or entity with more than 10% interest in the company proposed for contract in this Agenda Item Report are attached in Exhibit #1, in accordance with the City Campaign Finance Ordinance No. 5744

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Alternative 1: The City Council may not approve the motion to authorize the amendment to execute the professional service agreement with Equature, which will result in increased costs in maintaining two separate call recording solutions.

Alternative 2: Consider any other alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

Greg Fish, Fire Chief
Jason Bradford, Chief Information Officer
25 of 169

4d4
24-87197
5 7
7 4
Prepared by:

Brian Murphy, Deputy Fire Chief
Hagop Hovsepian, Assistant Chief Information Officer
Lisette Pagliassotto, IT Applications Manager
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
Campaign Finance Disclosure for Dictation Sales & Service dba Equature 26 of 169

CC_01282025_Motion_4d1.pdf
MOTION
Moved by Council Member ____________________________, seconded by Council Member ___________________________, that the City Manager, or his designee, is hereby authorized to execute a contract between the City of Glendale and Dictation Sales & Services Inc., dba Equature, in the amount not to exceed $158,604, plus a contingency of up to $15,860 for the expansion and standardization for the City’s digital logging recording system and to procure related hardware, software, parts, maintenance, services, and upgrades for the life of the software. Said agreement shall be approved as to form by the City Attorney.

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
27 of 169

City of Glendale

DISCLOSURE - CAMPAIGN FINANCE ORDINANCE
The City Council adopted Ordinance No. 5744, “Campaign Finance Ordinance,” which became effective on September 9, 2011, and amended it with Ordinance No. 5768, which became effective on March 15, 2012 (“the Ordinance”). The Ordinance prohibits: (1) A contractor* (including a subcontractor**)― who has a contract with the City of Glendale (“City”), Economic Development Department (“EDD”), or the Housing Authority of the City of Glendale (“HA”) and that contract is subject to approval by the City Council, EDD, or HA― from making a contribution to a City Council member, EDD member, HA member, City Clerk, or City Treasurer; and (2) Council members, EDD members, and HA members from voting on matters concerning a contract with a person who has provided a campaign contribution.

The Ordinance applies to a contractor whose contract requires the City Council’s, EDD's, or HA’s approval. A contract with the City, EDD, or HA is known as a “City Contract.” The Ordinance also applies to a subcontractor who has a subcontract through a City Contract. The Ordinance excludes a competitively bid contract awarded to the lowest responsible bidder.

To assist members of the City Council, EDD, and HA before they vote on a matter regarding a City Contract, the Ordinance requires City staff to prepare this report which discloses certain information about: the contractor receiving the City Contract, and the subcontractor(s) working under the City Contract.

A contractor must provide the information listed below when: A subcontractor must provide the information listed below when:
• • The subcontract through a City Contract has a total anticipated or actual value of $25,000 or more; or
The City Contract has a total anticipated or actual value of $50,000 or more; or contract awarded to the lowest responsible bidder.
• A combination or series of City Contracts have a value of $50,000 or more. • A combination or series of subcontracts, for the same or different projects, have an aggregate value of $25,000 or
more. Information that must be disclosed: ● Name of the person, entity, or organization (i.e., the Contractor or Subcontractor) ● Name of the Chief Executive Officer/President
● Chief Operating Officer
● Chief Financial Officer
● Chairperson
● All members of the Board of Directors
● All persons who own more than 10% of the person, entity, or organization ● Name of any campaign committee owned or controlled by the person, entity, or organization Please complete the following disclosure form:

Contractor(s)*:

Name Address
City
Dictation Sales & Service dba Equature
Full Name Title Business Address State
MI
Zip
Chairperson
Chief Executive Officer / President
Chief Operating Officer
Chief Financial Officer
Board of Directors
Southfield
Southfield
48075
48075
Joseph Mosed
Leesa Ferrell
18311 W 10 Mile
18311 W 10 Mile MI
More than 10% interest owner
* “Contractor” is the person, entity, or organization that is the party, or prospective party, to the contract with the City, EDD, or HA or any member of that person’s, entity’s, or organization’s Board of Directors, its Chairperson, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Operating Officer, any person with an ownership interest of more than ten percent (10%) in that person, entity, or organization, and any campaign committee that is owned or controlled by that person, entity, or organization. Above please disclose these persons’ name and business address. 28 of 169

Subcontractor(s)**:

Full Name
Name Address
City
N/A
Title Business Address State Zip
Chairperson
Chief Executive Officer / President
Chief Operating Officer
Chief Financial Officer
Board of Directors
More than 10% interest owner
** “Subcontractor” is the person, entity, or organization that has entered into a contract for the performance of all or a portion of the work undertaken under an agreement with an architect, design professional, engineer, or general or prime contract, usually by a general or prime contractor. Subcontractor includes any member of that person’s, entity’s, or organization’s Board of Directors, its Chairperson, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Operating Officer, any person with an ownership interest of more than ten percent (10%) in that person, entity, or organization, and any campaign committee that is owned or controlled by that person, entity, or organization. Above please disclose these persons’ name and business address.

Campaign Committee owned or controlled by:

Title Business Address City State Zip

CERTIFICATION
On behalf of the above-named x Contractor Subcontractor:
• I acknowledge that I have a continuing obligation to update this disclosure form if I substitute― or if I select additional― architects, design professionals, contractors, or subcontractors within ten (10) days of the selection or change; and • I hereby certify that:

I have identified all persons for which the Ordinance requires disclosure; The information in this disclosure form (and any attachment to this form) is true, accurate, correct, and complete; and I have been legally authorized to submit this disclosure form.

In total, this disclosure form (including attachments) is pages. 25 , at:

January 17Executed on:

Signature:

Address:
, 20 , California.

Aaron FerrellPrint Full Name:
18311 W. 10 Mile Rd Southfield, MI 48075
(248) 359 8220 [email protected] Number: E-mail Address:

Rev. 6/7/12 J:\FILES\DOCFILES\ORD\CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION\DISCLOSURE FORM – CONTRACTOR – 6-7-12.doc 29 of 169

4e
24-87054

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Adopt Motion Setting Date of the Hearing to Vacate the First Alley Easterly of Brand Boulevard, Northerly of Fairview Avenue (Alley 130)- Alley Vacation Case No. 188V

1. Motion Authorizing the City Clerk to Set a Public Hearing for the Subject Alley Vacation.

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Consent Calendar
Approved for February 4, 2025 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Vacation of a 15 foot wide alley, Alley 130, is proposed to be incorporated into the development of a Density Bonus application, approved by the Director of Community Development on August 20, 2024, to construct a new 5-story, 40,489 square-foot multifamily residential project with 36 residential units, featuring three affordable units restricted to very low-income households and two affordable units restricted to moderate income households on a lot located at 117 East Fairview Avenue.

RECOMMENDATION
Approve the motion authorizing the City Clerk to Set a Public Hearing for the Subject Alley Vacation.

ANALYSIS
The Planning Commission’s role is to make findings as to whether the proposed alley vacation will be consistent with the goals and objectives of the City of Glendale Comprehensive General Plan, pursuant to Chapters 2.68 and 12.24 of the City of Glendale Municipal Code, and State Government Code Section 65402.

Alley 130 is a 15-foot-wide with a single entry/exit onto East Fairview Avenue. The proposed vacation of this alley will split and incorporate 7.5 feet between two properties:
117-121 East Fairview Avenue and 1000 North Brand Boulevard. This request is part of a recently approved Density Bonus application dated August 20, 2024, which plans to construct a new 5-story, 36 unit, 40,489 square-foot multifamily residential project at 117- 30 of 169

4e2
24-87054
5 7
1 5
121 East Fairview Avenue. With the vacation, 7.5 feet will be added to the Density Bonus project, bringing its total area to approximately 18,260 square feet (0.42 acres). The remaining 7.5 feet will be added to the commercial property at 1000 North Brand Boulevard, increasing its area to about 26,474 square feet (0.61 acres). The alley is currently improved with asphalt concrete pavement and has aboveground electrical and telecommunication facilities from AT&T. The applicant is coordinating with Glendale Water & Power and AT&T to establish easements for their infrastructure.

The vacation of the alley would be consistent with the applicable goals and objectives of the elements of City of Glendale Comprehensive General Plan.

The General Plan Land Use Element designations for the adopting sites are Residential – High Density and Commercial – Community Services. The Residential – High Density designation allows for relatively large multiple-family dwelling complexes at a density of 35 to 60 dwelling units per acre. The Commercial – Community Services designation offers a full range of functional services and facilities, including offices (medical, real estate, etc.), personal services, shopping, and restricted industries. The alley vacation will enable the construction of a 36-unit density bonus project featuring three affordable units restricted to very low-income households and two affordable units restricted to moderate-income households at 117-121 East Fairview, as well as a modest additional lot area for the C3-zoned property located at 1000 North Brand Boulevard.

Surrounding the project site are commercial businesses (bank, retail, restaurants, etc.) to the south and west, a place of worship (St. Mark’s Episcopal Church) to the north, and multifamily residences to the east. The project is consistent with both designations in the General Plan Land Use Element, as it will accommodate high-density residential development and provide added lot area to a commercial site currently occupied by a bank.

Following the vacation of Alley 130, the R-1250 and C3 zones will no longer be buffered by the alley and will directly abut one another. To comply with Glendale Municipal Code (GMC) sections 30.31.030 (B) (1) and 30.31.030 (B) (2), trees shall be planted along the abutting property line (one tree per 20 linear feet) to provide an effective screen, and a minimum 5.5-foot-high decorative masonry wall shall be constructed along the property line abutting any residential zone boundary.

The General Plan Housing Element Strategy 3 aims to encourage development of housing for senior and affordable family housing through density bonuses and continue to implement the Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance (IZO). The density bonus project will provide 3 affordable units to low-income households [15% of 19 base density units] and will satisfy its IZO requirement and sets aside 2 moderate-income units (10% of the 19 base density units) for an additional density bonus.

4e3
24-87054
5 7
1 5
The project is consistent with this Land Use Element goal because it will increase the area of the commercial site provides opportunities for expansion of the site and increases the assessed value.

The project will implement the goals of the City’s Recreation Element. An in-lieu fee for the acquisition and management of recreational land consistent with the Recreation Element, is collected with the development review process. This project will pay Development Impact Fees which will implement the Recreation Element goal to acquire and manage recreational land.

The project will implement the policies of the Community Facilities Element. A policy of this Element is to preserve the high standards of library facilities in their educational and recreational roles. The project is required to pay Development Impact Fees which will enable the city to proceed with Library Arts and Culture and Community Services and Parks Department’s CIP programs, including developing new or rehabilitating existing parks and recreation facilities and libraries.

The Circulation Element Objective 2.1 encourages land use which can be supported within the capacity constraints of existing and realistic future infrastructure. The purpose of the alley vacation is to allow for the construction of a density bonus project with 36 residential units, featuring three affordable units restricted to very low-income households and two affordable units restricted to moderate income household. The project site is currently served by East Fairview Avenue, which is identified as a local street by the Circulation Element. Local streets perform a variety of functions and accommodations for vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian. In most instances, local streets serve residential needs of the immediate community and carry low volumes to and from collector and arterials, such as Brand Boulevard. Provided that the project is consistent with the Land Use Element, complements the mix of existing commercial and residential uses surrounding the subject site, and is currently supported by streets designed to handle the vehicular capacity of residential land uses, the project is consistent with the Circulation Element.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
Staff has worked with the property owner to facilitate the vacation of the public alley easement.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this report.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
The project has undergone environmental review required by the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and has been determined to be exempt from further CEQA review under a Class 32 “In-fill Development Project” exemption pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332, because after review and consideration of all required technical reports and/or studies, staff determined the project meets all the conditions for an infill development project, as follows:
32 of 169

4e4
24-87054
5 7
1 5
a) The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations;
b) The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban areas;
c) The project site has no value as a habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species; d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality; and
e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements.

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Alternative 1: The City Council may elect not to approve the motion as recommended herein. This would prevent the development of the residential building as envisioned by the applicant.

Alternative 2: The City Council may consider any other alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

Daniel Hernandez, Director of Public Works
Prepared by:

Ruel Villaluna, Senior Civil Engineer
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit 1: Location Map
Exhibit 2: Director of Community Development's Report to the Planning Commission 33 of 169

1 3
3 8
4 MOTION
Moved by Council Member ___________________________________________, seconded by Council Member ______________________________________, that the City Clerk is hereby authorized to set the time, date and place for a public hearing concerning Vacation Case No. 188V; being the vacation of the Portion of First Alley Easterly of Brand Boulevard, Northerly of Fairview Avenue (Alley 130); as set forth in the report of the Director of Public Works dated February 04, 2025 and causing the publishing and posting of notice of said Public Hearing as required by-law. The public hearing has been set for April 1, 2025, at 6 PM in the City Council Chambers.

Adopted this ______ day of __________________, 2025.

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
34 of 169

47.5 50
50 50

12.12 55
130
50 50
115
50 50

47.44 163
135.75

57.875

77.42 131.32
50 50
163

54.94 168
50 50

10.65 50

63.88 60
100
50 50
50 170
15 50
130

10.75 57.875
168
220.75
50 170.75
50 50
50 57.5
55 58
63 50

57.50 50
100
200
50 5050
100
55 163
163
95 49.875
50 50
50 50
145.88
60 5058
50 50
155
60 157.875
5050
50 157.875
127.75
50 48.84

10.75 50
200
95 50
50 50
55 145.18
169.94 169.94
60 95
150
200.10
50 150
70 130
50 48.84
170.7563
50 50
144.83
200
130
137
60 115
50 55
50 150

50.10 141
60 50

50.10 49.875
50 54.94

10.55 50
55 50
50 50
55 200
55 150
200.10
50 207
M.B. 6 - 184
14 PORTIONS OF LOTS
1104

PORTIONS OF LOTS
1023
TRACT
60 1016
M.B. 1 1 ~ 15
34 BLK. 14
48 6
120
1100
129
1015
6 15
4 47
44 932
1 43
1007
RES. 14,679
117
15 BLK. 14
125
TRACT NO. 870
7 GLENDALE BOULEVARD TRACT
M.B. 1 1 - 15
4 45
15 41
15 15
33 1104
38 7
PORTIONS OF LOTS 2 POR. LOT
40 208
46 PORTION OF LOT
208

PORTIONS OF LOTS
1 18
1031
1100
121

GLENDALE BLVD TRACT
16 M.B. 16 - 124
39 200
POR. LOT
21 4
42 50
3 210
15 60
202
POR.LOT
110
118
37 215
941
1000

FAIRVIEW TRACT
5 122
31 40
BLK. 14
32 5
M.B. 16 - 124

VACATED
204
15 60
941

PORTIONS OF LOTS

GLENDALE BLVD TRACT
211
17 M.B. 16 - 90

PORTIONS
OF
LOTS
19 1101
SOBEY

PORTIONS OF LOTS
214
15 130
36 35
M.B.16-124
M.B. 6 - 184
First Alley E'ly of Brand Blvd, N'ly of Fairview Av (Alley 130) - Glendale, CA

47.5 50
50 50

12.12 55
130
50 50
115
50 50

47.44 163
135.75

57.875

77.42 131.32
50 50
163

54.94 168
50 50

10.65 50

63.88 60
100
50 50
50 170
15 50
130

10.75 57.875
168
220.75
50 170.75
50 50
50 57.5
55 58
63 50

57.50 50
100
200
50 5050
100
55 163
163
95 49.875
50 50
50 50
145.88
60 5058
50 50
155
60 157.875
5050
50 157.875
127.75
50 48.84

10.75 50
200
95 50
50 50
55 145.18
169.94 169.94
60 95
150
200.10
50 150
70 130
50 48.84
170.7563
50 50
144.83
200
130
137
60 115
50 55
50 150

50.10 141
60 50

50.10 49.875
50 54.94

10.55 50
55 50
50 50
55 200
55 150
200.10
50 207
M.B. 6 - 184
14 PORTIONS OF LOTS
1104

PORTIONS OF LOTS
1 18
1031
1100
121

GLENDALE BLVD TRACT
16 M.B. 16 - 124
39 200
POR. LOT
21 4
42 50
3 210
15 60
202
POR.LOT
110
118
37 215
941
1000

FAIRVIEW TRACT
5 122
31 40
BLK. 14
32 5
M.B. 16 - 124

VACATED
204
15 60
941

PORTIONS OF LOTS

GLENDALE BLVD TRACT
211
17 M.B. 16 - 90

PORTIONS
OF
LOTS
19 1101
SOBEY

PORTIONS OF LOTS
214
15 130
36 35
M.B.16-124
M.B. 6 - 184
Scale
Location Map - Alley Vacation Case 188V
Map Prepared By:

Mapping & Real Property
April 2023
100 0 10050
Feet
AG Proj: Vac 188V Util Notif Map.mxd
g
Brand Boulevard
300 FOOT RADIUS
300 FOOT RADIUS

FAIRVIEW AVENUE
ALLEY 130
ALLEY
Area Proposed
to be Vacated
15'

DRYDEN STREET
EXHIBIT "1"
35 of 169

1 CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Request to vacate a 15 foot wide alley, Alley 130, to be incorporated into the development of a Density Bonus
application, approved by the Director of Community
Development Director on August 20, 2024, to construct a new 5-story, 40,489 square-foot multi-family residential project with 36 residential units, featuring three affordable units restricted to very low-income households and two
affordable units restricted to moderate income households on a lot located at 117 East Fairview Avenue.

File No./Case:Alley Vacation Case No. 188V
Location: Alley 130
Applicant: Rodney Khan, c/o Khan Consulting, Inc.

Owners: Stevenson Family Trust
Approved for October 16, 2024

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Prepared by:

Dennis Joe, Senior Planner
Reviewed by:

Dennis Joe, Senior Planner
36 of 169

2 GENERAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

General Information
General Plan: Residential – High Density and Commercial- Community Services Zone: R-1250 (High Density Residential) zone and C3 III (Commercial Service, Height District III) zone
Surrounding
Zoning/Use:North: R-1250 (High Density Residential) zone / Place of worship South: C3 III (Commercial Service, Height District III) zone / General retail and restaurants
East: R-1250 (High Density Residential) zone /Multi-family residential
West: C3 III (Commercial Service, Height District III) zone / Bank and financial institution
Existing
Conditions:See attached Exhibits 2-3.

Background
History:On August 9, 2024, the Director of Community Development approved case no. PDBP-002254-2023 to demolish seven existing buildings and to construct a new five-story, 40,489 square-foot multi-family residential project with 36 residential units, featuring three affordable units restricted to very low-income households and two affordable units restricted to moderate income households at 117-121 East Fairview Avenue.

Future Actions:Alley Vacation will be presented to the City Council on a future to be determined date, upon review and recommendation by the Planning Commission.
37 of 169

3 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The Project has undergone environmental review required by the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and has been determined to be exempt from further CEQA review under a Class 32 “In-fill Development Project” exemption pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332, because after review and consideration of all required technical reports and/or studies, staff determined the Project meets all the conditions for an infill development project, as follows:
a) The Project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations;
b) The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban areas;
c) The Project site has no value as a habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species;
d) Approval of the Project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality; and
e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.

The remaining 7.5 feet will be added to the commercial property at 1000 North Brand Boulevard, increasing its area to about 26,474 square feet (0.61 acres). The alley is currently improved with asphalt concrete pavement and has aboveground electrical and telecommunication facilities from AT&T. The applicant is coordinating with Glendale Water & Power and AT&T to establish easements for their infrastructure.

The vacation of the alley would be consistent with the applicable goals and objectives of the elements of City of Glendale Comprehensive General Plan. 38 of 169

4 The General Plan Land Use Element designations for the adopting sites are Residential – High Density and Commercial – Community Services. The Residential – High Density designation allows for relatively large multiple-family dwelling complexes at a density of 35 to 60 dwelling units per acre. The Commercial – Community Services designation offers a full range of functional services and facilities, including offices (medical, real estate, etc.), personal services, shopping, and restricted industries. The alley vacation will enable the construction of a 36-unit density bonus project featuring three affordable units restricted to very low-income households and two affordable units restricted to moderate-income households at 117-121 East Fairview, as well as a modest additional lot area for the C3-zoned property located at 1000 North Brand Boulevard.

Surrounding the project site are commercial businesses (bank, retail, restaurants, etc.) to the south and west, a place of worship (St. Mark’s Episcopal Church) to the north, and multi-family residences to the east. The project is consistent with both designations in the General Plan Land Use Element, as it will accommodate high-density residential development and provide added lot area to a commercial site currently occupied by a bank.

The Land Use Element Economic Goal 2 provides for opportunities for the expansion of revenue-producing commercial establishments within the parameters of other community goals. Portion of the vacated alley will the incorporated into the commercially zoned lot. The project is consistent with this Land Use Element goal because it will increase the area of the commercial site provides opportunities for expansion of the site and increases the assessed value.

The Project will implement the goals of the City’s Recreation Element. An in-lieu fee for the acquisition and management of recreational land consistent with the Recreation element, is collected with the development review process. This project will pay Development Impact Fees which will implement the Recreation Element goal to acquire and manage recreational land.
39 of 169

5 The Project will implement the policies of the Community Facilities Element. A policy of this Element is to preserve the high standards of library facilities in their educational and recreational roles. The Project is required to pay Development Impact Fees which will enable the City to proceed with Library and Community Services and Parks Department’s CIP programs, including developing new or rehabilitating existing parks and recreation facilities and libraries.

The Circulation Element Objective 2.1 encourages land use which can be supported within the capacity constraints of existing and realistic future infrastructure. The purpose of the alley vacation is to allow for the construction of a density bonus project with 36 residential units, featuring three affordable units restricted to very low-income households and two affordable units restricted to moderate income household. The project site is currently served by East Fairview Avenue, which are identified as local street by the Circulation Element. Local streets perform a variety of functions and accommodations for vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian. In most instances, local streets serve residential needs of the immediate community and carry low volumes to and from collector and arterials, such as Brand Boulevard. Provided that the project is consistent with the Land Use Element, complements the mix of existing commercial and residential uses surrounding the subject site, and is currently supported by streets designed to handle the vehicular capacity of residential land uses, the project is consistent with the Circulation Element.

RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Division recommends that the Planning Commission find that the proposed Alley Vacation Case No. 188V (Alley 130) is consistent with the City’s General Plan.

EXHIBITS

1. Motion of Finding of Consistency with the General Plan

2. Photographs

3. Location Map

4. Proposed Street Vacation Map

5. Site Plan
40 of 169

4f
25-87240

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Award Professional Services Agreement (PSA) to Stearns, Conrad and Schmidt Engineers Inc, dba SCS Engineers (SCS Engineers), to conduct a study of the feasibility of opening the Scholl Canyon Landfill (SCLF) wasteshed, to prepare a CEQA Analysis in relation to opening the wasteshed, and to perform a cost analysis comparing the existing flexible membrane liner/geosynthetic clay liner composite cover to evapotranspirative cover systems

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Consent Calendar
Approved for January 28, 2025 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The SCLF first opened in 1961 as an unrestricted regional landfill. In 1987, Glendale passed an ordinance establishing a restricted wasteshed for SCLF meaning only solid waste generated from the following areas would be accepted at the landfill: Glendale, Pasadena, La Cañada Flintridge, South Pasadena, San Marino, Sierra Madre, and portions of Los Angeles County. Recent decreases in daily disposal tonnage and the City Council’s direction to promptly close the site have compelled the city to examine opening the wasteshed to potentially increase daily tonnage.

On September 13, 2024, the Public Works Department issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the wasteshed analysis, CEQA Analysis and cover cost analysis for the SCLF.

The RFP was sent via email for 29 days that resulted in only one proposal from an incumbent consultant, SCS Engineers.
41 of 169

4f2
25-87240
5 7
8 4

RECOMMENDATION
Approve a motion authorizing a PSA with SCS Engineers for $142,500 to conduct a study of the feasibility of opening the SCLF wasteshed, to prepare a CEQA Analysis in relation to opening the wasteshed, and to perform a cost analysis comparing the existing flexible membrane liner/geosynthetic clay liner composite cover to evapotranspirative cover systems for the SCLF.

ANALYSIS
The Public Works Department has oversight of the city’s SCLF. As of September 30, 2024, the remaining capacity is approximately 1.1 million tons of refuse. SCLF is experiencing decreased incoming refuse tonnage down to 765 tons per day, which if stays unchanged, is pushing the estimated closure date to January 2029. SCLF has a wasteshed restriction that may be adversely impacting incoming tonnage. In March 2024 City Council directed staff to examine opening the wasteshed to close the landfill as soon as possible by reaching its full capacity.

SCS Engineers is qualified to undertake this project for a number of reasons:

1.Experience working with the city, including performing engineering at the SCLF, conducting a feasibility study for a material recovery facility at the site, evaluating potential development of an anaerobic digestion project at the site, and developing the commercial franchise zone system in the city.

2.Thirty years of working knowledge of the wasteshed and regional solid waste system, including previous experience conducting similar studies in Southern California.

3. Local office in Pasadena that is convenient to the city and the site, enabling SCS to meet with the City of Glendale, if necessary, on short notice.

Additionally, SCS Engineers, a current incumbent contractor at SCLF, is performing landfill maintenance, operation, installation of environmental controls systems and environmental compliance services for Scholl Canyon and Brand Park landfills. A five- year contract of $957,602 was awarded in late 2024 and will expire on August 31, 2029.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
This requirement is not applicable to this report.

FISCAL IMPACT
The proposed PSA for landfill consulting services will cost $142,500. The Public Works Department can absorb this cost and therefore no new appropriation is being requested at this time. The funding is outlined below:

Existing Appropriation
Amount Account String Funding Source
$142,500 GL: 43110-5300-PWD-7522-P0000 Refuse Disposal Fund 42 of 169

4f3
25-87240
5 7
8 4

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
If the analysis conducted result in the city determining to move forward with opening the wasteshed, the City will need to conduct a CEQA analysis to identify any potential significant environmental impacts that would require mitigation. Because it is unknown at this time the results of the wasteshed analysis, the level of CEQA analysis is not yet known. Therefore, SCS will prepare the City’s Environmental Information Form (EIF) to determine what further CEQA analysis, if any, will be necessary.

The EIF will include the requirements as indicated in the City’s CEQA Guidelines, revised 11-1-2016. If a Traffic Study is required, that will be prepared by a traffic engineer. The Traffic Study is considered outside the scope of this project at this time.

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Alternative 1: Do not approve a motion authorizing a new PSA which will limit the wasteshed policy and not be able to perform an analysis on opening the wasteshed at SCLF for a quicker closure.

Alternative 2: The City Council may consider any other alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

Daniel Hernandez, Director of Public Works
Prepared by:

Luke Chen, P.E., Senior Civil Engineer
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit 1: Campaign Disclosure Form
43 of 169

4f
MOTION
Moved by Council Member _____________________________________, seconded by Council Member _____________________________________, that the Council of the City of Glendale hereby authorizes the City Manager or a designee to enter into a Professional Services Agreement with Stearns, Conrad and Schmidt (dba SCS Engineers) in an amount not to exceed one hundred forty-two thousand five hundred ($142,500) dollars, subject to approval to form by the City Attorney, as outlined in the Report to Council dated February 4, 2025.

Vote as Follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
44 of 169

City of Glendale

Contractor(s)*:

Name
Title
Address
CityFull Name Business Address
3900 Kilroy Airport Way, Ste. 100
State
CA
Zip
90806Long BeachCurtis Jang President
Douglas Doerr, PE
Eduardo F. Smith
Chief Executive Officer
Chief Operating Officer
Chief Financial Officer
Board of Directors
8575 W. 110th St., Ste 100 Overland Park
Miami
KS
FL
66210
33156
90806
9500 S. Dadeland Blvd., Ste 610
3900 Kilroy Airport Way, Ste. 100Steven JJ. Liggins, CPA

SEE ATTACHED LIST
Long Beach CA
More than 10% interest owner
* “Contractor” is the person, entity, or organization that is the party, or prospective party, to the contract with the City, EDD, or HA or any member of that person’s, entity’s, or organization’s Board of Directors, its Chairperson, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Operating Officer, any person with an ownership interest of more than ten percent (10%) in that person, entity, or organization, and any campaign committee that is owned or controlled by that person, entity, or organization. Above please disclose these persons’ name and business address. 45 of 169

Subcontractor(s)**:

Full Name
Name Address
CityTitle Business Address State Zip
Chairperson
Chief Executive Officer / President
Chief Operating Officer
Chief Financial Officer
Board of Directors
More than 10% interest owner
** “Subcontractor” is the person, entity, or organization that has entered into a contract for the performance of all or a portion of the work undertaken under an agreement with an architect, design professional, engineer, or general or prime contract, usually by a general or prime contractor. Subcontractor includes any member of that person’s, entity’s, or organization’s Board of Directors, its Chairperson, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Operating Officer, any person with an ownership interest of more than ten percent (10%) in that person, entity, or organization, and any campaign committee that is owned or controlled by that person, entity, or organization. Above please disclose these persons’ name and business address.

Campaign Committee owned or controlled by:

Title Business Address City State Zip

CERTIFICATION
On behalf of the above-named Contractor Subcontractor:
• I acknowledge that I have a continuing obligation to update this disclosure form if I substitute― or if I select additional― architects, design professionals, contractors, or subcontractors within ten (10) days of the selection or change; and • I hereby certify that:

I have identified all persons for which the Ordinance requires disclosure; The information in this disclosure form (and any attachment to this form) is true, accurate, correct, and complete; and I have been legally authorized to submit this disclosure form. 3In total, this disclosure form (including attachments) is pages.

January 23 25 PasadenaExecuted on:

Signature:
, 20 , at: , California.

Michelle P. Leonard, Sr. Vice PresidentPrint Full Name:
438 S. Marengo Ave, Pasadena, CA
626-315-8138
Address:
[email protected] Number: E-mail Address:

Rev. 6/7/12 J:\FILES\DOCFILES\ORD\CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION\DISCLOSURE FORM – CONTRACTOR – 6-7-12.doc 46 of 169

Environmental Consulting & Contracting
SCS ENGINEERS BOARD OF DIRECTORS (2025)
James J. Walsh, PE
626 Eden Park Dr., Suite 425, Cincinnati, OH 45202
Douglas L. Doerr, PE
8575 W. 110th Street, Suite 100, Overland Park, KS 66210 Curtis P. Jang
3900 Kilroy Airport Way, Suite 300, Long Beach, CA 90806 Peter J. Carrico
1881 Campus Commons Dr., Suite 450, Reston, VA 20191
Robert B. Gardner, PE
2877 Guardian Lane, Suite 1-F, Virginia Beach, VA 23452 Carlo F. Lebron, PE
3922 Coconut Palm Dr., Suite 102,Tampa, FL 33619
Michelle P. Leonard
438 S. Marengo Avenue, Pasadena, CA 91101
Michael W. McLaughlin, PE
1881 Campus Commons Dr., Suite 450, Reston, VA 20191
Eduardo F. Smith, PE
18001 Old Cutler Road, Suite 556, Palmetto Bay, FL 33157 3900 Kilroy Airport Way #100, Long Beach, CA 90806|562-426-9544|Fax 562-427-0805 47 of 169

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Request for Conflict of interest Waiver in Legal Representation by Holland & Hart LLP.

1.Motion Authorizing the City Attorney to Consent to the Southern California Public Power Authority’s Execution of a Conflict of Interest Waiver.

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Consent Item
Approved for January 28, 2025 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
City Council’s authorization is requested for a waiver of legal conflict of interest by the Southern California Public Power Authority (SCPPA). The waiver would permit SCPPA’s outside counsel, Holland & Hart LLP (H&H) to represent a SCPPA counterparty, Longroad Energy Holdings, LLC (Longroad) in an unrelated matter. H&H requires the waiver because H&H is representing SCPPA in a matter involving contract negotiations adverse to Longroad as the other party. SCPPA is seeking Glendale’s concurrence and consent to waive the conflict of interest because Glendale, a member of SCPPA, is a potential participant in the SCPPA Transaction in which H&H is representing SCPPA adverse to Longroad.
48 of 169

24g
5 8
0 3

RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council authorize the City Attorney to consent to SCPPA’s waiver of the conflict described herein.

ANALYSIS
Glendale is a member of SCPPA. SCPPA is a Joint Powers Authority comprised of 11 cities and one irrigation district, focused on electrical generation and transmission issues.

H&H is currently representing SCPPA in contract negotiations on a matter adverse to Longroad (the SCPPA Transaction). H&H also currently represents Longroad in separate, unrelated matters that are unrelated to the SCPPA Transaction, under previous conflict waivers granted by SCPPA and Longroad in 2019 and 2023. SCPPA’s 2019 and 2023 conflict waivers do not apply to future or undisclosed conflicts.

H&H seeks SCPPA’s waiver of conflicts to permit Longroad in a new unrelated transaction. Because Glendale is participating in the negotiations for the SCPPA Transaction, SCPPA Bylaws require that SCPPA seek Glendale’s concurrence for the new conflict waiver.

The new matter in which H&H seeks to represent Longroad is unrelated to the SCPPA Transaction. None of the attorneys representing SCPPA would work on the separate matter for Longroad, and none of the attorneys representing Longroad would work on the SCPPA Transaction. H&H will maintain an ethical wall in place. The conflict waiver would not apply to any future, undisclosed conflicts.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
Not applicable.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with the concurrence with and the execution of the described herein.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
The action requested herein has no potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and as such is not a project subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 14 Cal. Code Regs. Section 15378

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
Not applicable.

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION

1. Not authorize the Conflict of Interest Waiver as requested herein.

2. Council’s consideration of any other alternatives not proposed by staff. 49 of 169

34g
5 8
0 3

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

Michael J. Garcia, City Attorney
Prepared by:

Dorine Martirosian, Principal Assistant City Attorney
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
None.
50 of 169

M O T I O N
Moved by Council Member ________________________________, seconded by Council Member __________________________________, that the City Council hereby authorizes the City Attorney, or his designee, to consent to Southern California Public Power Authority’s (SCPPA) execution of a Waiver of Conflict of Interest to permit SCPPA’s outside counsel, Holland & Hart LLP to represent a SCPPA counterparty, Longroad Energy Holdings, LLC in an unrelated matter, as described in the Report Dated January 28, 2025 by the City Attorney.

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
51 of 169

8a
24-86878

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Report on Rules for the Conduct of Council Meetings: Options for Oral Communications and Public Comment on Agenda Items; Matters Related to the Order of Business for Council Agendas; Rules Governing Council Deliberation and Debate; Discussion of Policy for Removing Items from Agenda after Publication; and Rules Governing Decorum and Removing Disruptive Individuals from Council Meetings

1. Motion Providing Direction to Staff

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Action Item
Approved for December 3, 2024 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City Council requested a report on public comment on agenda items and non- agenda items during regular meetings, including how other jurisdictions implement and manage public comment. This Report and Exhibit 1 provides a summary of 18 other jurisdictions’ policies. The Council also requested a report on rules of decorum and procedure for removing disruptive individuals from Council meetings. Staff seeks Council direction regarding:
•Whether to make changes to the Council procedures for public comment on agenda items and non-agenda items at regular meetings, including the number of comment periods, individual speaking time, total speaking time, ceding of time from one speaker to the next, and deadline for submission of speaker cards or calling in;
•Whether to establish rules regarding Council debate and deliberation including whether to implement time limits for individual councilmember comments; •A cut-off time upon which no further items on the agenda will be taken up, unless the Council takes an affirmative vote to proceed;
•Removal of the “Agenda Preview” item on the agenda;
•Establishing a procedure for removal of items from the agenda after its publication;
•Modification of the procedure for Councilmember Future Agenda Requests to streamline the discussion during the meetings;
•Consideration regarding the wide angle of cameras during public comments; 52 of 169

8a2
24-86878
5 6
4 9
•Establishing formal rules of decorum for members of the public; and •Establishing a formal procedure for terminating a speaker’s time and/or removing individuals from Council Chambers for disruptive conduct 53 of 169

8a3
24-86878
5 6
4 9

RECOMMENDATION
That the Council provide direction on the matters addressed in this Report.

ANALYSIS
Oral Communications and Public Comment

1. Brown Act Requirements
The Ralph M. Brown Act Open Meetings Law (“Brown Act”)1 incorporates public comment as a critical component of meetings of legislative bodies for local government. With respect to public comment, it provides:
“Every agenda for regular meetings shall provide an opportunity for members of the public to directly address the legislative body on any item of interest to the public, before or during the legislative body’s consideration of the item, that is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the legislative body . . . .”2 Thus, there are two specific requirements related to public comment during regular meetings of legislative bodies:
•First, every regular meeting agenda must allow members of the public to speak on any item of interest within the subject matter jurisdiction of the legislative body; and •Second, the public must be allowed to speak on a specific item of business before or during the legislative body’s consideration of the item.

For the Glendale City Council, these rules are implemented by permitting members of the public to speak on matters as the item is called on the agenda (typically after presentation of a report), whether the item is a closed session item, consent calendar item, action item, public hearing item or any other item. For public comment on matters not on the agenda, but within the Council’s subject matter jurisdiction, the public speaks under the “Oral Communications” section of the agenda. With respect to Oral Communications, the Council may question or briefly respond to the speaker or refer the matter to staff, but there can be no discussion or decision.

Under the Glendale Municipal Code (“GMC”), Oral Communications is limited to five minutes per speaker, unless the Mayor waives the five minute limitation. 3 Oral Communications is currently near the end of the agenda. The Mayor currently permits speakers who want to speak on non-agenda items to do so under “Community event announcements” subject to the three-minute limit and provided that the speaker cannot then also speak under the Oral Communications item later on the agenda. There is also a limit of five speaker cards for Community event announcements, inclusive of the oral 1 Gov’t Code § 54950 et seq.
2 Government Code §54954.3(a)
3 GMC § 2.04.090
54 of 169

8a4
24-86878
5 6
4 9
communications speakers.

The Council requested a report on approaches taken by other cities in terms of taking public input on agenda items and non-agenda items, as well as time limits imposed. The Brown Act permits legislative bodies to “adopt reasonable regulations to insure the intent” of the Brown Act’s public comment requirement “is carried out, including but not limited to, regulations limiting the total amount of time allocated for testimony on particular issues and for each individual speaker.”4 Such regulations must be enforced fairly and without regard to speakers’ viewpoints. The legislative body has discretion to modify its regulations regarding time limits on public comment if necessary. For example, the time limit can be shortened at the discretion of the chair to accommodate a lengthy agenda.

2. Review of Other Jurisdictions
Staff conducted a review of 18 other jurisdictions – 15 cities, two counties (Los Angeles and San Diego), and Glendale Unified School District. (See Exhibit 1). A variety of options are employed to implement and manage public participation by:
•Limiting speaking times allotted per individual. On average, jurisdictions limit speaking time on agenda and non-agenda items to 2-3 minutes per speaker; •Utilizing a sliding scale to determine speaker time limits based on number of speakers for each comment period;
•Limiting the total overall length of public comment periods; •Allowing a set amount of time for non-agenda items, e.g. 30 minutes total for discussion of non-agenda items at the beginning of the meeting or prior to discussion/action on business items;
•Reducing the total number of overall periods of public comment; •Establishing a formal process and limitation regarding the ceding time from one speaker to another (including requiring the person ceding time and the person obtaining the time to both be in Chambers); and
•Establishing deadlines for the submission of speaker cards (e.g., no additional comment cards accepted once the specified agenda item has begun or after the start of the meeting).

Staff seeks Council input and direction on whether it desires to make any changes regarding public comment and oral communications. If Council provides direction on a change in the policy, staff recommends implementing such changes via procedural rules that can be adopted in lieu of current provisions in the GMC pertaining to order of business 4 Gov’t Code §54954.3(b).
55 of 169

8a5
24-86878
5 6
4 9
(§2.04.080), the right to address the Council (§2.04.090), ejection (§2.04.120) and other provisions regarding Council meetings. This would require an amendment to the GMC as well.

Other Agenda and Meeting Management Issues
Rules Pertaining to Council Debate and Deliberation
At the Council Governance Workshop on August 29, 2024, councilmembers expressed support for a limit on councilmember speaking time during deliberation on items. In reviewing the procedural rules of other legislative bodies, staff notes some cities have implemented rules on Council deliberations including rules:
•Prohibiting a councilmember from interrupting a councilmember who has the floor;
•Allowing each councilmember to speak once before a councilmember is given a second opportunity to speak;
•Providing that members shall “confine their remarks to the question under debate and shall avoid personalities” and other rules regarding decorum during debate and deliberation; and
•Providing time limits for each member to speak (for example five minutes for initial comments on an item, and three minutes for second round comments and beyond).

Rules of debate are governed by Roberts Rules of Order, unless the Council has adopted a contrary or supplemental rule. If Council desires to implement rules pertaining to deliberation and debate as outlined above, it should provide further direction.

Time Limit on Council Meetings
In addition to limits and rules on deliberation and public comment, some cities (Burbank, Santa Monica) have a cutoff time after which no further agenda items will be taken up unless the Council votes to proceed. Burbank and Santa Monica both have an 11 p.m. cutoff, with Santa Monica requiring a 2/3 vote to proceed beyond the cutoff and Burbank requiring three affirmative votes to do so. In Burbank, the Council is required to confer with the City Manager prior to taking a vote as to the necessity of proceeding with any pressing matters.

The Council may want to consider a similar time limit for Glendale Council meetings. The Council conducts special meetings, Housing Authority meetings and closed session in the afternoons, sometimes as early as 1 p.m. Conducting business late into the night and sometimes into the early morning hours has the potential to affect the focus and concentration of councilmembers, staff and the public, as well as impact the ability of the 56 of 169

8a6
24-86878
5 6
4 9
public to fully participate in matters that go very late into the evening.

Agenda Preview
This portion of the agenda – usually provided by the Assistant City Manager – commenced in the 2000s to provide the public with advance notice of what will be on the next week’s agenda. Given that the City now publishes an advanced agenda forecast on its website, staff recommends removing this portion from the agenda.

Removal of Items from Agenda After Publication
The Council also inquired about the process to remove or continue a matter once the agenda has been published. City Council Resolution No. 23-50 provides that the “Mayor has discretion to control the timing of the placement on future agendas” subject to consultation with the City Manager and contrary direction by the Council. The policy is silent regarding the removal of an item from a published agenda. The past practice has been to require a Council motion or at least a Council consensus at the meeting to postpone or remove an item once the agenda has been published. Recently, items have been removed by the City Manager after consultation with the Mayor. Council should provide clarity on what policy it wants to implement and follow for removing /postponing an item that has been listed on a published agenda.

Policy on Discussion of Councilmember Future Agenda Requests In 2023, the Council instituted a new policy for agendizing staff report requests from councilmembers. Replacing the process requiring a second from a councilmember, the Council amended the GMC and adopted a resolution to require a majority vote to agendize a matter. The “Order of business” for Council agendas now includes “Discussion of Councilmember Future Agenda Requests.”
Since the adoption of this new policy, Council has inquired about revisiting or revising the policy due to the length of debate that has occurred from time to time to decide whether to agendize a matter. Staff seeks Council direction on the policy. One consideration that may be given is to give the councilmember making the request a specified amount of time, e.g. 2-3 minutes, to present the basis for the request and the other councilmembers a specified amount of time, e.g. 1-2 minutes, to discuss whether they agree or disagree with agendizing the matter.

Wide Angle of Cameras During Public Comment
At the August 29, 2024 Council Governance Session, the Council inquired into showing a wide angle of the Council dais during public comments on agenda and non-agenda items. The City Manager stated he would implement a wide angle as a pilot effort, pending the discussion of this item. Staff seeks Council direction whether to continue the wide angle for public comment, limit it to certain items, e.g. Oral Communication, or discontinue the wide angle. If Council decides to retain the wide angle, staff recommends that the City discontinue the practice for public hearings on quasi-judicial matters as speakers may show drawings, pictures, models etc. that should be captured as part of the record as the 57 of 169

8a7
24-86878
5 6
4 9
speaker is referring to them, even if the drawings, pictures, models etc. are subsequently made part of the record.

Rules for Decorum & Removal of Disruptive Individuals
The Mayor or presiding officer of a meeting may remove individuals or speakers who are disruptive or disturb a meeting. The authority to remove disruptive speakers or individuals is governed by state law (Brown Act) and case law interpreting the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, along with any adopted local rules or regulations that are consistent with both.

Brown Act Requirements - Rights to Address Legislative Body In connection with the right of the public to address the legislative body of a local agency during meetings, the Brown Act also provides that:
•The legislative body may adopt reasonable regulations to ensure that the intent of subdivision (a)[pertaining to public comment] is carried out, including, but not limited to, regulations limiting the total amount of time allocated for public testimony on particular issues and for each individual speaker.5 •The legislative body “shall not prohibit public criticism of the policies, procedures, programs, or services of the agency, or of the acts or omissions of the legislative body.”6
Brown Act Requirements - Removal of Disruptive Individuals With respect to removal of disruptive individuals, the Brown Act provides:
“(a) (1) In addition to authority exercised pursuant to Sections 54954.3 and 54957.9, the presiding member of the legislative body conducting a meeting or their designee may remove, or cause the removal of, an individual for disrupting the meeting.
(2) Prior to removing an individual, the presiding member or their designee shall warn the individual that their behavior is disrupting the meeting and that their failure to cease their behavior may result in their removal. The presiding member or their designee may then remove the individual if they do not promptly cease their disruptive behavior. This paragraph does not apply to any behavior described in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b).
(b) As used in this section:
(1) ‘Disrupting’ means engaging in behavior during a meeting of a legislative body that actually disrupts, disturbs, impedes, or renders 5 Gov’t Code §54954.3(b).
6 Gov’t Code §54954.3(c).
58 of 169

8a8
24-86878
5 6
4 9
infeasible the orderly conduct of the meeting and includes, but is not limited to, one of the following:
(A) A failure to comply with reasonable and lawful regulations adopted by a legislative body pursuant to Section 54954.3 or any other law. (B) Engaging in behavior that constitutes use of force or a true threat of force.
(2) ‘True threat of force’ means a threat that has sufficient indicia of intent and seriousness, that a reasonable observer would perceive it to be an actual threat to use force by the person making the threat.”7 Thus, the presiding officer may only remove individuals that are actually disrupting, disturbing, impeding or rendering infeasible the orderly conduct of the meeting, and only after providing at least one warning. However, a warning is not required to remove an individual who uses force or a threat of force in a council meeting.

Brown Act - Clearing of Council Chambers
The Brown Act also permits the presiding officer to clear the meeting room or chambers in very limited circumstances:
“In the event that any meeting is willfully interrupted by a group or groups of persons so as to render the orderly conduct of such meeting unfeasible and order cannot be restored by the removal of individuals who are willfully interrupting the meeting, the members of the legislative body conducting the meeting may order the meeting room cleared and continue in session.

Only matters appearing on the agenda may be considered in such a session. Representatives of the press or other news media, except those participating in the disturbance, shall be allowed to attend any session held pursuant to this section. Nothing in this section shall prohibit the legislative body from establishing a procedure for readmitting an individual or individuals not responsible for willfully disturbing the orderly conduct of the meeting.”8
This provision should be used only when a group or groups of individuals are willfully disturbing the meeting and, in the opinion of the presiding officer and the sergeant at arms, order cannot be restored except by clearing the room.

First Amendment Principles
The termination of speech or removal of individuals from Council meetings is also subject to the First Amendment, as interpreted by the courts. Indeed, Section 54957.95 of the Brown Act was an effort by the Legislature to codify the holding of one of the 7 Gov’t Section 54957.95
8 Gov’t Code §54957.5
59 of 169

8a9
24-86878
5 6
4 9
more recent decisions of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals addressing First Amendment issues in the context of a city council meeting.9 A meeting of a City Council or board or commission is considered a limited public forum under First Amendment principles, created for the discussion of certain subjects.10 Thus, local agencies have a legitimate public interest in conducting efficient, orderly meetings. In this regard, the courts have held that public agencies may:
•Stop a speaker from engaging in irrelevant speech (speech not on the topic of an agenda item or within the legislative body’s jurisdiction) or repetitious speech; •Impose speaking time limitations; and
•Implement requirements that speech be directed at the body or chair.

Similarly, the courts have held that a presiding officer may terminate the speech of a speaker or remove an individual who is disruptive. As the courts have explained, however, in order to remove a speaker for disruption, the conduct or behavior must actually disrupt, impede or render infeasible the orderly conduct of the meeting. “Actual disruptions means an actual disruption. It does not mean constructive disruption, technical disruption, virtual disruption, nunc pro tunc disruption, or imaginary disruption.”11 Whether a speaker may be shut down or individual removed for disruptive conduct depends on the actual impact of that conduct on the course of the meeting.

The following examples illuminate what conduct is and is not disruptive:

Disruptive Conduct
•Exceeding the time allotted to speak and not adhering to the presiding officer’s order to stop speaking.
•Speaking without first being recognized by the presiding officer (for instance, yelling out from the audience in a manner that disrupts the meeting). •Specific, credible threats to Council or members of the public. •Encouraging members of the audience to disrupt the meeting, which results in actual disruption.
•Speaking out of order or yelling to the extent that it hinders another member of the public from addressing the legislative body.

Conduct That Is Not Disruptive
•Technical violation of rules of decorum that do not actually disturb a meeting. 9 See Acosta v. City of Cost Mesa (2013) 718 F.3d 800.
10 City of Madison Joint School Dist. v. Wisconsin Employment Relations Comm’n, 429 U.S. 1267 (1976). 11 Norse v. City of Santa Cruz (2010) 629 F.3d 966, 967 (emphasis added.) 60 of 169

8a10
24-86878
5 6
4 9
•Speech that is deemed to be merely insolent or impertinent but which does not cause a disruption or constitute a threat of violence.12 •Speech or nonverbal conduct that goes largely unnoticed by legislative body and public and therefore doesn’t disrupt meeting.13
•Personal attacks against individual councilmembers, even if it appears off-topic, as this can be considered protected political speech.14 •Criticism of City Council policies, programs, procedures or services. 15 •Criticism of City officials or employees related to City business.

Further, although the Council may terminate speakers or remove individuals for disruptive behavior, enforcement must be on a “viewpoint neutral” basis. In other words, action against disruptive behavior must be applied evenly without regard to speaker or viewpoint expressed. Thus, for example, if the presiding officer intends to strictly enforce a rule regarding staying on topic it must do so for all speakers regardless of viewpoint.

Proposed Rules of Decorum and Procedure for Removing Disruptive Individuals Following the Brown Act requirements, case law, the City’s past practice and custom, and the rules imposed by other jurisdictions, it is recommended the Council adopt a formal procedure regarding what constitutes disruptive conduct as well as a procedure for effectuating removal of disruptive individuals. The following can be included in procedural rules as a basis for terminating a speaker’s time or ordering removal of an individual, after appropriate warnings:
•A prohibition on the utterance of threatening, abusive or loud language or sounds, whistling, clapping, booing, hissing, stamping of feet, repeated waiving of arms, presenting of signs that interfere with the participation of others in the audience, or other similar disruptive acts;
•A prohibition on any signs, placards, banners/flags, props or similar items larger than 8.5 x 11, illuminated, or attached to any pole, stick or other device; •A prohibition on all noisemakers;
12 See Acosta, supra, 800 F.3d at 816.
13 Norse, supra, 629 F.3d at 976
14 Dowd v. City of Los Angeles, 2013 WL 4039043 (U.S.D.C. – C.D. – Cal. 2013). 15 Gov’t Code §54953.3(c).
61 of 169

8a11
24-86878
5 6
4 9
•A requirement that members of the public shall only address the body from the audience microphone, unless authorized by the Mayor/Chair to speak from another location;
•A requirement that members of the public shall direct comments to the body as a whole or the presiding officer, and not to staff, individual members of the body, or the public and that no person shall be permitted to interrupt members of the body, staff presentations, or members of the public who are at the microphone during a meeting;
•Speakers must cease speaking immediately when their speaking time has ended;
•Public comment on agenda items must relate to the subject matter of that item; and
•Non-agenda Oral Communications are limited to the matters within the City Council's subject matter jurisdiction.

In accordance with the Brown Act and First Amendment jurisprudence, the Council can adopt a procedure for addressing disruptions:
•The Mayor or presiding officer will provide at least one warning to a speaker that is being disruptive. The presiding officer should explain the conduct that is disruptive, and what will be the consequence of failing to abide by the warning, e.g. that the speaker will be terminated from speaking or removed from Chambers.
•After providing at least one (1) verbal warning, if an individual continues to speak in violation of an order to cease speaking (e.g. is off-topic or has exceed the allotted time) or is otherwise disrupting the proceedings, the presiding officer may order the individual to be removed from chambers. Again, when providing the warning, the presiding officer should explain the conduct that is disruptive, and what will be the consequence of failing to abide by the warning, e.g. that the individual may be removed from the Council chambers. Before ordering the sergeant-at-arms to remove a disruptive individual, the presiding officer should give the disruptive individual the opportunity to leave chambers voluntarily. •Warnings will not be required for use of force or true threats of force. •The enforcement of rules – whether it be enforcing the requirement to stay on topic, to stop speaking when the allotted time is up, or removing individuals for disrupting the proceedings – must be neutrally applied and may not discriminate against viewpoint of the speaker/attendee.
62 of 169

8a12
24-86878
5 6
4 9

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
N/A.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this report.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
This activity involves organizational and administrative activities of the government related to election procedures and eligibility requirements, and such internal procedural and eligibility changes have no potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. As such, this action is not a “project” subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 14 Cal. Code Regs § 15378.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements.

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION

1. Council can choose not to provide direction regarding public comment, oral communication, rules of decorum and removal of disruptive members of the public.

2. Council can choose an alternative not identified by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

Michael J. Garcia, City Attorney
Prepared by:

Michael J. Garcia, City Attorney
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS

1. Public Comment Period Survey
63 of 169

M O T I O N
Moved by Council Member , seconded by Council
Member , that, with respect to the Report to City Council dated January 14, 2025 pertaining to public comment on agenda and non-agenda items, order of business for Council agendas, rules governing Council deliberation and debate; removing items from agendas after publication, rules governing decorum and disruptive individuals, and related agenda matters, the Council directs staff to pursue the options provided in the Report as follows:
•[Public comment on agenda items __________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________]; •[Public comment on non- agenda items _____________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________]; •[Council debate and deliberation __________________________________________] •[Cut-off time__________________________________________________________]; •[Removal of agenda preview _____________________________________________]; •[Councilmember Future Agenda Requests _______________________________] •[Wide Angle _______________________________________________________] •[Rules of Decorum -__________________________________________________] •[Procedure for removal _______________________________________________] 64 of 169

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain
65 of 169

City/County Survey - Public Comment/Oral Communications Periods City
Limit Per
Speaker
(Min) Requirements
Anaheim 3
Two public comment periods. First period is a total of 90 minutes or until all agenda comments are heard.

Non-agenda items are allowed after agenda items during the first 90-minute period of oral communications or at the end of the meeting
Burbank Varies
4 public comment periods: Closed Session, General Public Comment, Public Hearing Public Comment and Study Session Public Comment. General Public Comment precedes the consent calendar and the Reports to Council calendar (which is the Burbank equivalent of Glendale’s Action calendar). Speakers may speak on non-agenda items and/or agenda items during General Public Comment. Speakers also may separately speak on Reports to Council items (Action) after the oral staff report but before deliberation, provided they did not speak on the item during General Public Comment.

Speaking time on established on a sliding scale based on the number of speakers for each period:
1-20 Speakers – 3 minutes each
21-39 Speakers – 2 minutes each
40+ Speakers – 1 minute each
Culver City 3
Public comment for non-agenda items is limited to 20 minutes, but a continuation is added at the end of the agenda if needed. Comments on agenda items taken at time of presentation and registration is required. 3 minutes max time per speaker may be reduced at mayor’s discretion to reduced minutes to allow enough time to cover the business on the agenda. At Mayor’s discretion, there may be an allotted maximum time limit for speakers per agenda item (i.e. one hour) to allow City Council adequate time for deliberation.

Ceding of time: Persons who are present in the meeting may cede one minute of time to one other person per agenda item.

Garden
Grove 3
Council may limit public input based on number of people requesting to speak, length of the agenda, or business of the Council. Mayor may request one spokesperson for large groups to avoid unnecessary repetition.

Huntington
Beach 3
One public comment period at beginning of meeting, speaking time reduced depending on number of speakers. Public comment cards are accepted until the commencement of the comment period.

Inglewood 3
Two public comment periods, first on agenda items, last (end of meeting) on non-agenda items. Council members limited to 10 minutes each under Council Initiatives, 3 minutes each for closing remarks, and 5 minutes each for general debate on any agenda item. 66 of 169

Irvine 3 General public comment for non-agendized items, agenda item comment public comments continue at end of meeting.

City of Los
Angeles
Non-agenda items (“General Public Comment): 1 minute each (L.A. City Council meets 3 times per week).

Agenda items: One item: 1 minute.

Multiple Agenda Items: A member of the public speaking on more than one agenda item shall be allowed to speak for up to one minute per item up to a total of three minutes per meeting.

Los Angeles
County BOS 3 3 minutes per meeting on agenda items and 3 minutes per meeting on non-agenda items.

Pasadena 3
Comment periods: First - non-agenda items , limited to 20 minutes at the beginning of the meeting and continued thereafter to the end of meeting;. Second - consent calendar items. Third - multiple agenda items. Fourth - each agenda item.

Riverside 3
Multiple comment periods. Afternoon and evening sessions. Public comment on closed session, consent calendar as a whole, and agenda discussion items (action) and non-agenda items limited to three minutes.

Council reserves the right to determine the total amount for public comment and the amount for individual speakers.

San Diego
County
Board of
Supervisors Varies
(1) Matters Not on Consent Calendar up to two (2) minutes. If there are 10 or more speakers wishing to speak on an agenda item, the Chairperson may limit all individuals to speak for up to one (1) minute. (2) Consent calendar Each speaker is allowed two (2) minutes to comment on the entire Consent Calendar.
(3) Non-Agenda Public Communication: Twenty (20) minutes scheduled at the beginning of meeting for members of the public to address the Board, each speaker to be allowed no more than two minutes, on any subject matter within the jurisdiction of the Board and which is not an item on the agenda for that session. Each speaker must file with the Clerk a written Non-Agenda Public Communication Request to Speak form prior to the scheduled opening time of the session. In the event that more than ten (10) individuals request to address the Board (five individuals requesting to speak in person, five individuals requesting to speak remotely, the first ten (10) will be heard at the beginning of the meeting. The remaining speakers will be heard at the conclusion of the meeting and granted two (2) minutes each. The Chairperson shall have discretion to allow more than ten (10) individuals to speak at the beginning of the session. Each speaker must file with the Clerk a written Non-Agenda Public Communication Request to Speak form prior to the scheduled opening time of the meeting Santa Ana 3
General public comment at beginning of meeting includes agenda items and non-agenda items. Public comment cards are accepted until the commencement of the comment period.

Santa
Clarita 3
A public comment period is conducted for non-agenda items (30 -minute limit, 10 speakers), cards must be submitted before period begins. Remaining speakers after 30 minutes can be heard at end of meeting.

Additionally, public comments are taken prior to the start of each agenda item. 67 of 169

Santa
Monica 2 or 1
Remarks from the public are limited to a total of 6 minutes per Council meeting per individual with maximum two minutes and minimum one minute per public comment section.

Torrance 3
Two Oral Communications, speakers can only participate in #1 or #2. Oral Communications #2 is limited to 30 minutes, 3 minutes per speaker for non-Council Agenda items. Public can comment on agenda items before the item is discussed.

West
Hollywood 2
Public comments may address items on Consent Calendar (20 minutes, 2 min per speaker), all other comments will be heard at the time the item is considered during the meeting. A second public comment occurs at the end of the meeting for non-agenda items. Speakers can only speak once. 68 of 169

Public Comment/Rules Governing
Council Meetings
Glendale City Council
January 21, 2025
69 of 169

Issues
• Public Comment – Agenda and Non-Agenda Items
• Decorum & Disruptive Behavior
• Council Debate & Deliberation
• Removal of Agenda Items After Publication
• Meeting Cutoff Time
• Wide Angle
• Procedure for Councilmember Future Agenda
Requests
• Other Agenda Issues
2 70 of 169

Public Comment/Oral Communications
• Brown Act Requirement: Opportunity to speak on agenda items before or during consideration and to speak on
matters within the subject matter jurisdiction of legislative body
• Glendale: Each agenda item, Oral Communications, and
Community Event announcements
• Reasonable regulations:
o Total time allotted for testimony on particular issues o Time for each speaker
3 71 of 169

Other Agencies
• Combined Public Comment Periods: All agenda items, all consent items, agenda/non-agenda items
• Limits on Speaking Time: Often 2–3 minutes per speaker • Sliding Time Scales: Adjusted based on the number of
speakers
• Overall Time Limits: Some cap total time for comments (e.g., 30 minutes for non-agenda topics)
• Speaker Cards: Submission deadlines (e.g., no cards
after item read into the record)
• Time Ceding Rules: Formal limitations on sharing
speaking time between individuals
4 72 of 169

Rules Regarding Decorum and
Disruption
Council meetings are classified as limited public
forums:
§ Created for a specific governmental purpose –
e.g. conduct the Council’s business
§ Viewpoint Neutral
§ Restrictions must be reasonable
5 73 of 169

Disruptive Conduct
• Exceeding allotted speaking time and not adhering to
the presiding officer’s order to cease

• Speaking out of order or yelling to the extent that it hinders another member of the public from addressing
the legislative body
• Encouraging members of the audience to disrupt the
meeting, which results in actual disruption
• Specific, credible threats to Council, staff or members of the public
6 74 of 169

Not Disruptive Conduct
• Technical violation of rules of decorum that is not actually disruptive • Speech deemed merely insolent or impertinent but which does not cause a disruption or constitute a threat of violence
• Speech or nonverbal conduct that goes largely unnoticed by legislative body or the public and therefore doesn’t disrupt meeting • Criticism of City Council policies, programs, procedures or services • Criticism of City officials or employees related to City business. 7 75 of 169

Proposed Rules of Decorum
• Prohibition on the utterance of threatening, abusive or loud language or sounds, whistling, clapping, booing, hissing, stamping of feet, repeated waiving of arms, presenting of signs that interfere with the participation of others in the audience, or other similar disruptive acts
• Prohibition on any signs, placards, banners/flags, props or similar items larger than 8.5 x 11, illuminated, or attached to any pole, stick or other device
• Prohibition on all noisemakers
• •A requirement that members of the public shall only address the body from the audience microphone, unless authorized by the Mayor/Chair to speak from another location
8 76 of 169

Proposed Rules of Decorum (Cont’d)
• A requirement that members of the public shall direct comments to the body as a whole or the presiding officer, and not to staff, individual members of the body, or the public and that no person shall be permitted to interrupt members of the body, staff presentations, or members of the public who are at the microphone during a meeting; • Speakers must cease speaking immediately when their speaking time has ended;
• •Public comment on agenda items must relate to the subject matter of that item; and
• Non-agenda Oral Communications are limited to the matters within the City Council's subject matter jurisdiction.
9 77 of 169

Decorum and Disruption
• Process for Removal:
• At least one specific warning to disruptive individual required • Exception: Immediate removal for threats or force
• Mayor or presiding officer enforces order, guided by the Brown Act and City policy
10 78 of 169

Council Debate & Deliberation
• No interruptions during speaking
• Every member speaks once before a second round of
comments
• Stick to the topic, avoid personal attacks
• Speaking time limits (e.g., 5 minutes for first comments, 3 minutes for follow-ups)
• Exception: For Councilmember Questions
• Alternative: Authorize Presiding Officer to Provide Reminders on Brevity and Staying on Point
11 79 of 169

Removing Items from Agenda after Publication
• Current Council-approved Policy: Mayor directs timing of placement of matters on agenda (Council may direct
otherwise); Silent on removal after publication
• Past Practice: Council action to remove item from
agenda after publication
• Recent: City Manager removes items at direction of
Mayor
12 80 of 169

Other Meeting Management Issues
Time Limits for Meetings
• Example Policies: Burbank & Santa Monica:
o 11 PM meeting cutoff
o Extension requires a vote, consultation with City Manager Why Consider This?
• Impact to decision-making and public participation
13 81 of 169

Other Meeting Management Issues
• Wide-Angle Camera Use:
o Pilot program tested to show the entire Council dais
during public comments
• Options for Moving Forward:
o Continue wide-angle view for all public comments
o Limit to certain sections (e.g., Oral Communications) o Discontinue for quasi-judicial matters (e.g., referral to visual aids, exhibits etc.)
14 82 of 169

Other Meeting Management Issues
Procedure for Future Agenda Requests
• Intent: Brief discussion on whether to agendize matter, gain consensus
• Streamline Discussion: Limit speaker time and Council deliberation?
Removal of Agenda Preview
• Agenda Forecast Published on Website
15 83 of 169

Key Decision Points

1. Adjustments to public comment time or format?
a. Revise limits on non-agenda Oral Communications speaking time? b. Combine public comment periods?
c. Limits on total amount of time for any particular comment period?

2. Formalize rules for decorum and removing disruptive individuals?

3. Implement rules/limitations on Council deliberation/discussion?

4. Modify/Formalize Policy for removal of items from agenda after publication?

5. Introduce a meeting cutoff time?

6. Continue, modify, or discontinue the wide-angle camera policy?

7. Modify procedure for Councilmember Future Agenda Requests?

8. Remove Agenda Preview?
16 84 of 169

Next Steps
• Council to provide direction on desired policy changes. • Staff will prepare changes via:
o Amendments to the Glendale Municipal Code
o Council resolution to incorporate rules on order of
agenda, public comment/oral communication, rules on
disruption etc.
17 85 of 169

86 of 169

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Dispense with Competitive Bidding for the Acquisition of Pedestrian Safety Landscape Planters to be Installed on the Brand Boulevard and Central Avenue Over- pass Bridges and in the Orange Street Alleyway.

2.Resolution of Appropriation in the amount of $266,525 in Transportation Development Act (TDA) grant funds.

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Action Item
Approved for January 28, 2025 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In collaboration with the Greater Downtown Glendale Association (GDGA), staff requests the authorize dispensing with bidding in order to acquire 60 landscape planters to provide for pedestrian safety on the bridges over the 134 Freeway on Brand Boulevard and Central Avenue between Goode and Sanchez, and within the Orange Street Alleyway between Wilson and California. The planters staff seeks to procure match existing planters on Brand Boulevard and will therefore provide a consistent downtown aesthetic that beautifies the areas. GDGA will be responsible for installing and maintaining live landscaping in the planters.

Staff is requesting the Council make the findings required to dispense with public bidding because staff already worked with Purchasing in 2023 and no vendors other than QCP Corp. could provide planters that match the existing planters GDGA already installed in the downtown area. The Glendale City Charter, Article VI, Section 9 allows for dispensing with public bidding upon recommendation of the City Manager, when the City Council determines that it is in the best interests of the City to do so and acts by resolution setting forth the reasons for such action.
87 of 169

28b
5 7
4 9

RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council approve a resolution dispensing with competitive bidding as in the best interests of the City, and approve a resolution of appropriation to fund the project.

ANALYSIS
The requested pedestrian improvements are proposed to be installed on the Brand Boulevard and Central Avenue freeway overpass, between Goode and Sanchez, and in the Orange Street Alleyway. The 60 large concrete planters will be placed on the sidewalk/alleyway to protect pedestrians from vehicle traffic. These improvements would be made in collaboration with the Greater Downtown Glendale Association who will install and maintain live plant material in the planters.

To achieve consistency in the overall downtown aesthetic, which includes landscape planters already within the downtown, the City Manager is recommending the City Council make findings authorizing dispensing with public bidding as in the best interests of the City for the following reasons: (1) QCP Corp is the only vendor able to supply planters that match the existing ones, (2) On December 13, 2022, the City Council authorized going out to bid for these planters but Purchasing received no bids that matched the exact specifications (Exhibit 2), (3) These planters will ensure a consistent streetscape aesthetic that improves the beauty and safety of the City, and (4) QCP is the only known vendor (manufacturer) who is able to provide the planters with the required specifications.

A total of 55 planters will be needed along the pedestrian bridges on Brand and Central, and 5 planters will be needed within the alleyway between Brand and Orange. These planters will be branded with the Greater Downtown Glendale Association (GDGA) logo and maintained by GDGA’s Ambassadors.

As this is a pedestrian safety improvement, funds to pay for these improvements have been requested from Metro. The Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 Bicycle and Pedestrian funds are available to local agencies in Los Angeles County on a per-capita basis. Projects are reviewed and approved by Metro and funds are disseminated in advance to agencies for implementation.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
No outreach is associated with this report.

FISCAL IMPACT
The purchase and delivery of the planters totals $297,008. The City’s current TDA project balance is $12,656. The Pedestrian Plan Implementation project within the Measure M fund has $17,827 available. Staff is requesting an appropriation of additional TDA funds in the amount of $266,525 to fund the remainder of the project. The additional TDA funds was not included in the FY 24-25 budget, however, have been requested from Metro and will be available to the City following Council approval. The 88 of 169

38b
5 7
4 9
appropriation request is outlined as follows:

Existing Appropriation
Amount Account String Funding Source
$12,656 GL: 51000-4090-CDD-0020
PL: CDD00943AG
CIP Reimbursement
Fund
$17,827 GL: 45350-2220-PWD-0020
PL: 52180
Measure M
Requesting Appropriation
Amount From (Account
String)
To (Account String) Funding Source
$254,220 GL: 34301-4090-
CDD-0020
PL: CDD00943AG
GL: 51000-4090-
CDD-0020
PL: CDD00943AG
CIP
Reimbursement
Fund
$12,305 GL: 38000-4090-
CDD-0020
PL: CDD00943AG
GL: 51000-4090-
CDD-0020
PL: CDD00943AG
CIP
Reimbursement
Fund

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code of Regs. Title 14) section 15303 (Class 3) consists of construction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures; installation of small new equipment and facilities in small structures; and the conversion of existing small structures from one use to another where only minor modifications are made in the exterior of the structure. CEQA does not apply to projects where the lead agency determines "with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment." CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs.) § 15061(b)(3). This action involves placing new pedestrian protective concrete planters on the existing streetscape. There is no possibility that the action of placing planters (small structures) within the existing built environment may (streetscape) have a significant effect on the environment. To the contrary, such planters will provide for pedestrian safety and city beautification which will have no foreseeable direct or indirect significant impact on the environment.

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Alternative 1. Do not authorize dispensing with competitive bidding, and do not appropriate funding. Not accepting either item will prohibit staff from moving forward with this project. The funding from Metro would also need to be returned as was requested for this specific project.
89 of 169

48b
5 7
4 9

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

Bradley Calvert, Director of Community Development
Prepared by:

Tamar Sadd, Deputy Director of Community Development
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit 1: Campaign Disclosure Form
Exhibit 2: Planter Specifications
90 of 169

RESOLUTION NO. ______________

RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA,

DISPENSING WITH COMPETITIVE BIDDING AND AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE FROM QCP CORPORATION OF 60 CONCRETE LANDSCAPE PLANTERS TO BE

INSTALLED ON THE SIDEWALKS OF THE BRAND BOULEVARD AND CENTRAL

AVENUE OVERPASS BRIDGES AND IN THE ORANGE STREET ALLEYWAY WHEREAS, City of Glendale City Charter, in Article VI, Section 9 provides, in part, “Upon recommendation of the city manager, the council may dispense with competitive bidding for any contract when it determines that it is in the best interests of the City to do so and acts by resolution setting forth the reasons for such action”; WHEREAS, the City Manager is recommending Council authorize dispensing with competitive bidding for the acquisition and installation of 60 landscape planters to provide for pedestrian safety on the bridge sidewalks over the 134 Freeway on Brand Boulevard and Central Avenue between Goode and Sanchez, and within the Orange Street Alleyway between Wilson and California;
WHEREAS, the specific planters staff seeks to procure match existing planters on Brand Boulevard and will therefore provide a consistent downtown aesthetic that beautifies the areas;
WHEREAS, the Greater Downtown Glendale Association will be responsible for installing and maintaining live landscaping in the planters; WHEREAS, the City Council finds it is in the best interest of the City of Glendale to dispense with competitive bidding and to authorize the Deputy Director of Finance - Purchasing to issue a purchase order agreement with QCP Corporation because (1) QCP Corporation is the only vendor able to supply planters that match the existing planter specifications, (2) the City already went out to bid in 2023 for these planters but Purchasing received no bids that matched the exact specifications, (3) these planters will ensure a consistent streetscape aesthetic that improves the beauty and safety of the City, and (4) QCP is the only known vendor (manufacturer) who is able to provide the planters with the required specifications.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA:

1. That the foregoing facts are deemed to be a true and correct and a basis for dispensing with competitive bidding.

2. That the City Council hereby dispenses with competitive bidding and authorizes the Deputy Director of Finance - Purchasing to issue a purchase 91 of 169

2 order with QCP Corporation for the acquisition and installation of 60 concrete landscape planters based on the specifications set forth as Exhibit 2 to the January 28, 2025, staff report to the City Council.

3. The Deputy Director of Finance - Purchasing is authorized to approve and execute necessary agreements to implement this resolution, subject to the City Council’s approval of Resolution of Appropriation submitted in conjunction with the herein described request to dispense with competitive bidding to acquire the landscape planters.

Adopted this ______ day of ______________________, 2025. _________________________
Mayor

ATTEST:

City Clerk

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) SS

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
I, Suzie Abajian, Ph.D., City Clerk of the City of Glendale, certify that the foregoing Resolution was adopted by the Council of the City of Glendale, California, at a regular meeting held on the ____ day of ________________, 2025, and that same was adopted by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
_________________________
City Clerk
92 of 169

93 of 169

94 of 169

95 of 169

PROJECT NAME

PLAN TYPE

PRODUCT
FILE NO.

DRAWN BY:

DATE
SCALE
OF
SHEET
QC ITEM NO.PC. NO.

CONSTRUCTION PLAN
QS-CAL247236P | RECT. PLANTER | CALIFORNIA
GLENDALE BRIDGE PLANTERS DD1
1 2
S.B.1/2" = 1'
5/21/24
(CUSTOMER TO OFFLOAD IF OVER 6000 Lbs.)
GENERAL PRODUCT NOTES:

MANUFACTURING TOLERANCE ±1/4".

ALL EDGES TO BE EASED.

INSTALLATION IS REQUIRED BY OTHERS.

WEIGHT:PRODUCT: QS-CAL247236P 2,187 lbs.

STD. 2"DIA. DRAIN HOLE

INCLUDES INTERIOR WATER SEALANT

PLAN VIEW

SECTION/ ELEVATION VIEWSECTION/SIDE VIEW
C:\Users\Bedford\Quick Crete Products Corp\AutoCADSP - Documents\__SUBMITTALS\DOWNTOWN GLENDALE PLANTER DEMO\WO# 164378\164378-1.dwg, 5/21/2024 1:55:34 PM, Bedford

NO DRAIN HOLE
96 of 169

PROJECT NAME

PLAN TYPE

PRODUCT
FILE NO.

DRAWN BY:

DATE
SCALE
OF
SHEET
QC ITEM NO.PC. NO.

CONSTRUCTION PLAN
QS-CAL247236P (MOD) | RECT. PLANTER | CALIFORNIA
GLENDALE BRIDGE PLANTERS DD2
2 2
S.B.1/2" = 1'
5/21/24
Authorized Signature Date
By signing above or stamping this drawing “approved” or “no exception taken” authorization is give to QCP to produce this drawing as shown within a 1/4” tolerance. (CUSTOMER TO OFFLOAD IF OVER 6000 Lbs.)
GENERAL PRODUCT NOTES:

MANUFACTURING TOLERANCE ±1/4".

ALL EDGES TO BE EASED.

INSTALLATION IS REQUIRED BY OTHERS.

CONCRETE TEXTURE: CONCRETE COLOR:

WEIGHT:

NATURAL

MISSION WHITE

ADOBE TAUPECRAFTSMANS ETCH

STRATALATTE
PRODUCT:

QUANTITY:

SEALER:

CUSTOM
HONED
SMOOTH
QS-CAL247236P (MOD)
PERMASHIELD 4200 SEALER
2,187 lbs.

STD. 2"DIA. DRAIN HOLE

INCLUDES INTERIOR WATER SEALANT

PLAN VIEW

SECTION/ ELEVATION VIEWSECTION/SIDE VIEW

GREATER DOWNTOWN

GLENDALE ASSOCIATION
C:\Users\Bedford\Quick Crete Products Corp\AutoCADSP - Documents\__SUBMITTALS\DOWNTOWN GLENDALE PLANTER DEMO\WO# 164378\164378-2.dwg, 5/21/2024 1:55:47 PM, Bedford

NO DRAIN HOLE
BLACK
97 of 169

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Dispense with Competitive Bidding In Order to Purchase and Install Specialized Broadcast Quality Multi-Camera A/V Equipment at the Alex Theatre.

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Action Item
Approved for January 28, 2025 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Alex Theatre is engaged in a 10-year Capital Improvement Project to bring the Theatre’s appearance, amenities, and audio/visual equipment to the industry standards.

The City Manager is recommending Council authorize dispensing with competitive bidding for the acquisition and installation of an industry-standard, live-stream capable broadcast quality multi-camera video system through a single source in lieu of the regular bidding process. The Glendale City Charter, Article VI, Section 9 allows for dispensing with public bidding upon recommendation of the City Manager, when the City Council determines that it is in the best interests of the City to do so and acts by resolution setting forth the reasons for such action.

RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council approve the resolution dispensing with competitive bidding as in the best interests of the City in order to ensure the historic Alex Theatre has industry- standard audio-visual technology that will enable the Alex Theatre to remain viable and competitive as a regional live-theatre venue now and in the future.

ANALYSIS
In 2022, the City Council approved the contract with Evnsong (formerly SAS Entertainment), with a capital improvement schedule intended to modernize the Alex 98 of 169

28c
5 7
6 9
Theatre and bring operations up to industry standards. This 10-year project to improve the Theatre’s appearance, amenities, and audio/visual equipment has been underway for two years, with many more upgrades still required. These upgrades and purchases are budgeted annually and have occurred through the City’s regular procurement process.

The item before the Council is a major upgrade to the equipment – bringing in a live- stream capable broadcast quality multi-camera video system. Staff is requesting the acquisition and installation of the new equipment be from a single source because of the variety of compatible components needed to be delivered, installed and integrated at one time. Because of the intricacy of the equipment, this upgrade requires one expert vendor to coordinate the specifications of all the pieces to ensure proper functionality and connectivity. Additionally, by utilizing a single source vendor, the City is able to procure some pre-owned items with the same warranty as new equipment. If these items were bid out through the regular procurement process, there would be no ability to compare the functionality and differences amongst the pre-owned equipment’s quality and readily determine the compatibility of all pieces of equipment. Sole sourcing the acquisition and installation provides the opportunity for a significant discount in the purchase price by nearly 50%.

Utilizing a local vendor with items in stock also provides a guarantee that the equipment being delivered and ready for use within 30 days. Some supply chain issues with previous procurements have led to waits as long as 12 months.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
No outreach is associated with this report.

FISCAL IMPACT
The purchase, delivery, installation, and training on the use of these items totals $220,494, which was included as a part of the FY 2024-25 budget. No new appropriation is being requested at this time.

Existing Appropriation
Amount Account String Funding Source
$220,494 GL: 51200-4010-CDD-0020
PL: CDD00796BN
Capital Improvement
Fund

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
CEQA does not apply to projects where the lead agency determines "with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment." CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs.) § 15061(b)(3). Here, the action involves replacing old and outdated A/V equipment. There is no possibility that the action of upgrading equipment within the Theatre may have a significant effect on the environment.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
99 of 169

38c
5 7
6 9
The names and business addresses of the members of the board of directors, the chairperson, CEO, COO, CFO, Subcontractors and any person or entity with more than 10% interest in the company proposed for contract in this Agenda Item Report are attached in Exhibit #1, in accordance with the City Campaign Finance Ordinance No. 5744.

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Alternative 1. Do not authorize dispensing with competitive bidding. Not accepting this motion will significantly increase the cost and timeline of completing this project.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

Bradley Calvert, Director of Community Development
Prepared by:

Tamar Sadd, Deputy Director of Community Development
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit 1: Campaign Disclosure Form
Exhibit 2: Itemized Purchase List
Exhibit 3: Approved CIP Schedule
100 of 169

RESOLUTION NO. ______________

RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA,

DISPENSING WITH COMPETITIVE BIDDING AND AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE

OF SPECIALIZED BROADCAST QUALITY MULTI-CAMERA A/V EQUIPMENT FROM

TV PRO GEAR TO BE INSTALLED AT THE GLENDALE ALEX THEATRE WHEREAS, City of Glendale City Charter, in Article VI, Section 9 provides, in part, “Upon recommendation of the city manager, the council may dispense with competitive bidding for any contract when it determines that it is in the best interests of the City to do so and acts by resolution setting forth the reasons for such action”; WHEREAS, the Alex Theatre is engaged in a 10-year Capital Improvement Project to bring the Theatre’s appearance, amenities, and audio/visual equipment up to the industry standards;
WHEREAS, the City Manager is recommending Council authorize dispensing with competitive bidding for the acquisition and installation of industry-standard, live- stream capable broadcast quality multi-camera video system through a single source in lieu of the regular bidding process in order to ensure the Alex Theatre has industry- standard audio-visual technology that will enable the Alex Theatre to remain viable and competitive as a regional live-theatre venue now and in the future; WHEREAS, because of the intricacy of the AV equipment needed, this requested upgrade requires an expert vendor who is capable of coordinating the specifications of various equipment pieces to ensure proper integration, functionality, and connectivity; WHEREAS, TV Pro Gear is a specialized vendor that is capable to procuring, installing and integrating compatible AV components at the Alex Theatre at one time; WHEREAS, by utilizing this single source vendor, the City is able to procure from TV Pro Gear in stock and pre-owned items with the same warranty as new equipment, whereas if these items were bid out through the regular procurement process there would be limited ability to compare the functionality and differences amongst the pre- owned equipment’s quality and readily determine the equipment compatibility; WHEREAS, sole sourcing the acquisition and installation of updated AV equipment through TV Pro Gear provides a financial benefit because if will afford an opportunity for a significant discount in the purchase price by nearly 50% because of the availability of in stock and pre-owned items;
WHEREAS, utilizing a single local vendor with items in stock also provides a guarantee that the equipment is available for prompt delivery and ready to use within 30 days, whereas with previous procurements supply chain issues have at times led to wait 101 of 169

2 times as long as 12 months;
WHEREAS, the City Council finds there is a need to ensure that the Alex Theatre remains viable and competitive as a live-performance venue, and that upgrading the outdated A/V equipment with industry-standard, live-stream capable broadcast quality multi-camera video system will help to achieve this goal and save the City time and money; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds it is in the best interest of the City of Glendale to dispense with competitive bidding and to authorize the Deputy Director of Finance - Purchasing to issue purchase order agreements with the TV Pro Gear.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA:

1. That the foregoing facts are deemed to be a true and correct and a basis for dispensing with competitive bidding;

2. That the City Council hereby dispenses with competitive bidding and authorizes the Deputy Director of Finance - Purchasing to issue purchase orders with TV Pro Gear for the acquisition and installation of new industry standard AV equipment, as more specifically set forth above and in the report to the City Council dated January 28, 2025; and

3. The Deputy Director of Finance - Purchasing is authorized to approve and execute necessary agreements to implement this resolution.

Adopted this ______ day of ______________________, 2025. _________________________
Mayor

ATTEST:

City Clerk
102 of 169

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) SS

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
I, Suzie Abajian, Ph.D., City Clerk of the City of Glendale, certify that the foregoing Resolution was adopted by the Council of the City of Glendale, California, at a regular meeting held on the __________ day of ________________, 2025, and that same was adopted by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
_________________________
City Clerk
103 of 169

City of Glendale

Contractor(s)*:

Name
TV Pro Gear, Inc.

Title
Address
1630 Flower Street, Glendale, CA 91201
CityFull Name Business Address State Zip
Chairperson
Andy Maisner
Sheldon Zaslansky
Chief Executive Officer / President
Chief Operating Officer
1630 Flower Street, Glendale,
1630 Flower Street, Glendale,
Glendale
Glendale
CA
CA
91201
91201
Chief Financial Officer
Board of Directors
More than 10% interest owner
* “Contractor” is the person, entity, or organization that is the party, or prospective party, to the contract with the City, EDD, or HA or any member of that person’s, entity’s, or organization’s Board of Directors, its Chairperson, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Operating Officer, any person with an ownership interest of more than ten percent (10%) in that person, entity, or organization, and any campaign committee that is owned or controlled by that person, entity, or organization. Above please disclose these persons’ name and business address. 104 of 169

105 of 169

1630 Flower Street w Glendale w CA w 91201 w Ph (818) 246-7100 Quote Num: 9695
Quote Date: Dec. 22nd, 2024
Customer ID: ALEX
Client email: [email protected]
Project Type: Control Room in Theater
TV Pro Gear: Andrew Maisner
QtyManufacturer Model Description
Production Console
1TBC Consoles Intellitrac 5-Bay System with Yellow Lucite Counter Top 4TBC Consoles Intellitrac Monitor Arms
2TBC Consoles Intellitrac Speaker Platforms
Cameras, Lenses, Tripods and Camera Accessories
4Sony HXCFB80HL HXC HD Studio Camera Head - SMPTE/Lemo
3Sony HDVFL750 7" Color Viewfinder
2Sony HDVFL10 3.5" QHD LCD Viewfinder
4Sony HXCUFB80L FB80 4K/HD Studio Camera CCU - SMPTE/Lemo 4Sony RCP3500 Camera Remote Control Panel
3Fujinon XA20sX8.5BERM 20X Zoom Lens with 2X Tele-Extender 1Fujinon ZA12x4.5BERD 12x4.4 Wide Angle Digital Zoom Lens 3Fujinon MS-01 Remote Zoom and Focus Controls
4JVC KY-PZ400NWU/NBU 4K PTZ Robotic Camera -12x Zoom & NDI/HX & SRT 1JVC RM-LP100U PTZ Camera Controller with Joystick
4Libec LX10 Studio (35lbs payload)Fluid Head, 2-Stage Tripod, Dolly Wheels, 2 handles 4Secceed VCT-18 Tripod Camera Adaptor / Quick-On Plate
4Canare FCC153N-CCA SMPTE/Lemo Hybrid Fiber Optic Camera Cable - 500' Switcher, Recorders, Router and Terminal Equipment
1BlackMagic ATEM Television Studio Pro 4K84K/UHD 8-Input/10 Output All-in-One Switcher 3BlackMagic HyperDeck Studio 4K Pro4K Video DDR - Uses SD/UHS-II Cards & SSD to Record 1Black Magic Videohub 20x20 12G 4K/UHD Router (20 Inputs and 20 Outputs) 12G-SDI 1Black Magic Videohub Smart Control Pro48-Button Router Control Panel (Supports Ethernet) 1Black Magic SmartScope Duo 4K Waveform Monitor and VectorScope - Dual 7" Monitors 1Black Magic Teranex Mini SDI to HDMI 12GConverts 12-SDI 4K/UHD to HDMI 1Black Magic Teranex Mini HDMI to SDI-12GConverts HDMI to 4K/UHD SDI-12G 1Black Magic Teranex Mini SDI DistributionUHD/4K Distribution Amplifier - 12G with 8 Outputs 1Black Magic Web Presenter 4K HEVC 4K/UHD Internet Encoder 2Black Magic Universal Rack Shelf Holds Teranex Mini, Web Presenter and HyperDeck DDRs 1TP Link TL-SG3428XMP 24-Port Gigbit Smart L2+ PoE Switch 384W, 10GE SPF 1TP Link TL-WR902AC (AC750) Wireless Portable Router/HotSpot/Bridge/Extender 1ESE LX-220A Sync Generator with 8-Outputs
1CyberPower OR2200LCDRTXL2U Smart App LCD UPS System, 2100VA/1650W Phone Number: 213.400.1901
Cell Phone:

Customer Information
Company Name: The Alex
Contact Person: Miles Williams
Street Address: 216 N. Brand
City, State, Zip: Glendale, CA 91203
Quote
106 of 169

QtyManufacturer Model Description
Intercom and IFB Equipment
1Hollyland Solidcom C1 Pro-Hub8S Wireless Intercom System with 8 headsets and Hub Audio Equipment
1Yamaha DM3-D Digital Audio Mixer with Dante Built In
1Yamaha TIO-1608D Dante Digital Audio Snake 16-Inputs/8-Outputs 2Genelec 8010AP Bi-Amplified Near Field Speakers
4Sennheiser EW-D ME2/835-S SET Wireless Xmitter-Receiver-ME2 Lav&SKM Handheld Mic 1Sennheiser EW-D ASA (Q-R-S) Antenna Splitter Kit for Wireless Microphones 1Sennheiser A 1031-U Antenna, passive, omnidirectional, BNC, 3/8” mounting 1Sennheiser RG9913F100 Low-loss Antenna cable, 100' with BNC connectors Monitoring Equipment
3LG UQ8000 Series 55" UHD/4K LED/LCD Smart Monitor AI Processor 4LG 27UL650-W 27" HHD IPS Display with HDR-400 3840 x 2160 Rez. 7BlackMagic Micro Converter 12G-SDI to HDMI Converter
1TVPG Roll-Around Stand for LG 55" Monitor
Cables and Connecetors
2Canare L-3.3 or 5.5 cuhd 12G 1000' Rolls of UHD 12G Video Cable 120Canare BCP-D33UHD or D55 12G-12G BNC Crimp On Connector

0.5Belden 9451 Balanced Audio 1000' Rolls of HD Audio Cable 20Neutrik Audio Connectors NC3MXX-Black Male XLR with Gold Pins Connectors 20Neutrik Audio Connectors NC3FXX-Black Female XLR with Gold Pins Connectors 1TV Pro Gear Custom Panel Video 2RU Input/Output Access Panels 1TV Pro Gear Custom Panel Audio 2RU Input/Output Access Panels Cables and Connecetors (Continued)
1TV Pro Gear Custom Panel InterconnectInterconnect Panel 1AC Infinity Rack Mount Drawer Rack Mountable Drawer Brushed Aluminum 2-RU 1Middle AtlanticMiddle Atlantic Filler Panels, Cable Bracing Bars, Swival Arms, Screws 1UPS/FedEx Freight Expense Inbound Freight Expense
System Integration Labor
80TV Pro Gear Hours Engineer Labor System Design, Engineering and CAD Drawing 240TV Pro Gear Hours Installation Labor Mount Equipment, Cut, Solder, Crimp and Install Cables 24TV Pro Gear Hrs Test & Configuration LaborTesting System (Engineer and Wire Technicial) 24TV Pro Gear Hrs Training Labor Training Client's Staff Moving Sale Offer Only Good Until Jan. 30th, 2025 Sub-Total $199,995

10..25% Sales Tax $20,499
TERMS ARE: GRAND TOTAL $220,494
30% Deposit with PO
50% Upon Completion of CAD Drawings
20% Upon Delivery and Installation of Completed System Delivery within 30 days of receivng PO and deposit.
107 of 169

The projects outlined below address long-standing maintenance concerns as well as the needed modernization of the Alex Theatre's operating systems. Items addressed include nearly all areas of the facility and are designed to create a top class venue experience for both the artists and the audience.

Fiscal Year Description Cost Total Estimated longevity / Notes 2022-23No closure needed $555,000
Digital Video Projection System$125,000 10-15 yrsReplacement for GA property Grand Piano $45,000 50+ yrsReplacement for GA property
Spire refurbishment - LED Conversion$150,000 15-20 yrsSeveral lighting sections are not functioning Acoustic Panels $45,000 20-25 yrsreplacemenmt for acoustic curtains that were out of code and aging General Beautification and modernization$100,000 20-25 yrsEntrance decor, forecourt greenery / lighting, lobby decor, stage draperies, proscenium curtains, patron furniture, artist entrance, lobby gallery, etc.

House Audio components $30,000 15-20 yrsMain cable snake and splitter, near field speakers Stage Scenery $60,000 15-20 yrsStage set matched to interior architecture for concerts, like an orcherstra shell for popular music 2023-24Estimated closure of 3-4 months $555,000
Flooring in audience areas $200,000 15-20 yrsCarpet worn and out of date, concrete floors in auditorium flaking and aging - safety lighting replaced Seat cushions and fabric replacement$200,000 20-25 yrsCurrent seat covers are worn and cushions are breaking down Video cameras / streaming hardware $80,000 10-15 yrsHardware needed to complete live streaming upgrade Exterior Painting $75,000 10 yrs Last painted 2014
Closure planned for July-October 2023$800,000
DRESSING ROOMS / CONCESSIONS$300,000 20-25 yrsWorn, aging, and un-befitting a top class venue UPPER BALCONY REHAB / REBUILD$500,000 Perm Safety and code concerns per consultant 2024-25No closure needed $500,000
Lighting system - component replacement$250,000 15-20 yrsSystem modernization needed LED Video wall $100,000 10-15 yrsModern video system for on-stage usage Stage Audio Improvements $150,000 15-20 yrsMicrophones, cables and stands, stage monitors 2025-26Estimated closure of 1 month for projects$185,000 Stage communication replacement$75,000 15-20 yrsStage communication system Clear Com Stage floor replacement $60,000 25-30 yrsNew flooring needed every 25 yrs or so Soft Goods $50,000 15-20 yrsblack stage masking curtains 2026-27No closure needed $180,000
Stage rigging refurbishment $30,000 15-20 yrsreplace hand lines and worn blocks Stage Dimmers $150,000 20-25 yrslast replaced 1992
2027-28No closure needed $400,000
Sound system replacement $400,000 15-20 yrsModernization needed 2028-2031
No projects needed
Sub-total - new projects / improvements proposed $2,375,000 Total including previously identified projects$3,175,000 108 of 169

8d
24-87000

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Introduction of an Ordinance Amending Glendale Municipal Code, 1995, Title 8 Chapter 8.42 To Amend and Restate the City's Adopted Prohibitions on the Use of Polystyrene Products and Single Use Plastics.

1. Ordinance for Introduction.

2. Motion directing staff to develop incentive programs to support the transition to the proposed Plastic Waste Reduction Regulations ordinance.

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Action Item
Approved for January 28, 2025 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The report discusses amendments to the Glendale Municipal Code (GMC) focused on reducing plastic waste, particularly single-use plastics by (1) implementing stricter regulations on foodware and accessories, (2) mandating the use of compostable or recyclable foodware for to-go or delivery items, and (3) requiring reusable foodware for dine-in services.

The ordinance, as introduced, recommends a phased approach, with bans on plastic straws, stirrers, and utensils starting July 1, 2025, and implementation of the broader foodware standards on January 1, 2026.

To support the food and beverage establishments in complying with the proposed ordinance, financial and technical assistance is proposed to assist with the transition to compliant products, such as compostable or reusable foodware. Staff recommends that 109 of 169

8d2
24-87000
5 6
9 2
up to $150,000 annually may be allocated for product incentives and capital improvements, such as dishwashers.

Staff recommends that the City continue to engage with food and beverage providers by providing educational support programs including product sourcing information and technical guidance. Staff also recommends the City retain a consultant to provide continued education and support to organizations impacted by the Plastic Waste Reduction Regulations ordinance.

Overall, the proposed ordinance aims to reduce plastic waste in Glendale by enforcing stricter regulations, providing support to businesses, and continuing customer education on sustainable practices.

RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council introduce an ordinance requiring all dine-in food service use washable, reusable foodware, and that all to-go or delivery be served in compostable or recyclable containers, and that all foodware accessories must be fiber-based compostable.

That the City Council adopt a motion directing staff to develop incentive programs to support the transition to the proposed Plastic Waste Reduction Regulations ordinance.

That the City Council adopt a motion directing staff to retain a consultant to provide continued education and support to organizations impacted by the proposed ordinance.

ANALYSIS
Since 2021, the City Council has adopted three ordinances tackling the use and distribution of single-use plastics, disposable foodware accessories, and polystyrene products.

Single-Use Plastics:

Ordinance No. 5964, adopted in April 2021, prohibits using single-use plastic products to serve prepared foods at certain City-managed, City-run concessions or City- sponsored events located in City-owned or controlled facilities. The ordinance requires all disposable foodware used by food or beverage providers who serve prepared food and beverages at a City event to be marine-biodegradable. The ordinance prohibits the City, its contractors, agents, and employees acting in their official capacity to purchase, acquire, or distribute non-recyclable or compostable foodware for public use at City events.
110 of 169

8d3
24-87000
5 6
9 2
Disposal Foodware Accessories:

Ordinance No. 5973, adopted in September 2021, regulates the distribution of disposable foodware accessories by food and beverage facilities. Specifically, the ordinance prohibits use of self-serve, disposable foodware accessory dispensers or providing or offering disposable foodware accessories to a dine-in or takeout customers, except upon customer request. However, food and beverage facilities are allowed to ask a drive-through or delivery customer if they want disposable foodware accessories. In addition, prepared food facilities that use online food ordering platforms are required to provide online ordering platform “opt in” options that enable customers to choose which disposable foodware accessories to include with online orders..

Polystyrene and Other Plastic Products:

On March 22, 2022, City Council approved a motion directing staff to prepare a report on the validity of prohibiting polystyrene, foodware, the use of single-use plastic straws, stirrers and utensils, a disposable cup charge, and reusable foodware for dining on premises.

On November 29, 2022, the City Council directed staff to prepare an ordinance regulating plastic waste, specifically polystyrene products, single-use plastic straws, stirrers, and utensils. The Council also directed that the proposed ordinance establish disposable foodware standards, disposable cup charges, reusable foodware dining on- premises standards, and a prohibition of single-use beverage bottles.

On November 14, 2023, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 6015 prohibiting the use, distribution, and sale of polystyrene foodware, polystyrene coolers, polystyrene packing materials, polystyrene egg cartons, polystyrene produce trays, and polystyrene meat and fish trays.

At the direction of the City Council, staff have conducted outreach on proposed plastic waste reduction regulations focused on:
a. Prohibition on the use and or distribution of single-use plastic straws, stirrers, and utensils
b. Disposable foodware recycling standards
c. Disposable cup charge
d. Reusable foodware for dining on premises
Adopting the Single-Use Plastics, Disposable Foodware Accessories, and Polystyrene Prohibition ordinances has reduced plastic use and raised awareness of the impact of plastic waste on our environment. Locally, single-use plastics are a significant source of litter and contamination in recycling programs because confusion surrounds which 111 of 169

8d4
24-87000
5 6
9 2
forms of plastic are acceptable to discard in recycling bins. Littered plastic products cause substantial environmental harm and burden governments with considerable cleanup costs.

Overview Related State Laws
The State of California continues implementing regulations aimed at packaging safety and reducing the use of single-use foodware.

AB1276: California AB-1276 (Single-use Foodware Accessories and Standard Condiments) reduces plastic waste by limiting the distribution of single-use foodware accessories (such as utensils, straws, stirrers, and condiment packets) in restaurants and other food establishments. Additionally, the City of Glendale adopted Ordinance No. 5973, Disposable Foodware Accessories, which prohibits using self-serve/self- service dispensers for disposable foodware accessories.

AB 1200: On October 5, 2021, Governor Newsom signed Assembly Bill (AB) 1200 into law. Beginning January 1, 2023, this bill bans all plant fiber-based food packaging containing PFAS either intentionally added or present at levels exceeding 100 parts per million total organic fluorine.

SB 54: The 2022 "Plastic Pollution Prevention and Packaging Producer Responsibility Act", is one of the California’s most significant environmental laws to reduce plastic waste. Its primary goal is to reduce plastic pollution by holding producers accountable for the lifecycle of their packaging materials. Key Points of SB 54 for the City to consider relevant to the proposed ordinance are:

1. Reduction in Single-Use Plastics:
a. By 2032, SB 54 mandates a 25% reduction in California's single-use plastic packaging and foodware.
b. Reduction can be achieved through reducing unnecessary packaging, redesigning products, or shifting to reusable or refillable systems.

2.Recycling and Composting Goals:
a. By 2032, 65% of all single-use plastic packaging and foodware must be recycled or composted.
b. Packaging materials that are not recyclable or compostable will eventually be phased out or heavily regulated.

3.Support for Local Recycling Infrastructure: Funds raised by the Extended Producer Responsibility program, which requires producers to take responsibility for the entire product life-cycle of their packaging, will improve local recycling systems and infrastructure, helping municipalities deal more efficiently with 112 of 169

8d5
24-87000
5 6
9 2
plastic waste.

4.Bans on Problematic Plastics: The bill empowers California regulators to ban or limit specific problematic plastics that are not recyclable or present significant challenges in waste management.

SB 54 should drive the California market to develop foodware and packaging that is recyclable or compostable. The law aims to improve recycling rates by holding producers accountable for ensuring their packaging is recyclable. This could lead to more effective sorting and recycling systems, and less contamination in recycling streams.

Proposed Plastic Waste Reduction Regulations - Background As part of the background for drafting this Ordinance, City retained ReCREATE Waste Collaborative ("ReCREATE") to conduct outreach with the food and beverage community to obtain feedback on the proposed Ordinance and to determine the recyclability and composability of the foodware items proposed to be covered by the Ordinance.

Staff also examined foodware recyclability and compostability by focusing regulations on the distribution and use of plastic straws, stirrers, and utensils – items that are typically neither compostable nor recyclable. Additionally, staff focused on foodware recycling standards that can be successfully implemented and on programs that educate and encourage reusables based on the scope and scale of Glendale’s commercial residential and commercial recycling programs that reflect the recycling commodities market.

Glendale has contracts with four private waste haulers for commercial collection services and provides collection services for residential recycling. All waste haulers and the Department of Public Works, Integrated Waste Division responded to ReCREATE’s request to identify whether the items covered under the proposed Ordinance are in fact accepted in their recycling program and recovered at the designated material recovery facility. The results are as follows:

Table 1: Acceptability and Recyclability of Plastic Covered Materials:

Hauler
Accept-
ability
PET cold
beverage
cup
PP cold
beverage
cup
PS cold
beverage
cup
PET
clamshell
PP
clamshell
PP tubs/
containers
Black
plastic
Non-
numbered
containers
113 of 169

8d6
24-87000
5 6
9 2
Of the accepted items, PS cold beverage cups are not recycled by any of the 5 waste haulers.

Table 2: Acceptability and Recyclability of Compostable Covered Materials:

Hauler
Natural Fiber
Accessories
(straws,
stirrers,
utensils)
PLA- Lined
Cups
PLA- Lined
Foodware
Natural Fiber
Non-PLA-
Lined Cups
Natural Fiber
Non-PLA-
Lined
Foodware
Total Accepted 2 out of 5 0 out of 5 0 out of 5 2 out of 5 2 out of 5 Polylactic acid (PLA)
ReCREATE’s research shows that most waste haulers operating in Glendale are currently accepting and recycling the items deemed recyclable in the proposed Ordinance. Although not all the covered materials are accepted by all haulers, to avoid confusion amongst food and beverage providers, the staff recommends setting one set of rules for the use of recyclable and compostable items, even though some of those items will end up in landfills. Additionally, SB 54 regulations may clarify what items are considered recyclable and compostable, which may lead to increased recycling and composting of items covered in the proposed Ordinance..

Ordinance Summary.

The Ordinance is set up for phased implementation that coincides with the Burbank's roll out if its waste reduction regulations; it is hoped this coordinated approach will reduce confusion about where and when the regulations take effect. Accordingly, July 1, 2025, was selected for implementing the prohibition on the use and distribution of single-use plastic straws, stirrers, and utensils. January 1, 2026, was selected for implementing disposable foodware recycling standards and regulations for on premises Total
Accepted 3 out of 5 3 out of 5 1 out of 5 3 out of 5 3 out of 5 3 out of 5 2 out of 5 1 out of 5
Total
Recycled
3 out of 5 3 out of 5 0 out of 5 3 out of 5 3 out of 5 3 out of 5 2 out of 5 1 out of 5
•Polypropylene (PP) (resin code 5)
•Polyethylene Terephthalate (PETE or PET) (Resin code 1) •Polystyrene (PS) (Resin code 6)
114 of 169

8d7
24-87000
5 6
9 2
dining reusable standards for large food and beverage providers, and July 1, 2026, was selected for all other food and beverage providers.

Based on these proposed timelines, the proposed Ordinance includes the following:

Prohibition on Use and or Distribution of Single-use Plastic Straws, Stirrers, and Utensils
Effective July 1, 2025, prohibitions on the use, distribution, and sale of Single-use Plastic Straws, Stirrers, and Utensils shall take effect as follows:

1. Prohibition on Single-Use Plastic. Food and beverage providers shall not use or distribute plastic straws, stirrers, or utensils, whether for use on- site, to-go, or delivery. Disposable straws, stirrers, and utensils must be made from non-plastic materials, such as paper, pasta, sugar cane, bamboo, or wood.

2. Use Accommodation. Food and/or beverage providers city-wide may retain and dispense plastic straws upon request as an accommodation for people with disabilities to provide equal access to food and beverage services within the City.

Disposable Foodware Standards

1. Effective January 1, 2026, no to-go or delivery food or beverage facility may distribute disposable foodware that is not compostable or recyclable.

2. Effective January 1, 2027, no to-go or delivery food or beverage facility may distribute disposable foodware that is not compostable.

On-Premises Dining
A. Effective January 1, 2026, large food or beverage facilities (with more than 26 employees) serving prepared food and or beverages served for consumption by a customer on the premises of food and beverage facilities shall only be distributed in reusable foodware except that disposable paper food wrappers, sleeves and bags; foil wrappers; paper napkins; straws and paper tray- and plate-liners shall be allowed for dining on the premises, so long as they meet the Disposable Foodware Recycling Standards.

B. Effective July 1, 2026, all other food or beverage facilities serving prepared food and or beverages served for consumption by a customer on the premises of food and beverage facilities, shall only be distributed in reusable foodware except that disposable paper food wrappers, sleeves and bags; foil wrappers; paper napkins; straws and paper tray- and plate-liners shall be allowed for dining on the premises, so long as they meet the Disposable Foodware Recycling Standards.

C. Nothing in this section prohibits food and/or beverage facilities from providing a 115 of 169

8d8
24-87000
5 6
9 2
"doggy bag" or “to-go” (single-use foodware) to prevent food waste as long as the disposable foodware complies with the disposable foodware recycling standards.

D. Where a food or beverage facility is granted an exemption from on- premises dining reusable foodware requirement, compostable foodware shall be used unless the product in unavailable as long as the disposable foodware complies with recycling foodware standards.

Develop Incentive Programs
Staff also recommends the Council direct development of incentive and assistance programs to help food and beverage providers comply with the Ordinance. Incentive programs may fall into two categories: one focused on compliant products and the other on capital improvements and equipment. Assistance programs may be focused educating food and beverage providers on energy efficient practices, compliant product lists and grants and financing opportunities.

Incentive Programs Options - Compliant Products:

Incentive program may be subdivided into two programs:

1. Recycling Standards: This program may focus on providing food and beverage providers financial assistance to purchase items that meet the proposed disposable foodware recycling standards. This program will enable the purchase of approved disposable foodware for takeout and delivery to avoid using polystyrene and other non-compliant plastics. (See Exhibit 4 – Foodware Price Comparison Chart)

2. Reusable Foodware: This program may focus on providing financial assistance to help dine-in restaurants and cafes buy reusable foodware and utensils to replace single-use disposable items.

Staff recommends allocating up to $50,000 per year for the incentive program with up to $500 available for 50 establishments per year for two years after adopting the proposed regulations. Staff recommends that 80% of these funds be directed to purchasing reusable items for dine-in.

Incentive Programs Options – Capital Improvement:

1. This program may focus on those businesses classified as small food and beverage providers to assist with the capital improvements to accommodate dishwashers. The program shall be open to food and beverage providers with less than 26 employees who are not chains located in Glendale.

2. The City may develop a dishwasher rebate program modeled on the California Foodservice Instant Rebate program. In this program, customers can get 116 of 169

8d9
24-87000
5 6
9 2
valuable instant rebates on qualifying energy-efficient dishwashers for their businesses. The program may provide businesses $750 to help them comply with this new ordinance. The program shall be open to food and beverage providers with less than 26 employees who are not chains located in the City of Glendale.

Recommends allocating up to $100,000 per year for this program.

If the City Council approves the motion to develop incentive programs staff will include cost of incentive programs in to the 2025-2026 budget request.

Assistance Programs - examples
Assistance programs are focused on three areas:

1. Utilizing existing programs to work with food and beverage providers to assist them in saving energy and water programs.

2. Providing information on compliant products.

3. Providing information on financing and grants that can assist businesses transition to the requirements of this ordinance.

Energy Savings Upgrades: Glendale Water & Power, in partnership with Willdan, offers affordable energy-saving upgrades to businesses. Upgrading not only reduces monthly energy costs but also improves the look and feel of your business. Upgrading is affordable, with incentives covering up to 100% of the project cost. The Sustainability Office has provided Willdan with a list of food and beverage providers. Although the program cannot offer dishwasher equipment upgrades, tackling energy efficiency may directly assist businesses.

Reusable Foodware Systems: A reusable foodware system is typically a turn-key service where the vendor provides dishware, inventory management, collection and washing of used dishes, as well as redistribution of clean foodware for takeout and delivery of prepared food, or a subset of these services. Custom solutions may include part of the service, e.g., dishwashing/sanitizing of foodware provided by a customer or another reusable foodware service, closed-loop systems within specific distribution parameters (e.g., meal services), etc.

Compliant Product Lists: The City will post a list of compliant disposable foodware on the City's Office of Sustainability website. City staff shall update the list as frequently as necessary to include compliant foodware; however, the list shall be updated at least annually. For 2 years, the City may hire an expert consultant to help businesses evaluate their processes, provide reuse recommendations, and assist in identifying appropriate foodware alternatives or equipment recommendations. 117 of 169

8d10
24-87000
5 6
9 2
GoGreen Financing: Administered by the State of California, GoGreen Financing puts energy efficiency upgrades within reach, with attractive rates and terms and no property liens. Small business can upgrade facilities with an efficient heating and cooling system, insulation, new windows, a cool roof, and more, such as commercial dishwashing equipment utilizing gas or electric hot water.

SoCal Gas Business Equipment Rebates: SoCal Gas provides $250-750 rebates for qualifying commercial dishwashers.

Continued Education Programs: Staff recommends that the City continue engaging, supporting, and educating the organizations affected by the regulations through July 2026 and beyond if appropriate. The continued customer education was identified as a key area of support requested by the survey responses. Staff recommends the continuing support program that provides robust education and outreach/technical assistance to up to 400 food and beverage establishments located in Glendale to assist with implementing the ORDINANCE. The objective of the assistance will be to:
➢Educate business owners, managers, and staff regarding specific requirements outlined in the ORDINANCE by providing the Business Outreach Packet and other resources and recommendations for product swaps.
➢Place educational signage in the food and beverage establishment. ➢Complete surveys to assess ORDINANCE compliance and gain insights into business owner/manager perceptions and identified challenges. These surveys are crucial in understanding the current state of compliance and the areas that need further attention.
➢Provide follow-up communication to the establishment, including resources, specific recommendations, product ideas and/or replacements, and answers to inquiries.

Staff recommends hiring a consultant to assist with the continued education programs.

Ordinance Exemptions

1. The following are exempt from the provisions of this Chapter:
a. Coolers and ice chests, other than those defined as Polystyrene Coolers in this Chapter.
b. Food brought by individuals for personal consumption. c. During a locally declared emergency, the City, emergency response agencies operating within the City, users of City facilities, and Food Providers and Beverage Providers shall be exempt from the provisions of this Chapter.
118 of 169

8d11
24-87000
5 6
9 2
d. The Food Provider or Beverage Provider provides or distributes a plastic beverage straw upon request to individuals with disabilities as needed to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act.

2. The City Manager or designee may exempt any person from the regulations as follows:
a. A request for an exemption shall be filed in writing with the City Manager or designee. It shall include documentation of the reason for the claimed exemption and any other information necessary for the department to decide. The department may require the Applicant to provide additional information to make the required determinations.
b. The City Manager or designee may grant an exemption for a maximum of one (1) year, with or without conditions, upon finding that compliance would create an undue hardship. Applications for exemption renewals will also be considered. Undue hardship shall be construed to include but not be limited to situations where:
i. Compliance with this article will result in undue hardship because of a food and or beverage facility’s lack of space. ii. Compliance with this article will result in an undue financial hardship for a food and or beverage facility.
iii. No suitable products are available.
iv. Compliance with the requirements of this chapter would deprive a person of a legally protected right.

An example exemption form is provided in Exhibit 1.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
In December 2023, ReCREATE began engaging stakeholders to solicit feedback from the food and beverage community about potential policy details related to the Ordinance and gather data to be analyzed for future outreach efforts. ReCREATE was engaged to assist with the stakeholder engagement process and gather community feedback which included business site visits and surveys, in-person meetings and virtual webinars. A key driver of the recommendations in this report are based on the feedback received from food and beverage providers through the extensive stakeholder engagement program.

Food and beverage providers received information about the details of the Ordinance and polystyrene ban regulations. They were provided flyers outlining the specifics of the passed polystyrene ban (available in English, Armenian, and Spanish) and a Resource Guide for Glendale Businesses which included links, Webinars and in-person presentations provided a detailed PowerPoint on the proposed Ordinance. 119 of 169

8d12
24-87000
5 6
9 2
A Vendor Fair was held to provide food and beverage establishments with access to compliant product information, examples, and providers. Two online webinars and five in-person presentations were conducted.

Online and In-Person Presentation Dates:

Organization Name Date of Presentation
Downtown Glendale Chamber of Commerce 4/24/2024
Montrose Shopping Park Assoc 5/02/2924
Webinar 1 5/14/2024
Montrose Verdugo Chamber of Commerce 5/21/2024
Webinar 2 6/03/2024
Vendor Fair 8/24/2024
Glendale Sustainability Commission 10/03/2024
Glendale Chamber of Commerce 11/07/2024
Summary of Surveys Performed
In the first round of business visits, ReCREATE engaged with 139 businesses and conducted 89 surveys to provide written and verbal feedback related to the Ordinance.

Businesses in Glendale were educated about the specifics of the proposed Ordinance, and the details of the recently passed polystyrene ban. Each business was provided with an outreach sheet that included a City Purchasing Guide of ordinance-approved products and resources for financial and technical assistance.

Summary of Outreach Points-of-Contact:
●Round 1: 219 attempted business visits
○Visits and/or phone calls where a manager or owner could not be reached, but a flier was left for the business
●Round 1: 139 businesses visited (89 surveys conducted) ○Visits where ReCREATE was able to speak to a manager or owner and 89 were willing to participate in the survey
●Round 2: 77 businesses re-visited (87% revisit rate)
○12 business were unable or unwilling to complete the survey 120 of 169

8d13
24-87000
5 6
9 2
Business Included in the Survey:

RESTAURANT ADDRESS
85C BAKERY CAFE 201 N BRAND BLVD STE 100
ACAI GRILL 401 N BRAND BLVD
ACAPULCO 722 N PACIFIC AVE
ADANA RESTAURANT 6918 SAN FERNANDO RD
ALL INDIA CAFE 316 N BRAND BLVD
AMC THE AMERICANA 18 322 AMERICANA WAY
ARA 1021 E BROADWAY
ARKO FOODS-MAIN STORE 1425 E COLORADO ST
BACARI GDL 757 AMERICANA WAY
BARNES & NOBLE #2303 210 AMERICANA WAY
BCLA 1 LLC BIG CHICKEN 252 S BRAND BLVD # B
BJ'S RESTAURANT & BREWHOUSE 101 N BRAND BLVD STE 150
BLACK COW CAFE 2219 HONOLULU AVE
BLAZE FAST FIRE'D PIZZA 3231 GLENDALE GALLERIA # 5404
CAFE 86 221 GALLERIA WAY
CALIFORNIA POKE HOUSE 106 W CALIFORNIA AVE
CAROUSEL RESTAURANT 304 N BRAND BLVD
CHARLEY'S PHILLY STEAKS 1140 GLENDALE GALLERIA
CHIPOTLE MEXICAN GRILL #2237 1135 GLENDALE GALLERIA
CHOP SHOP 23 361 W BROADWAY
CHOP STOP #5 601 N GLENDALE AVE
CILANTRO 247 N BRAND BLVD
CRAZY ROCK'N SUSHI 239 N BRAND BLVD
CRUNLY 2151 GALLERIA WAY
121 of 169

8d14
24-87000
5 6
9 2

RESTAURANT ADDRESS
DA JUICE BAR 305 1/2 BRAND BLVD
DIN TAI FUNG 177 CARUSO AVE
DINAH'S FRIED CHICKEN 4106 SAN FERNANDO RD STE A
DUNKIN 1151 GLENDALE GALLERIA
EL MORFI 241 N BRAND BLVD
FISH KING MARKET 722 N GLENDALE AVE
FIVE GUYS BURGERS & FRIES 1137 GLENDALE GALLERIA WAY # FC11 FRENCH BAKERY CAFE 1017 E BROADWAY
GAMTUBOP (THE RICE BALL) 132 N BRAND BLVD FL 1
GEN KOREAN BBQ HOUSE 126 N MARYLAND AVE
GLENDALE PHO CO 102 S GLENDALE AVE
GOLDEN FORK 222 S GLENDALE AVE
GREEN CRUSH 2168 GLENDALE GALLERIA WAY # S2167
HONEY BAKED HAM 547 N GLENDALE AVE
HOT DOG ON A STICK 1146 GLENDALE GALLERIA
HOT WINGS CAFE 314 N BRAND BLVD
KHINKALI HOUSE 113 N ARTSAKH AVE
KOJUICE 127 S BRAND BLVD STE 101
KUMADORI SUSHI 143 S ARTSAKH AVE
L'AVENUE 156 S BRAND BLVD.

LA CUBANA 801 S GLENDALE AVE #3
LA GOCCIA 101 N BRAND BLVD #130
LA VACA BRAZILLIAN GRILL 1148 GLENDALE GALLERIA
LE PAIN QUOTIDIEN 730 AMERICANA WAY
MARIOS ITALIAN IMPORTS 740 E BROADWAY
MARUGAME UDON 1318 GLENDALE GALLERIA
122 of 169

8d15
24-87000
5 6
9 2

RESTAURANT ADDRESS
MAX'S OF MANILLA 313 W BROADWAY
MEDITERRANEAN DELIGHT #3 126 S BRAND BLVD
MENDOCINO FARMS, LLC 769 AMERICANA WAY, SUITE E-14
MR GOODS DONUTS 801 S GLENDALE AVE #2
NOVA MARKET & CATERING 901 W GLENOAKS BLVD
OCTOPUS JAPANESE RESTAURANT 112 N ARTSAKH AVE
OLIVE GARDEN #1322 101 N BRAND BLVD
PACIFIC FOOD MART BAKERY 1020 N PACIFIC AVE
PANDA EXPRESS #118 1134 GLENDALE GALLERIA # #4
PANERA BREAD 300 N BRAND BLVD
PEPE'S MEXICAN RESTAURANT 2272 HONOLULU AVE
PHILZ COFFEE 252 S BRAND BLVD # A
PHO HUT 312 N BRAND BLVD
PORTO'S CAFE BAKERY 309 N BRAND BLVD
REGENT COFFEE 249 N BRAND BLVD
ROLL CAFE 2151 GLENDALE GALLERIA SPC 6522
SASABUNE GLENDALE 101 N BRAND AVE # 220
SEVAN 1315 E COLORADO
SEVAN CHICKEN 601 W GLENOAKS
SHARETEA 2210 GLENDALE GALLERIA SPC S006
SIPAN BAKERY INC. 1250 W GLENOAKS BLVD STE C
SPRINKLES CUPCAKES 629 AMERICANA WAY
STAR CAFE 2217 HONOLULU AVE
STONE OVEN 1136 GLENDALE GALLERIA
SUPER KING MARKET 6501 SAN FERNANDO RD
TARGET # T2307 2195 GLENDALE GALLERIA
123 of 169

8d16
24-87000
5 6
9 2

RESTAURANT ADDRESS
TAVA HOUSE 1110 S GLENDALE AVE
THE BRANDY 108 N BRAND BLVD STE 100
THE HALAL GUYS #105 201 N BRAND BLVD # 110
THE SALT & OLIVE 400 N BRAND BLVD STE 120
TOASTED CAFE 2420 HONOLULU AVE
TRATTORIA AMICI 783 AMERICANA WAY
TROY'S BURGERS 530 S GLENDALE AVE
URARTU COFFEE 119 N ARTSAKH AVE
VEGAS BUFFET GLENDALE 110 S BRAND BLVD
WILD ACAI 2275 HONOLULU AVE
WRAP IT UP INC 115 W WILSON AVENUE
YI FANG 251 N BRAND BLVD
YOGA-URT 1407 1/2 W KENNETH RD
ReCREATE met with restaurant owners and managers to solicit feedback on their primary barriers and concerns of the Ordinance. The primary concern was cost.

Business concerns related to cost include:
○General increase in operating costs
○Increased costs for implementing reusables/compostables ○Persistent post-Covid costs such as high demand for take-out and customer perception that disposables are more sanitary
A Stakeholder Engagement and Survey Results Report (Exhibit 2) was submitted to the City in February 2024. After reviewing the data, a revised version of the Ordinance was drafted to address the concerns and feedback included in Round 1 of stakeholder engagement.

Additional Survey Results
In August 2024, ReCREATE conducted a second round of business outreach (“Round 2”) (Exhibit 3) soliciting feedback on the revised regulations, that reflected comments from the first round of outreach. ReCREATE re-connected with the same stakeholders engaged in Round 1 of the outreach process and seeking to determine whether 124 of 169

8d17
24-87000
5 6
9 2
perceptions had changed since the first round. A total of 77 businesses were re-visited (87% revisit rate) in the second round.

Round 2 outreach included additional data collection regarding polystyrene use, automatic dishwasher ownership, and compliance with SB 1383’s organics disposal requirements.
➢22 out of 77 businesses were still using polystyrene
➢30 out of 77 businesses have automatic dishwashers
➢92% of restaurants are not offering customers a three-stream waste system ➢Several strip malls and malls do not provide tenants with any organic waste dumpsters
The results of the second round of outreach found that. ➢14% more businesses felt very supportive of the updated Ordinance. ➢19% more businesses felt somewhat or very confident in their ability to implement the updated Ordinance.
➢Businesses were in support of the addition of recyclable materials and the removal of the 25-cent cup fee.
➢Business owners and managers would like the City to offer information about where to source compliant products and provide more customer education.

Other Observations
➢Businesses expressed concern that retail stores located in Glendale still offer polystyrene packaging for sale.
➢Businesses expressed concern that food carts and food trucks will not be held to the same standards as brick-and-mortar stores.
➢Confidence in implementing the changes increased by 11% from Round 1 to Round 2 of outreach.
➢The two most popular options for City outreach efforts among business owners and managers were City-sourced ordinance-approved products and customer education.
➢Businesses that will need the most assistance are those that currently use only disposables with no automatic dishwashing capacity and have minimal storage space for reusables.

Summary of Survey Results
Question: What is the primary barrier you see to implementing the Ordinance? 125 of 169

8d18
24-87000
5 6
9 2
Question: What assistance would you like to see the City of Glendale offer? Question: The City of Glendale is considering requiring compostable accessories to be implemented first, and other aspects of the Ordinance within a year. Do you prefer this phased-in approach?
126 of 169

8d19
24-87000
5 6
9 2
Question: How supportive are you of the Ordinance? (Round 1 to Round 2 Comparison) 127 of 169

8d20
24-87000
5 6
9 2
Question: How confident are you in your ability to implement the Ordinance details? (Round 1 to Round 2 comparison)
Sustainability Commission Recommendations
At the Sustainability Commission meeting of October 3, 2024, and November 7, 2024, the Commissioners reviewed the draft regulations and recommended the following changes are made:

Disposable Foodware Recycling Standards:
➢The Disposable Foodware Recycling Standards regulations clarify that no “to- go/delivery” food and or beverage facility may distribute to customers disposable foodservice ware that is not either compostable or recyclable. ➢Effective January 1, 2027, no to-go or delivery food or beverage facility may distribute disposable foodware that is not compostable. ➢The Commission requested that effective January 1, 2026, no to- go/delivery large food or beverage facilities may distribute plastic to go/delivery bags to customers. Legal staff reviewed existing state legislation and has determined that the City is statutorily prohibited from imposing different or more restrictive regulations on the use and distribution of plastic bag.

Specifically, Public Resources Code section 42287, applicable to PRC 42280-42288 states:
“(a) Except as provided in subdivision (c), this chapter is a matter of 128 of 169

8d21
24-87000
5 6
9 2
statewide interest and concern and is applicable uniformly throughout the state. Accordingly, this chapter occupies the whole field of regulation of reusable grocery bags, single-use carryout bags, and recycled paper bags, as defined in this chapter, provided by a store, as defined in this chapter.
(b) On and after January 1, 2015, a city, county, or other local public agency shall not enforce, or otherwise implement, an ordinance, resolution, regulation, or rule, or any amendment thereto, adopted on or after September 1, 2014, relating to reusable grocery bags, single-use carryout bags, or recycled paper bags, against a store, as defined in this chapter, unless expressly authorized by this chapter.” On Premises Dining:
➢Effective dates of the regulations for On-Premises Dining for large businesses (with more than 26 employees) begin January 1, 2026, for all other business take effected July 1, 2026.
➢Where a food or beverage facility is granted an exemption from On- Premises Dining reusable foodware requirement, compostable foodservice ware shall be used unless the product in unavailable.

Incentive Programs:
➢Be increased to $50,000 and $100,000 per year for two years.

Exemptions:
➢Exemptions are applied for on an annual basis.

The above recommendations have been included into the ordinance for City Council consideration.

FISCAL IMPACT
The fiscal impact associated with the implementation of this ordinance will depend upon the desired levels and duration of enforcement and the direction of City Council to provide incentive programs. The cost to engage the services of a consultant to provide continued education and support to organizations impacted by the ordinance will vary based on the scope of work. These costs will be requested as a part of the FY 2025-26 budget.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
129 of 169

8d22
24-87000
5 6
9 2
Staff conducted environmental review and determined the ordinance does not require review under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and that this ordinance is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of Division 6 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (the CEQA Guidelines) because the adoption of this ordinance is covered by the commonsense exemption that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment and where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may be a significant effect of the environment, therefore the activity is not subject to the requirements of CEQA. Further the action is exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15308 (Actions by Regulatory Agencies for the Protection of the Environment) because these regulations involve the imposition of regulations for the protection of the environment through the reduction of plastic wastes, which include polystyrene, polystyrene packaging materials, single use plastics, from entering the waste stream, and from entering the environment.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements.

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Alternative 1: Do not introduce the Ordinance for Prohibitions on the use of Polystyrene Products and Single Use Plastics.

Alternative 2: City Council may consider any other alternative not proposed by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

John Takhtalian, Assistant City Manager
Prepared by:

David Jones, Sustainability Officer
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS

1. Example Exemption Form.

2. Glendale Plastic Waste Stakeholder Engagement Results Round 1 Survey/Stakeholder Engagement Report.

3. City of Glendale Plastic Waste Stakeholder Engagement Results Round 2 Survey / Stakeholder Engagement Report.

4. Foodware Price Comparison Table.
130 of 169

8d23
24-87000
5 6
9 2
131 of 169

1 ORDINANCE NO.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE AMENDING TITLE 8, CHAPTER 8.42 OF THE GLENDALE MUNICIPAL CODE, 1995, TO AMEND AND RESTATE THE CITY’S ADOPTED PROHIBITIONS ON THE

USE OF POLYSTYRENE PRODUCTS AND SINGLE-USE PLASTICS
WHEREAS, on April 6, 2021, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 5964 regulating the use of polystyrene and single-use plastics which was principally focused on prohibiting the use of non-compostable disposable foodware in city departments, and by city contractors, agents, and employees at certain city events; and
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 5964 also required food and beverage providers serving food at a city event to provide compostable disposable straws and utensils upon request only, and allowed food and beverage providers to dispense plastic straws as an accommodation to people with disabilities who request them to enjoy equal access to food and beverage services at city events; and
WHEREAS, on September 21, 2021, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 5973 implementing regulations on the distribution of disposable foodware accessories by food and beverage facilities in the City; and
WHEREAS , on January 10, 2023, the City Council considered the introduction of a comprehensive plastic waste reduction ordinance that would repeal and replace Ordinance No. 5964 regulating “Polystyrene and Single Use Plastics” set forth in Glendale Municipal Code, 1995, Chapter 8.42; and WHEREAS , the City Council also directed staff to amend Chapter 8.42 to extend certain regulations on the use of polystyrene products to a city-wide basis and to undertake certain public education programs; and WHEREAS, on November 14, 2023, the Council adopted Ordinance No. 6015 to prohibit the use of Polystyrene Products and Single Use Plastics, which became effective on December 14, 2023, and simultaneously directed staff to conduct targeted outreach; and
WHEREAS, subsequent to the 2023 adoption of Ordinance No. 6015, staff through its consultant, ReCREATE, visited 139 businesses and conducted 89 surveys throughout the City and obtained feedback on regulations that 132 of 169

2 businesses can effectively implement. ReCREATE conducted two rounds of surveys, two webinars, four presentations to city chambers and one vendor fair; and
WHEREAS, this ordinance reflects refinements to the polystyrene and single use plastics regulations based on direction from the City Council and consultation with businesses and public outreach in order to assure effective implementation.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE:

SECTION 1. The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference.

SECTION 2. Title 8 of the Glendale Municipal Code, 1995, Chapter 8.42 is hereby amended and restated in its entirety to read as follows:

CHAPTER 8.42

POLYSTYRENE AND SINGLE-USE PLASTIC PRODUCTS

8.42.010 Purpose and findings.

8.42.020 Definitions.

8.42.030 Prohibition on use of non-compostable food
service ware at city facilities and city events.

8.42.035 Prohibition on the use, distribution or sale of polystyrene foodware, coolers, packing materials,
egg cartons, and produce, meat and fish trays.

8.42.040

8.42.045

8.42.050

8.42.055

8.42.060
Dining on the Premises
Single Use Foodware Standards
Prohibition on Use and Distribution of Single- Use
Plastic Straws, Stirrers and Utensils
Distribution of Disposable Foodware Accessories
Only Upon Request
Single-use beverage bottles.

8.42.065 Exemptions.
133 of 169

3 8.42.070 Appeals.

8.42.075 Violations and penalties.

8.42.010. Purpose and findings.

The City Council finds and declares that:

A. As set forth in California Public Resources Code Section 42355, the state Legislature recognized that littered plastic products have caused and continue to cause significant environmental harm and have burdened local governments with significant environmental cleanup costs.

B.The state Legislature further declared its intent to ensure that environmental marketing claims, including claims of biodegradation of plastics, do not lead to an increase in environmental harm associated with plastic litter by providing consumers with a false belief that certain plastic products are less harmful to the environment.

C.Plastics synthesized from petroleum and natural gas do not biodegrade.

Even with the emergence of bioplastics, which are derived from renewable biomass sources, such as plants and microorganisms, there is no certified type of bioplastic that biodegrades in a marine environment.

D.Despite continued efforts, and the current availability of non-plastic, compostable alternatives, the city continues to see littered plastic, namely plastic straws, stirrers, takeout containers, cups, lids and cutlery. Plastic straws, stirrers, take out containers, cups, lids and cutlery are generally made from polystyrene or polypropylene. The city intends to set a positive example through the adoption of this ordinance, that all disposable, single use foodware, as defined herein, at city- managed events, city run concessions and city-sponsored events where prepared food is served, must be compostable to reduce or eliminate the amount of disposable foodware sent to the landfill and the amount of plastic pollution in the ocean.

E.Adoption of refined standards prohibiting the use, distribution or sale of polystyrene foodware, coolers, packaging materials, egg cartons, and produce, meat and fish trays will assure implementation is clear and effective.

8.42.020. Definitions.
“Affected Retail Establishment” means any retail establishment located within or doing business within the geographical limits of the city. 134 of 169

4 “Aseptic Paper Packaging” means shelf-safe packaging that typically contains layers of paper, plastic, and aluminum.
“Beverage” means a consumable drink in a sealed box, bag, can, bottle, or other container of any size, and including, but are not limited to, alcohol, coffee, energy drinks, milk, soy milk, nut milk, juice, soda, soft drinks, sports drinks, tea, yogurt drinks, water, carbonated water, and flavored water.
“Beverage Provider” means any business, organization, entity, group, or individual that offers liquid, slurry, frozen, semi-frozen, or other forms of beverages to its members or to the public for consumption. "Bioplastic" means a type of biodegradable plastic derived from biological substances rather than from petroleum.
“City” means the city of Glendale, California, a municipal corporation. “Citywide” means including or involving all parts of the city. "City concession" means a concession that is either operated by city employees, that is permitted by the city and operated by third-parties, or is a concessionaire hired by the city.
"City contractor" means any person that enters into an agreement with the city to furnish products or services to or for the city.
"City facility" means any building, structure, property, park, open space, or vehicle, owned or leased by the city.
"City event" means collectively, any city-managed event, city concession, city- sponsored event, as defined herein, or city meeting that is organized, operated, managed or sponsored, in whole or in part, by the city or any department of the city.
"City-managed event" means any event located at a city facility which the city manages and or operates either directly through city employees or through a vendor hired by the city.
“City-sponsored event” means any event, activity or meeting organized or sponsored, in whole or in part by the city or any department of the city.

Compostable” means a product that is free of all intentionally added fluorinated chemicals, including, but not limited to, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in accordance with Part 3 of Division 104 Section 109000 of the 135 of 169

5 California Health and Safety Code; and that satisfies one of the following additional requirements:
a. Consists entirely of non-synthetic, paper or plant fiber-based material, free of any plastic component, that will promptly and safely break down; b. Is certified as "home compostable" by a certifying organization acceptable to the city manager or designee in accordance with Part 3 of Division 30 Section 42357 of the Public Resources Code; or
c. Is certified as “compostable” by a certifying organization acceptable to the city manager or designee.
"Customer" means any person obtaining goods from an affected retail establishment, vendor or non-profit vendor.
"Disposable foodware" or "Disposables" means single-use products used for serving, consuming or transporting prepared food and or beverage (excepting sealed, pre-packaged beverages, e.g., water bottles), including, but not limited to, clamshells, pizza boxes, plates, bowls, trays, wrappers or wrapping, platters, cartons, condiment containers, cups or drink ware, straws, lids, cutlery, utensils, stirrers, lid plugs (splash sticks), or any container in or on which prepared food or beverages are placed, packaged or served for consumption. Disposable foodware or Disposables does not include beverage containers that are subject to the California Redemption Value ("CRV") in accordance with the California Beverage Container Recycling and Litter Reduction Act, Public Resources Code section 14500, et seq., and does not include items, such as ketchup bottles and pickle barrels, that are not intended for a single-use but that would nevertheless be considered single-use foodware under California Health and Safety Code section 113914 because they do not meet specified materials, durability, strength, and cleanability specifications.
"Food or beverage provider" means any business, organization, entity, group or individual, that provides or sells prepared food.
“Food or Beverage Facility” means a physical location in the City where a food or beverage provider sells or otherwise provides prepared food or beverages for consumption on or off its premises, and includes, but is not limited to, a shop, sales outlet, restaurant, bar, pub, coffee shop, coffee stand, juice and/or smoothie bar, cafeteria, caterer, convenience store, liquor store, grocery store, supermarket, delicatessen, farmers market, theater, mobile food truck, roadside stand, kiosks, carts or a vendor or any organization, group, or individual that regularly provides, prepared food or beverages as part of its service. 136 of 169

6 “Foodware” or “Food service ware” means all containers, utensils, bowls, plates, food trays, cups, lids, boxes, and other like items that are used for prepared foods, including without limitation, foodware for takeout foods and or leftovers from partially consumed meals prepared by food or beverage providers. "Liners" any disposable sheet used as a tray-liner, basket-liner, plate-liner, or for handling of baked goods for the purpose of maintaining a barrier against a reusable foodware item.
"Non-Profit vendor" means a recognized tax-exempt organization which provides goods as a part of its services.
“Person” means any person, business, corporation, or event organizer or promoter; public, non-profit or private entity, agency or institution; or partnership, association, or other organization or group, however organized. “Plastic beverage bottle” means any formed or molded beverage container comprised predominantly of plastic resin, having a relatively inflexible fixed shape or form, having a neck that is smaller than the container body, and intended primarily as a single-service container.
"Polystyrene" means a thermoplastic petrochemical material utilizing the styrene monomer, including, but not limited to, rigid polystyrene and expanded polystyrene, processed by any number of techniques, including, but not limited to, fusion of polymer spheres (expandable bead polystyrene), injection molding, expanded polystyrene molding, or extrusion-blow molding (extruded polystyrene), and clear or solid polystyrene (oriented polystyrene). The resin code for polystyrene is '6' or 'PS,' either alone or in combination with other letters. This definition applies to all polystyrene food service ware, regardless of whether it exhibits a resin code.
“Polystyrene Cooler” means any cooler or ice chest made of polystyrene material, where such material is not fully encased in another durable material. "Prepared food and beverages" means any food or beverage prepared using any cooking or food preparation technique which is offered for consumption Citywide.
"Produce tray" means any tray or carton for vegetable, fruit, or eggs sold to consumers from a refrigerator case or similar retail appliance. "Raw food" means any uncooked meat, fish, poultry, vegetable, fruit, or egg. "Recyclable" means material that can be sorted, cleansed, and reconstituted 137 of 169

7 using the city’s available recycling collection programs for the purpose of using the altered form in the manufacture of a new product. Recycling does not include burning, incinerating, converting, or otherwise thermally destroying solid waste. “Resin code” means a resin identification code placed on plastics to identify the material composition for separation of different types of plastics for recycling. "Retail establishment" means any commercial business facility that sells goods directly to the ultimate consumer including, but not limited to, grocery stores, pharmacies, liquor stores, "mini-marts," and retail stores and vendors selling clothing, food and personal items.
“Reusable Foodware” means a multiservice utensil as defined in California Health and Safety Code section 113837; it includes foodware used for serving and consuming prepared food or beverages, including, but not limited to, plates, bowls, trays, condiment containers, cups or drink ware, and accessories, such as cutlery, that is manufactured from durable materials and that is specifically designed to be cleaned after each use and reused.
“Single-Use Articles” or Single-Use Foodware” as defined by California Health and Safety Code section 113914, mean utensils, tableware, carry-out utensils, bulk food containers, and other items such as bags, containers, placemats, stirrers, straws, toothpicks, and wrappers that are designed and constructed for one time, one person use, after which they are intended for discard. “Single-use articles” also include items such as wax paper, butcher paper, plastic wrap, formed aluminum food containers, jars, plastic tubs or buckets, bread wrappers, pickle barrels, ketchup bottles, and number 10 cans that do not meet the materials, durability, strength, and cleanability specifications for utensils under California Health and Safety code sections 114130, 114130.1, and 114130.3. Single-Use articles or foodware does not include beverage containers that are subject to the California Redemption Value ("CRV") in accordance with the California Beverage Container Recycling and Litter Reduction Act, Public Resources Code section 14500, et seq. In addition, for purposes of this article, Single-Use Foodware article does not include items, such as ketchup bottles and pickle barrels, that are not intended for a single-use but that would nevertheless be considered Single-Use Foodware under California Health and Safety Code section 113914 because they do not meet specified materials, durability, strength, and cleanability specifications. "Single use plastics" means any plastics and goods that are derived primarily from fossil fuel-based chemicals (petrochemicals) and are meant to be used once and disposed.
138 of 169

8 "Vegetable, meat or fish tray" means a polystyrene tray used for raw food sold to consumers from a refrigerator case or similar retail appliance. "Vendor" means any store, shop, restaurant, sales outlet, mobile food vendor, pushcart, or other commercial establishment located within or doing business within the city which provides perishable or nonperishable goods. "Wrapper": any disposable food sheet, wrapper, sleeve, sandwich wrap, burrito wrap, gyro wrap, or food wrap intended to maintain the shape or freshness of a prepared food.

8.42.030. Prohibition on use of non-compostable non-recyclable foodware at city facilities and city events.

A. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, all disposable foodware that food or beverage providers use to serve prepared food and beverages at a city event must be compostable or recyclable.

B. The city, its departments, contractors, agents and employees acting in their official capacity, shall not purchase, acquire or distribute non- compostable or recyclable foodware for use at city event.

C. A food and beverage provider serving food at a city event shall provide compostable disposable straws and utensils upon request only.

D. Food and beverage providers may dispense plastic straws as an accommodation to people with disabilities who request them to enjoy equal access to food and beverage services at city events.

8.42.035. Prohibition on the use, distribution, and sale of polystyrene foodware, coolers, packing materials, egg cartons, and produce, meat or fish trays.

A. No food or beverage provider shall use, distribute, or sell any polystyrene foodware in conjunction with the sale of prepared food, raw food, or beverages at any location within the city.

B. No person shall sell or distribute any polystyrene foodware or polystyrene coolers at any location within the city.

C. No vendor in the city shall sell, distribute or use polystyrene packing material composed in whole or in part from polystyrene, including, but not limited to, foam peanuts, packing peanuts, foam popcorn, or packing noodles within the city.

D. No person may sell, distribute, or use within the city any produce, meat and 139 of 169

9 or fish trays, and or egg cartons made, in whole or in part, from polystyrene.

E. Food and beverage providers that distribute prepared food or raw food or beverages in disposable foodware or disposable foodware accessories shall:

1. Not distribute disposables that exhibit resin code “No. 6” or “PS”.

2. Maintain documentation about the composition of the disposable foodware or disposable foodware accessories. Such documentation shall include information from the either the supplier, the manufacturer, or bulk packaging for the disposables, and information which demonstrates the disposable material is not composed of polystyrene.

F. City employees, contractors, agents, and officers acting in their official capacity, shall not purchase, use, or distribute products composed of polystyrene in part, or in whole.

8.42.040. On-Premises Dining
A. Effective January 1, 2026, large food or beverage facilities (with more than 26 employees) serving prepared food and or beverages served for consumption by a customer on the premises of food and beverage facilities shall only be distributed in reusable foodware except that disposable paper food wrappers, sleeves and bags; foil wrappers; paper napkins; straws and paper tray- and plate-liners shall be allowed for dining on the premises, so long as they meet the Disposable Foodware Standards in Section 8.42.045.

B. Effective July 1, 2026, all other food or beverage facilities serving Prepared Food and or Beverages served for consumption by a customer on the premises of food and beverage facilities, shall only be distributed in reusable foodware except that disposable paper food wrappers, sleeves and bags; foil wrappers; paper napkins; straws and paper tray- and plate- liners shall be allowed for dining on the premises, so long as they meet the Disposable Foodware Standards in Section 8.42.045
C.Nothing in this section prohibits food and or beverage facilities from providing a “doggy bag” (single use foodware) to prevent food waste as long as the disposable foodware complies with section 8.42.045.

D.Where a food or beverage facility is granted an exemption from On- Premises Dining reusable foodware requirements, compostable foodware shall be used unless the product in unavailable, as long as the disposable foodware complies with section 8.42.045

8.42.045. Disposable Foodware Recycling Standards
140 of 169

10 A. Effective January 1, 2026, no to-go or delivery food and or beverage facility may distribute to customers disposable foodware that is not either compostable or recyclable.

B. The city manager or designee will post a list of compliant disposable foodware on the City’s office of sustainability website
https://www.glendaleca.gov/government/departments/office-of-the-city- manager/office-of-sustainability. If a product is not included on the list, that product is prohibited and a food facility using prohibited disposable foodware will have the burden of establishing, to the City Manager or Designee’s reasonable satisfaction, that the product complies with this Section. The City Manager or Designee shall update the list of compliant disposable foodware as frequently as necessary to include compliant foodware, however, the list shall at a minimum be updated annually. Any revision to the list removing a previously authorized Disposable foodware product shall not become effective until six months after the date that the city manager or designee updates the list.

8.42.050. Prohibition on Use and/or Distribution of Single-use Plastic Straws, Stirrers, and Utensils
A. Effective July 1, 2025, prohibitions on the use, distribution, and sale of Single- use Plastic Straws, Stirrers, and Utensils shall take effect as follows:

1. Prohibition on Single-Use Plastic. Food and or beverage providers shall not use or distribute plastic straws, stirrers or utensils, whether for use on- site, to-go, or delivery. Disposable straws, stirrers, and utensils must be non-plastic, made from non-plastic materials, such as paper, pasta, sugar cane, bamboo, or wood.

2. Use Accommodation. Food and or beverage providers Citywide, may retain and dispense plastic straws upon request as an accommodation to people with disabilities in order to provide equal access to food and beverage services within the City.

8.42.055. Distribution of Disposable Foodware Accessories Only Upon Request A. Food and or beverage providers shall comply in its entirety with Glendale Municipal Code Chapter 8.46 “Disposable Foodware Accessories”.

B. Food and or beverage providers shall comply with California Public Resources Code, Sections 42270, 42271 and 42273 (Assembly Bill 1276 “Single-use foodware accessories and standard condiments,”, effective January 1, 2022).

8.42.060. Single Use Beverage Bottles.
141 of 169

11 No city employee, representative, contractor, agent, or official shall use, sell, distribute, or otherwise provide any single-use plastic beverage bottle or aseptic paper packaging while acting on behalf of the city or while acting pursuant to a city contract or agreement. Except where specific hydration requirements exist for employees working outside with no reasonable alternative to Plastic bottled beverages that will serve the same purpose. Provided, however, city employees, representatives, contractors, agencies or officials are not prohibited from bringing their own food or beverages for personal consumption while acting on behalf of the city or while acting pursuant to city contract or agreement.

8.42.065. Exemptions.

A. The following are exempt from the provisions of this chapter:

1. Coolers and ice chests, other than those defined as polystyrene coolers in this chapter.

2. Food brought by individuals for personal consumption.

3. During a locally declared emergency, the city, emergency response agencies operating within the city, users of city facilities, and food and beverage providers shall be exempt from the provisions of this chapter.

4. Plastic beverage straws provided or distributed by a food or beverage provider upon request for individuals with disabilities as needed to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act.

B. The city manager or designee may exempt any person from section 8.42.030 of this code, as follows:

1. A request for an exemption shall be filed in writing with the city manager or designee and shall include documentation supporting the reason for the claimed exemption and shall include any other information necessary for the city manager or designee to make a decision. The city manager or designee may require the applicant to provide additional information in order to make an exemption determination. Applicants shall promptly provide additional information requested by the city manager or designee. Failure to provide such additional information may result in the denial of an exemption request.

2. The city manager or designee may grant an exemption for a maximum of one (1) year, with or without conditions, upon finding that compliance would create an undue hardship. Applications for exemption renewals will also be considered. Undue hardship includes, but is not limited to, situations where:
a. Compliance with this article will result in undue hardship because of a food and or beverage facility’s lack of space.
b. Compliance with this article will result in an undue financial hardship for a food and or beverage facility.
142 of 169

12 c. No suitable products are available.
d. Compliance with the requirements of this chapter would deprive a person of a legally protected right.

8.42.070. Appeals.

A decision of the city manager or designee on exemption applications shall become final fifteen (15) days following the date of the decision unless an appeal to the city council is filed pursuant to the provisions of chapter 2.88 of this code relating to the uniform appeal procedure.

8.42.075. Violations and penalties.

A. Administrative enforcement. The provisions of this chapter may be enforced through the issuance of administrative citation process set forth in Chapter 1.24 of this code. Violators will receive one written warning notice of violation. Thereafter, violators would be subject to an administrative fine of $100 for a second violation within one (1) year, $200 for a third violation within one (1) year and $500 for each subsequent violation within one (1) year, The imposition of administrative fines are set by resolution of the city council and may be modified from time to time.

B. Criminal Enforcement . The provisions of this chapter may also be enforced through the criminal prosecution process. Any person who is convicted of violating this chapter shall be guilty of an infraction and upon conviction shall be punished pursuant to Chapter 1.20 of this code. In addition, no permits or licenses for any use or purpose that violate the provisions of this title shall be issued. Any such license or permit, if issued in conflict with the provisions of this title, shall be null and void.

SECTION 3. Compliance with California Environmental Quality Act.

The City Council finds and determines that this ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15061(b)(3) of Division 6 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (the CEQA Guidelines) because the adoption of this ordinance is covered by the commonsense exemption that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment and where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may be a significant effect of the environment, therefore the activity is not subject to the requirements of CEQA. The City Council also finds and determines that the 143 of 169

13 action is exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15308 (Actions by Regulatory Agencies for the Protection of the Environment), because these regulations involve the imposition of regulations for the protection of the environment through the reduction of plastic wastes, which include polystyrene, polystyrene packaging materials, single use plastics, from entering the waste stream, and from entering the environment.

SECTION 4. Severability.

This Ordinance is adopted under the authority of the Charter of the City of Glendale and State law. If any section, subsection, clause or phrase is declared invalid or otherwise void by a court of competent jurisdiction, it shall not affect any remaining provision hereof. In this regard the City Council finds and declares that it would have adopted this measure notwithstanding any partial invalidity hereof.

SECTION 5. Effective Date.

This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days after the date of its passage.

Mayor
ATTEST:

City Clerk
144 of 169

14 STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS.

CITY OF GLENDALE )
I, DR. SUZIE ABAJIAN, City Clerk of the City of Glendale, certify that the foregoing Ordinance No._______ was passed by the Council of the City of Glendale, California, at a regular meeting held on the day of , 2025, and that the same was passed by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

City Clerk
145 of 169

M O T I O N
Moved by City Council Member ________________, and seconded by City Council Member __________________, that the City Council hereby directs staff to develop incentive programs to support the transition to the proposed Plastic Waste Reduction Regulations ordinance.

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
146 of 169

M O T I O N
Moved by City Council Member ________________, and seconded by City Council Member __________________, that the City Council hereby directs staff to engage the services of a consultant to provide continued education and support to organizations impacted by the Plastic Waste Reduction Regulations ordinance.

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
147 of 169

FOODWARE EXEMPTION REQUEST FORM
Use this form to apply for an exemption from one or more elements of the City of Glendale’s Plastic Waste Reduction Ordinance (Title 8, Chapter 8.42). The City of Glendale adopted the ordinance on DATE to address the growing problem of plastics in our environment created by our disposable culture. The requirements apply to all food vendors such as sit-down restaurants, fast- food restaurants, bars, and hospitality venues. Each exemption request shall be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, and may be granted in whole or in part, with or without conditions, for a period of up to twelve (12) months.

Business Contact Name:

Name of Business:

Business Address:

Mailing Address (if different from above):

Telephone: Email:

Describe what exemption you are requesting:

Reason for Exemption (check all that apply):
oFeasibility – No space to accommodate reusable on-site foodware oCost – Compliant substitutes are prohibitively expensive oFeasibility – Compliant substitute product is not available oUndue Hardship – Creates undue hardship for my business oOther – please describe:
________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ *I declare that all of the statements made by me in this application are true. I understand that this request does not guarantee an exemption.
*Signature: Date:

Return completed forms and any supporting documentation by email at [email protected] or mail to City of Glendale, Sustainability Office, 613 E. Broadway, Suite 200, Glendale CA 91206.
148 of 169

Glendale Plastic Waste Stakeholder Engagement
Results
Round 1 Survey/Stakeholder Engagement Report
Introduction
In December 2023, ReCREATE Waste Collaborative (ReCREATE) began stakeholder engagement to solicit feedback from the business community about potential policy details related to the Plastic Waste Reduction Ordinance and gather data to be analyzed for future outreach efforts.

As part of this engagement, ReCREATE visited 139 businesses and conducted 89 surveys with business managers and owners, and additionally followed up the in-person visits with emails and phone calls. With 219 points of contact, Glendale businesses were educated on the specifics of the proposed ordinance and the details of the recently passed polystyrene ban.

Each business was provided with an outreach packet that included a City of Glendale Purchasing Guide of ordinance-approved products and resources for financial and technical assistance.

The sections below provide a summary of stakeholder feedback received during the process.

SURVEY RESULTS
Not supportive Somewhat
supportive
Somewhat
supportive
SupportiveNeutral
149 of 169

Reasons for being NOT supportive

1. Cost 26

2. Product performance 24

3. Corporate structure 19

4. Customer response 4

5. Health concerns 1
Not
confident
Somewhat
confident
Neutral Somewhat
confident
Confident
150 of 169

COST OF IMPLEMENTATION
●Compostable takeoutware is more costly than plastics
●Adding a dishwasher or paying for an employee to wash dishes would be costly ●Currently operating on thin profit margins
●Though reusables save money over time, some dine-in restaurants have up to 80% of their business set up as delivery/to-go
●Monetary effects of Covid are still impacting the businesses

PRODUCT PERFORMANCE
●Compostables do not hold oils, liquids, or sauces well ●Compostables do not hold heat well
●Bread loaves need to be sold in plastic bags to not go stale ●Deli items and bulk items must be displayed in plastic so customers can see the items* ●Deli meats and cheeses have very few compostable options that perform well ●Beverages need plastic to hold liquid
*In communities with a dense population of immigrants, there can be a lack of English-reading clientele that cannot judge what a product is simply by a label. They will often open up containers that are not clear so they can see the food item inside. This leads to product spoilage.

CUSTOMER RESPONSE
●Compostable straws are universally disdained
●Customers will complain if their food or beverage is in a container that leaks or does not hold heat (especially for delivery)
●Many coffee shops offer reusables, but customers will want to take the rest home with them in a disposable- the cafe then has to wash a reusable and give a disposable for one drink
●Customers need to be educated on why the business is making the change

HEALTH CONCERNS
●Most businesses are unaware of AB 619
●They believe the health department will site them for using a customer's cup/container ●Employees need training on health and safety protocols around taking reusables

CORPORATE STRUCTURE
●Indicates chain restaurants that must make all product decisions on a corporate level Reason(s) for being VERY supportive

1. Good for the planet*
*this was the only reason given for ordinance support
151 of 169

POLICY THAT BUSINESSES COMMITTED TO

1. None 47

2. Compostables 12

3. Accept customer reusables 12

4. Reusables 9

5. Stopping use of polystyrene 6

CURRENT PRIORITY RATING

1.LOW (level of assistance needed) 17

2.MEDIUM (level of assistance needed) 36

3.HIGH (level of assistance needed) 38
LOW level of assistance means the establishment has already implemented most aspects of the ordinance (resusables or compostables).

MEDIUM level assistance is representative of the businesses that have either compostables or reusables, but not both.

HIGH level of assistance indicates that the establishment has no reusables or compotables and may still be using polystyrene.
152 of 169

RESTAURANTS STILL USING POLYSTYRENE/UNAWARE OF ORDINANCE 13 out of 89

DISHWASHERS

1. Have one 23

2. Do not have one 13

3. Unknown 53
Please note, all of these restaurants visited do have some way to wash dishes (three sink system), even if it is by hand.

THREE-STREAM WASTE BINS
Out of 89 businesses, only 5 could be confirmed as having a three-stream waste system in front-of-house for compliance with AB 827.

OTHER OBSERVATIONS
●There was a minimal amount of pushback to the .25 cent cup fee, but the push back that we did receive was extremely strong.
●There is confusion or pushback on what is considered “single-use.” ●A good number of restaurants mentioned that their trash hauler co-mingles the three- stream pick up.
●There was some frustration that retail stores located in Glendale still offer polystyrene packaging for sale (Smart and Final etc).
●Would condiment packets be included in the ban?
●Businesses would like some clarity on how long they will have to use up stock they already have purchased.
●There is concern that if Glendale’s restrictions are more stringent than neighboring cities that customers will avoid Glendale restaurants.
●There was positive feedback given that business owners appreciate Glendale’s cap on 3rd-party delivery fees.
●It has become very clear that the majority of the food packaging concerns are due to the high rates or take-out and/or third-party deliveries.
●Resource guide was very helpful/popular with business owners 153 of 169

RECOMMENDATIONS
ROUND 2 SURVEY
(To be conducted after educational webinar and social media outreach.) ●Track how the numbers have changed
●Add this question (rank 1-4): What would you prefer the City of Glendale assist with:
○Reusable Implementation Assistance
○Dishwasher Installation Assistance
○Sourcing of Ordinance-approved Products
○Customer Education
●Confirm/educate three-stream waste system
●Confirm dishwasher/no dishwasher
●Confirm use of polystyrene
●Update businesses on where the ordinance stands
Provide businesses with an updated/enhanced resource guide. ●Include Info sheet to comply with AB 619 signed off by health department (San Francisco model)
●Update polystyrene flier to reflect that the ordinance has gone into effect POLICY
●Doggy bags (AKA any food that a customer takes home after a meal) should immediately transition to compostable (no need to hold heat or have quality performance)
●Consider adjusting policy language to match similar nearby cities (Example: Burbank)

EDUCATION/OUTREACH
●Accepting customers reusables should be universally and immediately implemented ○Educate businesses and customers on health and safety standards ○Educate businesses and customers on AB 619
○Will save the business money
●Providing microgrants for dishwashers or compostables purchasing (San Francisco model)
●Promotion of rebates from Sustainable Works
●Education on the definition of “reusables,” i.e: a plastic water bottle that you refill a few times or a to-go box that you clean and reuse one or two times is not a reusable product. (additional education opportunities)
154 of 169

Webinar/Social Media/Print Strategy
This section includes content recommendations for inclusion in upcoming webinar(s), social media and print campaigns based on feedback from businesses.
●Educate Stakeholders on Pollution
○Highlight current state of plastic pollution
■How this affects health, environment, economics, and tourism for City of Glendale
■Focus on third-party delivery statics/Encourage dine-in eating ○Describe details of proposed ordinance
■Any changes that may have happened since first round of surveys ○Educate businesses on resources available to them
■Plastic Free Restaurants
■ReThink Disposables
■Purchasing Guide
■Green Business
■GreenScreen
■Any additional resources Glendale determines will be available ○Presence/outreach at community events
○Q&A
155 of 169

City of Glendale Plastic Waste
Stakeholder Engagement Results
Round 2 Survey / Stakeholder Engagement Report

INTRODUCTION
In December 2023, the City of Glendale ( “City”) began stakeholder engagement to solicit feedback from the business community about potential policy details related to the Plastic Waste Reduction Regulations (“PWRR”). ReCREATE Waste Collaborative (“ReCREATE”) was engaged to assist with the stakeholder engagement process and gather data to be analyzed for future outreach efforts.

As part of the first round of business outreach (“ Round 1”), ReCREATE made contact with 219 businesses, ultimately met with 139 businesses and conducted 89 surveys to gather perceptions and feedback related to the draft PWRR. Glendale businesses were educated on the specifics of the proposed PWRR and the details of the recently passed polystyrene ban. Each business was provided with an outreach packet that included a City Purchasing Guide of ordinance- approved products and resources for financial and technical assistance.

A Stakeholder Engagement and Survey Results Report was submitted to the City in February 2024. After reviewing the data, a new version of the PWRR was drafted to address the concerns and feedback included in Round 1 of stakeholder engagement.

In August 2024, ReCREATE conducted a second round of business outreach (“Round 2”) soliciting feedback on the revised regulations from the same stakeholders engaged in Round 1 of the outreach process and seeking to determine whether perceptions had changed since the first round. A total of 77 businesses were re-visited (87% revisit rate) in the second round.

The sections below provide a summary of stakeholder feedback received during the second engagement process along with a comparative analysis of both rounds.

OVERVIEW OF ROUND 2 SURVEY
Out of the 89 businesses surveyed in Round 1, 77 participated in a Round 2 survey (75 restaurant; 2 retail stores). Of the remaining 12, 10 were unable or unwilling to participate and 2 had permanently closed). Additionally, 2 businesses participated in the Round 2 survey that did not participate in Round 1 (data not included in this Report except Question 8 and 9).

Questions Added to Round 2 Survey:
● Does your business have an automatic dishwasher?
● Are you currently using Polystyrene?
● Do you offer a three-stream waste system in the front and back-of-house?

156 of 169

ROUND 2 SURVEY RESULTS
This section includes the results of the Round 2 surveys completed (77 in total).

Question 1: How supportive are you of the updated PWRR?

Question 2: How confident are you in your ability to implement the updated PWRR?

Unsupportive
Very
Supportive
Somewhat
Unsupportive Neutral Somewhat
Supportive
Somewhat Not
Confident Neutral
Somewhat
Confident Not Confident
Very
Confident
157 of 169

Question 3: Reasons for lack of support:

1. Cost (of switching to compostables; of adding reusables/dishwashing)

2. Product availability (contracted supplier does not provide compliant options; supply chain issues)

3. Implementation (product performance (durability/customer satisfaction); reusables implementation (staff/customer participation)

Question 4: Reasons for support:

1. Environmental/health benefits of compostables/reusables

2. The revised policy now permitting the use of recyclable plastic

Question 5: What is the primary barrier you see to implementing the PWRR?

158 of 169

Question 6: What assistance would you like to see the City of Glendale offer?

Question 7: Does the business have an automatic dishwasher?

• 30 out of 77 businesses
• All restaurants without an automatic dishwasher have a three-sink system for handwashing instead.

Question 8: Does the business provide a 3-stream waste system in the “back-of-house” (for employees)? (Includes all 79 Round 2 surveys)

159 of 169

Question 9: Does the business provide a 3-stream waste system in the “front-of-house” (for customers)? (Includes all 79 Round 2 surveys)

Question 10: Is the business currently using/selling polystyrene? If so, why?

• 20 out of 77 restaurants using Polystyrene (26%)
• 2 out of 2 retail stores selling Polystyrene (100%)

Reasons for using/selling polystyrene:

160 of 169

Question 11: The City of Glendale is considering requiring compostable accessories to be implemented first, and other aspects of the PWRR within a year. Do you prefer this phased-in approach?

COMPARISON OF ROUND 1 / ROUND 2 SURVEY RESULTS
To accurately compare Round 1 and Round 2 results, all businesses which did not participate in both rounds of surveys were removed from the data. Below are charts comparing the change in support and confidence amongst the 77 businesses surveyed in both rounds.

Question 1: How supportive are you of the PWRR?

Unsupportive
Very
Supportive
Somewhat
Unsupportive
Neutral
Somewhat
Supportive
161 of 169

Question 2: How confident are you in your ability to implement the PWRR?

CONCLUSION
• 14 % more businesses felt very supportive of the updated PWRR. • 19 % more businesses felt somewhat or very confident in their ability to implement the updated PWRR.
• Businesses were in support of the addition of recyclable materials and the removal of the 25-cent cup fee.
• Business owners and managers would like the City to offer information about where to source compliant products and provide more customer education.

OTHER OBSERVATIONS
● Businesses expressed concern that retail stores located in Glendale still offer polystyrene packaging for sale.
● Businesses expressed concern that food carts and food trucks will not be held to the same standards as brick-and-mortar stores.
● Businesses that will need the most assistance are those that currently use only disposables with no automatic dishwashing capacity and have minimal storage space for reusables.

Somewhat Not
Confident Neutral
Somewhat
Confident Not Confident
Very
Confident
162 of 169

RECOMMENDED NEXT STEPS

1. Education and Outreach
● Identification of priority businesses for additional outreach / expand outreach ○ Those currently using only disposables
○ And/or those that do not have any automatic dishwasher ○ And/or those that have limited storage space for reusables and/or a dishwasher ● Aggressive outreach campaign to offer technical assistance in implementing the PWRR ○ Onsite education and assistance with understanding the guidelines of the PWRR, AB 619, AB 1276, SB1383 and how to implement changes
■ Educational packet
■ Signage
■ Product guide
● Educational Videos
○ Provide information to business on how to comply in video form to be watched at owner/manager’s convenience
● Consider microgrants for dishwashers and/or reusables purchasing ● Continued promotion of rebates from California Green Business

2. Social Media and Print Collateral
● Educate stakeholders on the PWRR
○ Outreach to businesses
■ How to comply with reusables
■ Clear guidelines for compostables/recyclables
■ Explaining why polystyrene is bad / importance of the PWRR ○ Educate customers and residents
■ Highlight the goal of the PWRR in reducing plastic pollution ■ Explain how to bring reusables (clean) and report noncompliant businesses that refuse to accept it
■ Highlight how to properly source separate waste into trash, recycle and organics
■ Remind customers about AB 1276 and that they will have to ask for accessories for take-out orders
163 of 169

FOODWARE PRICE COMPARISON
Prices listed are the average price of the item. Items in RED are not compliant under the law. Items in BLACK are compliant.

All reusable cost data established using the Product
Stewardship Institute's Foodware Calculator LINK.

COLD CUP COLD CUP LID HOT CUP HOT CUP LID CLAMSHELL (VARIOUS SIZES) SOUP CONTAINER HOT CONTAINER WITH SEPARATE LID FORK* STRAW

TYPE PRICE EXAMPLE LINK TYPE PRICE EXAMPLE LINK TYPE PRICE EXAMPLE LINK TYPE PRICE EXAMPLE LINK TYPE PRICE EXAMPLE LINK TYPE PRICE EXAMPLE LINK TYPE PRICE EXAMPLE LINK TYPE PRICE EXAMPLE LINK TYPE PRICE EXAMPLE LINK PS #6 FOAM $0.06 Webstaurant Store PS #6 FOAM N/A N/A PS #6 FOAM $0.05 Webstaurant Store PS #6 FOAM N/A N/A PS #6 FOAM $0.12 Webstaurant Store PS #6 FOAM $0.08 Pak-Man PS #6 FOAM N/A N/A PS #6 FOAM N/A N/A PS #6 FOAM N/A N/A PS #6 RIGID $0.10 ULINE PS #6 RIGID $0.04 ULINE PS #6 RIGID N/A N/A PS #6 RIGID 0.08 ULINE PS #6 RIGID $0.52 United States Plastic Corp PS #6 RIGID N/A N/A PS #6 RIGID N/A N/A PS #6 RIGID $0.02 Webstaurant Store PS #6 RIGID $0.01 Webstaurant Store POLY-LINED PAPER $0.09 Dart POLY-LINED PAPER N/A N/A POLY-LINED PAPER $0.10 ULINE POLY-LINED PAPER N/A N/A POLY-LINED PAPER $0.42 Restaurantware POLY-LINED PAPER* $0.18 Webstaurant Store POLY-LINED PAPER N/A N/A POLY-LINED PAPER N/A N/A POLY-LINED PAPER N/A N/A PETE # 1 $0.05 Webstaurant Store PETE # 1 $0.04 ULINE PETE # 1 N/A N/A PETE # 1 N/A N/A PETE # 1 $0.35 Walmart PETE # 1 N/A N/A PETE # 1 N/A N/A PETE # 1 N/A N/A PETE # 1 $0.01 Mr. Takeout Bag COMPOSTABLE FIBER $0.21 Webstaurant Store COMPOSTABLE FIBER N/A N/A COMPOSTABLE FIBER $0.24 Green Paper Products COMPOSTABLE FIBER $0.07 Webstaurant Store COMPOSTABLE FIBER $0.35 Webstaurant Store COMPOSTABLE FIBER* $0.23 Webstaurant Store COMPOSTABLE FIBER $0.40 Eco Quality COMPOSTABLE FIBER $0.10 Webstaurant Store COMPOSTABLE FIBER $0.03 Webstaurant Store COMPOSTABLE PLASTIC #7 $0.13 Webstaurantstore COMPOSTABLE PLASTIC #7 $0.04 Webstaurant Store COMPOSTABLE PLASTIC #7 N/A N/A COMPOSTABLE PLASTIC #7 $0.09 Good Start Packaging COMPOSTABLE PLASTIC #7 $0.50 Green Paper Products COMPOSTABLE PLASTIC #7 N/A N/A COMPOSTABLE PLASTIC #7 $0.68 Green Paper Products COMPOSTABLE PLASTIC #7 $0.13 Green Paper Products COMPOSTABLE PLASTIC #7 $0.03 Good Start Packaging PP #5 BLACK N/A N/A PP #5 BLACK N/A N/A PP #5 BLACK N/A N/A PP #5 BLACK $0.05 E Package Supply PP #5 BLACK $0.28 Webstaurant Store PP #5 BLACK* $0.11 LolliCupStore PP #5 BLACK $0.25 Webstaurant Store PP #5 BLACK $0.01 Webstaurant Store PP #5 BLACK $0.01 Webstauarant Store PP #5 NON-BLACK $0.05 Webstaurant Store PP #5 NON-BLACK N/A N/A PP #5 NON-BLACK N/A N/A PP #5 NON-BLACK $0.08 JAVA STOCK PP #5 NON-BLACK $0.23 Webstaurant Store PP #5 NON-BLACK* $0.19 ULINE PP #5 NON-BLACK $0.21 Webstaurant Store PP #5 NON-BLACK $0.01 Webstaurant Store PP #5 NON-BLACK $0.01 Webstauarant Store ALUMINUM $0.55 Webstaurantstore ALUMINUM N/A N/A ALUMINUM N/A N/A ALUMINUM N/A N/A ALUMINUM N/A N/A ALUMINUM N/A N/A ALUMINUM $0.15 Webstaurant Store ALUMINUM N/A N/A ALUMINUM N/A N/A * Costs for knives and spoons similar in comparison

REUSABLE
Switching PETE #1 disposable cups for
reusable will save $50 per 1000 cups REUSABLE
Switching PETE #1 disposable cups
for reusable will save $40 per 1000
cups REUSABLE
Switching compostable cups for
reusable mugs will save $31 per
1000 mugs REUSABLE
Switching disposable compostable cups
for reusable mugs will save $31 per 1000
mugs REUSABLE
Switching disposable PETE #1 clamshells
for reusable will save $35 per 1000 bowls. REUSABLE
Switching disposable bowls toforreusable
will save $35 per 1000 bowls. REUSABLE
Switching disposable plates for reusable
will save $35 per 1000 plates REUSABLE
Switching compostable fiber disposable
forks for reusable will save $10 per 1000
forks. REUSABLE $0.75 Webstaurant Store

REFILLABLE
Allowing customers to bring their own
cup will save $0.45/drink (cup + lid+
straw average cost) REFILLABLE
Allowing customers to bring their own
cup will save $0.45/drink (cup + lid+
straw average cost) REFILLABLE
Allowing customers to bring their own
thermos will save $0.45/drink (cup +
lid+ sleeve average cost) REFILLABLE
Allowing customers to bring their own
thermos will save $0.45/drink (cup + lid+
sleeve average cost) *Lid included
"SIPPY CUP" LID TO
REPLACE STRAW* $0.01* Webstaurant Store
* Sippy cup lid true cost = $0.04 lid - cost of $0.03 straw 164 of 169

5 7
1 9

AGENDA ITEM

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Report: Voting Delegate for the 2025 Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) General Assembly

1. Motion Designating a Voting Delegate and Alternate Representative(s) for the 2025 Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) General Assembly

COUNCIL ACTION

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), established as an association of local governments that convene to address regional issues, holds an annual gathering (General Assembly) to consider budget, governance, proposed amendments and resolutions brought forth by member agencies.

SCAG has asked that each City Council appoint a Voting Delegate and Alternate Representative(s) for the General Assembly and Regional Conference taking place on May 1-2, 2025.

Item Type: Action Item
Approved for1/28/2025 calendar
165 of 169

5 7
1 9

RECOMMENDATION
Designate a Voting Delegate and Alternate Representative(s) to represent Glendale during the 2025 Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) General Assembly and Regional Conference.

BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is established as an association of local governments and agencies that convene to address regional issues.

Under federal law, SCAG is designated as a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) and under state law as a Regional Transportation Planning Agency and a Council of Governments (COG). The City of Glendale is a member of SCAG.

SCAG holds an annual gathering (General Assembly), during which, SCAG’s membership consider and act on items, such as adoption of the budget, ratification of board officers, proposed amendments to bylaws, and any proposed resolutions.

SCAG has asked that each City Council appoint a Voting Delegate and Alternate Representative(s) for the General Assembly through formal Council action. The detailed agenda for the meeting will become available later in the Spring. The general agenda is listed in Exhibit 1.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this report.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
N/A

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements.

ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION

1. Council may choose to not select any member of Council to serve as a voting delegate or alternate. With this alternative, Glendale’s voice will not be represented during the annual regional conference.

2. Council may consider any other alternative not proposed by staff. 166 of 169

Page 3 of 4 ends

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:

Elena Bolbolian, Chief Innovation Officer
Prepared by:

Elena Bolbolian, Chief Innovation Officer
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1: Agenda
167 of 169

Page 4 of 4 ends

Exhibit 1
2025 Regional Conference & General Assembly
May 1-2, 2025
JW Marriott Desert Springs Resort & Spa
Agenda
May 1 | Thursday
8 a.m. REGISTRATION, NETWORKING, AND CONTINENTAL BREAKFAST 9 a.m. REGIONAL COUNCIL MEETING
10 a.m. WELCOME AND OPENING REMARKS
11 a.m. GENERAL ASSEMBLY MEETING
12:15 p.m. SUSTAINABILITY AWARDS LUNCHEON
2:15 p.m. BREAKOUT SESSIONS I
2:15 p.m. STUDENT SHOWCASE
3:15 p.m. BREAK AND NETWORKING
3:45 p.m. BREAKOUT SESSIONS II
3:45 p.m. STUDENT SHOWCASE
5:30 p.m. EVENING RECEPTION
May 2 | Friday
8 a.m. REGISTRATION
8:30 a.m. BREAKFAST
9 a.m. WELCOME
9:10 a.m. STUDENT SHOWCASE AWARDS
9:30 a.m. KEYNOTE ADDRESS
10 a.m. PLENARY PANEL SESSION
11:15 a.m. CONFERENCE WRAP-UP
168 of 169

MOTION
Moved by Council Member ____________________________, seconded by Council Member ___________________________, that the Council of the City of Glendale, California hereby designates the following individuals as the voting delegate and alternate representative(S) for the 2025 Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) General Assembly taking place on May 1-2, 2025:

VOTING DELEGATE: _________________________
ALTERNATE REPRESENTATIVE(S): ____________________

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
169 of 169

Glendale City CouncilJanuary 28, 2025

Glendale City Council
January 28, 2025