drain improvements, roadway rehabilitation, and signing & striping. Work also includes traffic control, traffic control plan development, and material certification submittals. It is anticipated that construction will take approximately 400 working days from the date the City issues the Notice to Proceed. Work is anticipated to take place between June 2022 and November 2023.
DISCUSSION
Three bids were received for this project on January 13, 2022, and are summarized below:
BIDDER LOCATION AMOUNT
1. Sully-Miller Contracting Co. Brea $10,690,000.00
2. RC Becker and Son Valencia $10,476,848.39
3. CA Rasmussen Valencia $12,194,110.00
As part of the ATP Grant Funds, there was a 24% Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) requirement. The contractors were required to provide a good faith effort of using DBE subcontractors on the project. Upon review of the bid documentation, Sully-Miller Contracting Co. was able to show that they met the DBE requirement, 24% of their subcontractors were DBE’s, while R.C. Becker only met 0.16% thus disqualifying them according to the bid documents. Documentation was sent to Caltrans for review and recommendation, and they concurred that Sully-Miller Contracting Co. is the lowest responsible bidder and recommends award. R.C. Becker was informed of this decision and a Re-consideration Hearing was held on February 22nd. The Hearing panel agreed to stay with the City’s and Caltrans recommendation.
It is anticipated that there will be change orders because of unknown field conditions, the complexity, and size of the project. Due to a tight construction schedule for this project, a prompt response to, and fair settlement of, these claims are important factors in minimizing the cost of construction delays; therefore, staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to approve supplemental agreements to this contract in an aggregate amount not to exceed $1,603,500. This amount represents fifteen percent (15%) of the construction contract and is incorporated into the contingency set aside for this project.
Contract changes exceeding the above aggregate amounts will be submitted to the City Council for review and approval. At the conclusion of the project, staff will submit a final report of Supplemental Agreements to the City Manager for review and reporting to the City Council.
References have been checked and staff recommends that the City Council award Project No. 698 to Sully-Miller Contracting Co., in the amount of $10,690,000.
Report to Mayor and City Council
Re: Award of PN 698, Agreement No. A-7596
March 2, 2022
FISCAL IMPACT
This project is currently funded through Gas Tax (201), Measure M (209) and ATP Grant Funds (241), which has been allocated in Account No. S0058. Based upon estimated expenditures, there will be a $6,312,694 shortfall. There are two budget scenarios showing different funding sources as shown in the table below:
SCOPE OF WORK COST
PN 698, Avenue R Complete Streets and Safe Routes Project $10,690,000 Construction Contingency (15%) $1,603,500
Construction Inspection Services (MNS Engineers) $560,000 Material Testing (Krazen) $46,560
Biological Monitoring (Psomas) $57,050
Labor Compliance (TBD) $30,010
Construction Administration (MNS Engineers & City) $250,000 Total Cost: $13,237,120
Account Number Starting Balance Remaining Balance
S0058 $6,924,426 $(6,312,694)
Budget Scenario No. 1 Expenditures
Total Project Cost: $13,237,120
Existing Funding $6,924,426
Prop C Local Return $2,893,595
Measure M Local Return $1,000,000
Article 8 FY 21/22 allocation $2,419,099
Budget Scenario No. 2 Expenditures
Total Project Cost: $13,237,120
Existing Funding $6,924,426
STP-L Funding Allocation $5,000,000
Article 8 FY 21/22 allocation $1,312,694
Budget Scenario No. 1 uses unappropriated local funds from Prop C, Measure M and Article 8. Budget Scenario No. 2 uses a $5 million balance of Surface Transportation Program Local (STP-L) funds that can be programmed in FY 22 along with Article 8 funds.
Reasons for the shortfall are due to the inflationary cost of materials since the project began design in 2015; increased cost of acquisition and relocation of several properties that were affected by the project and some scope change to include storm drain improvements along Avenue R and full pavement resurfacing of the project limits, along with contracted construction full time inspection and part time administration services.
STRATEGIC PLAN
Report to Mayor and City Council
Re: Award of PN 698, Agreement No. A-7596
March 2, 2022
Goal III: Invest in infrastructure to improve community livability.
C. Plan and maintain safe and attractive neighborhoods, streets, facilities, and public spaces with exciting programming that promotes active fund for everyone.
Prepared by: Chuck Heffernan, P.E., Director of Public Works Certified as to availability of Funds: Keith Kang, Finance Manager Approved by: Ronda Perez, Acting City Manager
Approved as to form: Christopher Beck, City Attorney
CC-SA Minutes 02/02/2022 1
MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL/SUCCESSOR AGENCY
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBER
38300 SIERRA HIGHWAY, SUITE B
PALMDALE, CALIFORNIA FEBRUARY 2, 2022
www.cityofpalmdale.org
5:00 P.M.
1) MAYOR TO CALL MEETINGS TO ORDER
Mayor Hofbauer called the meetings to order at 5:00 p.m.
2) ROLL CALL MAYOR HOFBAUER, MAYOR PRO TEM LOA,
COUNCILMEMBERS CARRILLO, BISHOP, BETTENCOURT
PRESENT: Steven Hofbauer, Richard J. Loa, Juan Carrillo, Austin Bishop, Laura Bettencourt.
ABSENT: None.
3) PUBLIC COMMENTS
V. Jesse Smith commented in support of City Manager Murphy.
4) PRESENTATION BY CITY ATTORNEY
City Attorney Beck confirmed that the items would be heard as listed.
4.1) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—EXISTING LITIGATION
Donald D'Angelo V. County of Los Angeles, et al.Los Angeles County Superior Court Case No. 21AVC00441
This closed session is being held pursuant to the authority of California Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1).
4.2) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—EXISTING LITIGATION
Dimartino v. City of Palmdale
Los Angeles County Superior Court Case No. 21AVCV00482
This closed session is being held pursuant to the authority of California Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1).
4.3) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—EXISTING LITIGATION
CV Communities v. AVEK, et al.
Los Angeles County Superior Court Case No. BC66107
This closed session is being held pursuant to the authority of California Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1).
CC-SA Minutes 02/02/2022 2
4.4) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL —ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9: One case.
A point has been reached where, in the opinion of the City on the advice of the City Attorney, based on existing facts and circumstances, there is a significant exposure to litigation against the City. The City believes that the facts and circumstances that might result in litigation against the City are not yet known to a potential plaintiff or plaintiffs.
4.5) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—
ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9: Two case.
A point has been reached where, in the opinion of the City on the advice of the City Attorney, based on existing facts and circumstances, there is a significant exposure to litigation against the City. The City believes that the facts and circumstances that might result in litigation against the City are not yet known to a potential plaintiff or plaintiffs.
4.6) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—EXISTING LITIGATION
Ricci v. City of Palmdale, et al.Los Angeles County Superior Court Case No. 22STCV01269
This closed session is being held pursuant to the authority of California Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1).
4.7) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—ANTICIPATED LITIGATION The existing facts and circumstances that constitute a significant exposure to litigation are detailed in the following claim received by the City, which is available for public inspection pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.5:
Claimant: Patricia Nevarez
City Claim No.: 2022-005
Date Filed: 1/27/22
Date of Loss: Various
4.8) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL —ANTICIPATED LITIGATION The existing facts and circumstances that constitute a significant exposure to litigation are detailed in the following claim received by the City, which is available for public inspection pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.5:
Claimant: Shanae Smith
City Claim No.: 2022-005
Date Filed: 1/10/22
Date of Loss: Various
CC-SA Minutes 02/02/2022 3
5) ANNOUNCEMENT BY CITY ATTORNEY
All Councilmembers were present and able to participate in all items.
Item 4.1 Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation: D’Angelo v. County of Los Angeles – Council was provided an update on this matter. There was no further reportable action.
Item 4.2 Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation: Dimartino v. City of Palmdale – Council was provided an update on this matter and provided unanimous direction to staff. There was no further reportable action.
Item 4.3 Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation: CV Communities v.
AVEK – This matter was continued to a later date.
Item 4.4 Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation – Council was provided an update on this matter. There was no further reportable action.
Item 4.5 Con ference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation – Two Cases – Council was provided an update on these matters and provided unanimous direction to staff on one case. There was no further reportable action.
Item 4.6 Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation: Ricci v. City of Palmdale: Council was provided an update on this matter. There was no further reportable action.
Item 4.7 Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation: Council was provided an update on this matter and provided u nanimous direction to staff.
There was no further reportable action.
Item 4.8 Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation: Council was provided an update on this matter and provided unanimous direction to staff.
There was no further reportable action.
There was no further reportable action.
6) ADJOURN CLOSED SESSION MEETING
Mayor Hofbauer adjourned the meeting at 7:09 p.m.
7:00 P.M.
Mayor Hofbauer called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m.
7) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND MOMENT OF SILENCE IN HONOR OF OUR TROOPS
CC-SA Minutes 02/02/2022 4
8) PRESENTATIONS
8.1) Acting City Manager Perez presented the City of Palmdale’s Warrior Award to Miguel Lopez, I.T. Technician.
8.2) Public Safety Supervisor German presented the cute critters available for adoption at the Palmdale Animal Care Center.
9) WAIVER OF FULL READING OF RESOLUTION(S) and ORDINANCE(S) Motion: Move to waive full reading of the Resolution (s) and/or Ordinance(s) to be considered and voted on at this meeting.
Moved by Richard J. Loa, seconded by Juan Carrillo.
Vote: Motion carried (5-0)
Yes: Steven Hofbauer, Richard J. Loa, Juan Carrillo, Austin Bishop, Laura Bettencourt.
10) PUBLIC COMMENTS
The following individuals provided public input:
Jason Zink commented regarding the allocation of Measure AV funds, parking tickets and other miscellaneous items.
Marsha Furman suggested a visible timer for the citizens and commented on speaker form submissions.
Rich Gallego and Mario Presents requested the adoption of Ordinance No. 1577.
An anonymous resident comment on illegal dumping.
Both Dave Bowman and Xavier Flores expressed concerns regarding the redistricting process.
11) CONSENT CALENDAR
11.1) Receive and file the monthly and quarterly investment activity reports for December 2021. (Staff Reference: Finance Manager Kang)
11.2) Adopt Resolution No. CC 2022 -016, a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pa lmdale approving and authorizing the execution and delivery of a supplemental agreement No. 5 to amended and restated fiscal agent agreement related to Ritter Ranch, and authorizing actions related thereto. (Staff Reference: Finance Manager Kang).
11.3) Approve Legal Services Agreement Between the City of Palmdale and Silver & Wright, LLP in the amount of $500,000. (Staff Reference: City Attorney Beck)
Mayor Pro Tem Loa pulled this item for discussion. City Attorney Beck provided clarification on the necessity for the renewal of the contract.
Motion: Approve Legal Services Agreement with Silver & Wright, LLP.
CC-SA Minutes 02/02/2022 5
Moved by Juan Carrillo, seconded by Austin Bishop.
Vote: Motion carried (4-0)
Yes: Richard J. Loa, Juan Carrillo, Austin Bishop, Laura Bettencourt. Absent: Steven Hofbauer.
11.4) Approve Agreement with Management Partners, Inc. to Provide Consulting Services Regarding Misdemeanor Prosecutions within the City of Palmdale. (Staff Reference: City Attorney Beck)
Mayor Pro Tem Loa pulled this item for discussion. City Attorney Beck provided a detailed overview of the staff report. Mayor Pro Tem Loa provided information on which misdemeanors are not being prosecuted by the District Attorney's Office. Discussion ensued.
Motion: Approve Agreement with Management Partners, Inc. to Provide Consulting Services Regarding Misdemeanor Prosecutions within the City of Palmdale.
Moved by Richard J. Loa, seconded by Austin Bishop.
Vote: Motion carried (4-0)
Yes: Richard J. Loa, Juan Carrillo, Austin Bishop, Laura Bettencourt. Absent: Steven Hofbauer.
11.5) Approve Final Tract Map No. 74927, (located at the northwest corner of Pevero Court & Range Drive. (Staff Reference: Director of Public Works Heffernan)
11.6) Notice of Completion - Accept public improvements for Palmdale Aerospace Academy Street Widening located at 35th Street East south of Palmdale Boulevard. (Staff Reference: Director of Public Works Heffernan)
11.7) Approve Supplemental Agreement No. 3 with RSB Group, Inc. for PN 784, Rancho Vista Park, in the amount of $218,855.81. (Staff Reference:
Director of Public Works Heffernan - Presented by Deputy Director of Public Works Glidden)
11.8) Adopt Resolution No. CC 2022 -018, a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Palmdale authorizing submission of a Notification of the City’s Intent to Comply with Senate Bill (SB) 619, to the State Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (Calre cycle). (Staff Reference:
Director of Public Works Heffernan - Presented by Deputy Director of Public Works Glidden)
CC-SA Minutes 02/02/2022 6
11.9) Approve the minutes from the previous meetings. (Staff Reference: City Clerk/Agency Secretary Smith)
CC/SA/PCA - January 12, 2022
CC - January 19, 2022
Motion: Approve all item listed on the Consent Calendar with the exception of Items 11.3 and 11.4.
Moved by Austin Bishop, seconded by Juan Carrillo.
Vote: Motion carried (4-0)
Yes: Richard J. Loa, Juan Carrillo, Austin Bishop, Laura Bettencourt.
Absent: Steven Hofbauer.
12) PUBLIC HEARING
12.1) Public Hearing to review and consider the redistricting draft maps recommended by the Advisory Redistricting Commission. (Staff Reference: Acting City Manager Perez)
Item 12.1 was heard at 7:30 p.m.
Mayor Hofbauer opened the Public Hearing.
Acting City Manager Perez provided a brief overview of the staff report.
City Attorney Beck provided additional information to Council. Mr. Beck stated the City Council may elect to do one of two things: 1) Direct staff to introduce an Ordinance approving one of the Commission's recommended maps for sequencing or 2) Reject the maps in sequencing and return to the Commission for reconsideration with the statement of the reasons for such disapproval and request the Commission to modify the map sequencing or r eview them. If the Council rejects the Commission's recommendations, the Commission will have up to seven (7) days to submit a revised map for sequencing to the City Council for their consideration and upon receipt of the revised maps the City Clerk will immediately cause the maps to be published for seven (7) day public review period as had occurred.
The following individuals provided public comments:
Marcos Alvarez commented that the ALVA map is viable and legal and thanked the Advisory Redistricting Commission for the public workshops.
Xavier Flores spoke regarding the selection of the maps by the Advisory Redistricting Commission and the decision-making power of community residents.
Jason Zink suggested a Central Council District.
Ruth Sanchez and Maria Mainella spoke in support of the ALVA map.
CC-SA Minutes 02/02/2022 7
Suzann Reina, Chair of Advisory Redistricting Commission, commented on the maps selected by the Commission and clarified the difference between a committee and commission.
Dave Bowman commented regarding the map selection process.
A motion was made and carried unanimously to close the Public Hearing.
Mayor Hofbauer asked City Attorney Beck for clarification on whether District 3 and 4 are the only seats that will be up for election in 2022 and if the current seat s stay in place for District 1 and 2 . City Attorney Beck stated that E lections Code 21606 reads the term of office of any Councilmember who has been elected and whose term of office has not expired shall not be affected by any change in the boundaries of the district from which the Councilmember was elected. Mayor Hofbauer stated some of the debate of the attempt to try to salvage someone else's seat for November does not apply.
Mayor Pro Tem Loa expressed his concerns regarding both maps recommended by the Advisory Redistricting Commission. Discussion ensued. Mayor Pro Tem Loa requested that the maps be rejected and returned back to the Commission; and that a new recommendation be made.
Councilmember Bettencourt inquired whether the Council would be comfortable reviewing the original four (4 ) maps originally discussed by the Commission i nstead of sending them back to the Advisory Redistricting Commission. City Attorney Beck stated it is a procedural issue and prior to a map being adopted it must be published for seven (7) days and the preferred method would be to return the matt er to the Advisory Redistricting Commission with a recommendation that they send forth the four (4) maps so that those can be published within the required time in advance of the hearing. Councilmember Bishop agreed with Councilmember Bettencourt.
Councilmember Carrillo commented on the selected maps, the Hispanic percentage in the districts, and voter registration. Discussion ensued.
Councilmember Bettencourt asked why gender was not considered in the demographics. Kristen Parks, National Demograp hics Corporation, provided clarification. Discussion ensued.
Mayor Hofbauer commented on the demographic balance of the districts.
Discussion ensued.
Councilmember Bettencourt requested clarification on the responsibilities of the Advisory Redistricting Commission. Discussion ensued.
CC-SA Minutes 02/02/2022 8
Councilmember Bettencourt withdrew the original motion.
Councilmember Carrillo made a motion to adopt the ALVA map. The motion died for the lack of a second.
Motion: Move to send the maps back for reconsideration to the Advisory Redistricting Commission for selection of maps that meet the criteria of the fair maps act.
Moved by Richard J. Loa, seconded by Steven Hofbauer.
Vote: Motion carried (4-1)
Yes: Steven Hofbauer, Richard J. Loa, Austin Bishop, Laura Bettencourt.
No: Juan Carrillo.
Marcos Alvarez and Ruth Sanchez commented in opposition to Council's decision to send the maps back to the Advisory Redistricting Commission.
Mayor Hofbauer excused himself from the meeting at 8:30 p.m.
13) INFORMATIONAL REPORT FROM MAYOR AND / OR COUNCILMEMBERS
ON THEIR VARIOUS COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIPS AND MEETINGS
ATTENDED AT PUBLIC EXPENSE
13.1) COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIPS.
• ANTELOPE VALLEY AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT -
Councilmember Bishop announced the City of Palmdale Public Works Department received $203,000 in grant funds for a street sweeper. • ANTELOPE VALLEY TRANSIT AUTHORITY - Mayor Pro Tem Loa attended the meeting on January 25th and announced the AVTA is the first and largest all electric local bus fleet in the nation and accomplished an important milestone of mounting up to seven million miles of zero emissions bus operations in the Antelope Valley through AVTA • LOS ANGELES COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT - Mayor Pro Tem Loa attended the monthly meeting.
• NORTH LOS ANGELES COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COALITION -
Councilmember Bishop announced he was elected as Chair and he will be focused on making improvements to the 14 freeway. Mr. Bishop mentioned the City of Palmdale will meet with Santa Clarita Valley to discuss solutions that were implemented to bring down fatalities.
• • PALMDALE RECYCLED WATER AUTHORITY - Councilmember Bishop reported a new chair was selected and the PRWA is researching ways of using recycled water from the Sanitation District.
• SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS
REGIONAL COUNCIL - Councilmember Carrillo reported attending a joint meeting on January 14th with North Los Angeles County Transportation
CC-SA Minutes 02/02/2022 9
Coalition and SCAG to collaborate on traffic issues and fatalities in the Northern County. Mayor Pro Tem Loa attended a SCAG meeting on the Aeronautics Commission and discussed the Ontario airport.
Councilmember Carrillo attended the recreational center workshop at Marie Kerr Park.
Councilmember Bettencourt attended the rec reational center workshop at Oasis Park.
Mayor Pro Tem Loa attended the Palmdale Sheriff's booster and a Caltrans meeting.
13.2) MEETINGS ATTENDED AT PUBLIC EXPENSE
14) CITY MANAGER’S REPORT
Acting City Manager Perez reported the following:
• There was a great turn out at the workshops for the regional recreation center.
• The Measure AV Committee met last week and appointed one of the commissioners and an alternate to be a part of the selection committee on the grant program, and 84 applications were recei ved for grants.
Discussion ensued.
15) CITY COUNCIL REQUESTS FOR NEW AGENDA ITEMS
Councilmember Carrillo requested review of appointments to the Measure AV Committee. He also requested an update on the Quimby Act.
Mayor Pro Tem Loa requested a resolution be brought back to a future meeting regarding a No Vote of Confidence for the District Attorney.
16) Adjourn
Mayor Pro Tem Loa adjourned the meeting at 9:32 p.m. to February 16, 2022 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chamber located at 38300 Sierra Highway, Suite B, Palmdale, California.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 2nd day of March 2022.
___________________________________
Steven D. Hofbauer, Mayor
ATTEST:
CC-SA Minutes 02/02/2022 10
___________________________________
Shanae S. Smith, City Clerk
CC Minutes 02/07/2022 1
MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL
CITY HALL COUNCIL
CHAMBER 38300 SIERRA
HIGHWAY, SUITE B
PALMDALE, CALIFORNIA
FEBRUARY 7, 2022
www.cityofpalmdale.org
12:00 P.M.
1) CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER
Mayor Hofbauer called the meeting to order at 12:01 p.m.
2) ROLL CALL
MAYOR HOFBAUER, MAYOR PRO TEM LOA,
COUNCILMEMBERS CARRILLO, BISHOP, BETTENCOURT
PRESENT: Steven Hofbauer, Richard J. Loa, Juan Carrillo, Austin Bishop, Laura Bettencourt.
ABSENT: None.
3) PUBLIC COMMENTS
The following individuals provided public comments:
Dave Bowman commented regarding the judiciary process and the hostile work environment.
Anne Ambrose spoke in support of the dismissal of City Manager Murphy and inquired regarding the allocation of Measure AV funds.
Arthur Calloway encouraged Council to conduct an investigation.
Juan Blanco, Ruth Sanchez, Dexter Stinson, M ayra Duarte, John Pars amyan, Tony Tert olano, Megan Hiltzendeger, Kevin Sanders, Ben Berk, Van Roberts, Sylvia Garner, and Atherine Blanco c ommented in support of City Manager Murphy.
Eugene Hernandez expressed concerns regarding the City prosecuting misdemeanors and the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department contract and brutality.
Marcos Alvarez spoke regarding City Manager Murphy and the long-term interest of the city.
Jason Zink commented regarding allegations against City Manager Murphy.
Alenna Schofield expressed concerns regarding allegations against City Manager Murphy and Council action.
Saynne Redifer spoke on behalf of women filing compla ints, the toxic work environment, allocation of Measure AV funds, and a fair investigation.
4) PRESENTATION BY CITY ATTORNEY
City Attorney Beck confirmed the item would be heard as listed.
CC Minutes 02/07/2022 2
4.1) This closed session is being held pursuant to the authority of California Government Code Section 54957.PUBLIC EMPLOYEE
DISCIPLINE/DISMISSAL/RELEASE
PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Title: City Manager 5) ANNOUNCEMENT BY CITY ATTORNEY
All members of the Council were present and able to participate in all items.
Item 4.1 - The Council conducted the agendized matters. Council gave direction to staff on a 4-1 motion, with Councilmember Bishop voting ‘no’.
The matter has been directed back on February 16, 2022, at 3:30 p.m. The City Manager will remain on paid administrative leave.
There is no further reportable information.
6) ADJOURN
Mayor Hofbauer adjourned the meeting at 3:10 p.m. to February 16, 2022 at 3:30 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chamber located at 38300 Sierra Highway, Suite B, Palmdale, California.
APPROVED, PASSED, and ADOPTED this 2nd day of March 2022.
Steven D. Hofbauer, Mayor
ATTEST:
Shanae S. Smith, City Clerk
City Council Staff Report
DATE: MARCH 2, 2022
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DISTRICT: 2
SUBJECT: ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. CC2022-022 AND ORDINANCE NO. 1581 APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 21 -001, ZONE
CHANGE 21-001 AND ADOPTION OF THE ASSOCIATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION
ISSUE
Adopt Resolution No. CC 2022-022 and Ordinance No. 1581 approving General Plan Amendment (GPA) 21-001, Zone Change (ZC) 21-001 and adoption of the associated Negative Declaration.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council:
1. Receive public testimony regarding proposed Resolution No. CC 2022 -022 and Ordinance No. 1581;
2. Adopt Resolution No. CC 2022-022 and Ordinance No. 1581 approving GPA 21 - 001, ZC 21-001; and,
3. Adopt the associated Negative Declaration.
BACKGROUND
The Planning Commission , at their February 10, 2022, meeting , unanimously recommended that the City Council approve GPA 21 -001 and ZC 21 -01 and adopt the associated Negative Declaration.
DISCUSSION
A request to modify the General Plan land use designation from LDR (L ow Density Residential, maximum of one dwelling per acre ) to PF (Public Facilities) and zone from R-1-1 (Single-Family Residential, minimum lot size of one acre) to PF (Public Facilities) for three contiguous parcels totaling approximately 160 acres located approximately 2,500 feet west of Tierra Subida Avenue and 2,600 feet south of Elizabeth Lak e Road.
No development is proposed in conjunction with this request.
Report to Mayor and City Council
Re: GPA 21-001 and ZC 21-001
March 2, 2022
The vacant parcels are currently within the LDR General Plan land use designation and R-1-1 zone, as depicted below.
FIGURE 1 - EXISTING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
Report to Mayor and City Council
Re: GPA 21-001 and ZC 21-001
March 2, 2022
FIGURE 2 - EXISTING ZONING
Approval of the request would change both the General Plan land use designation and zone to PF as depicted below. The PF land use designation allows for various public facilities that are necessary to serve the mix of uses surrounding the property. The PF land use designation also allows for a natural progression in uses as it is compatible with the property located immediately to the south. There is no development proposed at this time and any future development would require separate review and approval.
Report to Mayor and City Council
Re: GPA 21-001 and ZC 21-001
March 2, 2022
FIGURE 3 - PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS
Report to Mayor and City Council
Re: GPA 21-001 and ZC 21-001
March 2, 2022
FIGURE 4 - PROPOSED ZONE
Report to Mayor and City Council
Re: GPA 21-001 and ZC 21-001
March 2, 2022
FISCAL IMPACT
The applicant paid the appropriate entitlement fees for the applications and although no new revenues are anticipated, facilitation of potential future development may result in a net positive fiscal impact.
STRATEGIC PLAN
Goal IV: Maintain a desirable community where everyone wants to live, work and play.
B. Provide inclusive access to a variety of supportive services that build a resilient and healthy community.
Prepared by: Brenda Magaña, Senior Planner
Certified as to availability of Funds: Keith Kang, Finance Manager Approved by: Ronda Perez, Acting City Manager
Approved as to form: Christopher Beck, City Attorney
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution No. CC 2022-022
2. Ordinance No. 1581
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF PALMDALE, CALIFORNIA
RESOLUTION NO. CC 2022-022
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALMDALE APPROVING
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO MODIFY THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE
DESIGNATION FROM LDR (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, MAXIMUM OF ONE
DWELLING UNIT PER ACRE) TO PF (PUBLIC FACILITIES) FOR THREE CONTIGUOUS PARCELS TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 160 ACRES LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 2,500 FEET WEST OF TIERRA SUBIDA AVENUE AND 2,600 FEET SOUTH OF ELIZABETH LAKE ROAD (GPA 21-001)
A. RECITALS
WHEREAS, Three Arklin, LLC has filed an application requesting approval of General Plan Amendment (GPA) 21-001 described herein (herein referred to as “Application”);
WHEREAS, The Application applies to approximately 160 acres, referred to on the Los Angeles County Assessor’s roles as APN’S 3004-012-003, 3004-012-018, and 3004-012-023, legally described on Exhibit I hereto and shown on the map attached hereto as Exhibit II.
WHEREAS, On February 10, 2022, the Planning Commission of the City of Palmdale reviewed the proposed project and recommended approval of the Application by the City Council; and,
WHEREAS, on March 2, 2022, the City Council of the City of Palmdale conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Application and the concluded said hearing on that date. Evidence, both written and oral, was duly presented and considered by the City Council at the aforesaid public hearing, including but not limited to, the staff report dated March 2, 2022.
B. RESOLUTION
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PALMDALE DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A of this Resolution, are true and correct.
SECTION 2 . Based upon substantial evidence presented to the City Council during the March 2, 2022, public hearing, including public testimony and written and oral staff reports, the City Council specifically finds as follows:
(a) The proposed change in land use is consistent with State law.
Resolution No. CC 2022-022
The vacant parcels are currently within the LDR (Low Density Residential, maximum of one dwelling per acre) land use designation and R-1-1 (Single-Family Residential, minimum lot size of one acre) zone. The applicant is requesting to modify the General Plan land use designation and zone to PF (Public Facilities), and no development is proposed. In accordance with State law, the proposed project has been reviewed by interested agencies and Native American tribes. In addition, as required by State law, the General Plan may only be amended four times per year and this amendment constitutes the first amendment for 2022. (b) The amendment is suitable and beneficial for the uses permitted within the associated zone districts.
The topography of the site consists of slopes and, if developed, would need to adhere to Palmdale Municipal Code Chapter 17.100 related to Hillside Management; however, no development is proposed at this time. Should development be proposed in the future, the project will undergo separate review and future development will be required to comply with the development standards for the PF zone.
SECTION 3 . The City Council hereby finds as follows with respect to the environmental documentation:
(a) The City Council hereby finds that the proposed Negative Declaration prepared in connection with the Application was prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (Exhibit III). Also, the Negative Declaration has been reviewed and considered by the City Council, reflects the independent judgment of the City Council and that based on the Initial Study and the entire record of proceedings, there is no substantial evidence that the proposed project will have a significant effect on the environment.
(b) The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Negative Declaration, and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City Council’s decision is based, is the Planning Manager of the City of Palmdale. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Division of the City of Palmdale located at 38250 Sierra Highway, Palmdale, California 93550, telephone (661) 267-5200.
Resolution No. CC 2022-022
SECTION 4. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth in the above Sections, and based on all other evidence in the record, the City Council hereby approves GPA 21-001 changing the General Plan Map to incorporate the proposed changes as shown in Exhibit V to this Resolution.
SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 2nd day of March, 2022. _________________________________
Approved as to form: Steven D. Hofbauer, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________ ________________________________ Christopher L. Beck Shanae S. Smith, City Clerk
City Attorney
I, Shanae S. Smith, City Clerk of Palmdale, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Palmdale at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 2 nd day of March, 2022, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN: ABSENT:
Date:
Shanae S. Smith, City Clerk
EXHIBIT I
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE ASSOCIATED PROPERTIES
FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 21-001
THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF
PALMDALE, IN THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
PARCEL 1: APN: 3004-012-023
BEING PARCEL A AS SHOWN ON THAT CERTAIN CERTIFICATE OF
COMPLIANCE FOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT, RECORDED SEPTEMBER 16, 2016 AS NO. 20161125330 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY,
CALIFORNIA, ALSO BEING A POTION OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 6 NORTH, RANGE 12 WEST, IN THE CITY OF
PALMDALE, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING
TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT OF SAID LAND APPROVED BY THE SURVEYOR GENERAL ON SEPTEMBER 3, 1855, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 28.
TOGETHER WITH THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 28.
EXCEPT THERE FROM SAID SOUTH HALD 50% MINERAL, OIL, GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES BELOW THE DEPTH OF 500 FEET OF SAID
LAND BUT WITHOUT ANY RIGHT OF ENTRY UPON THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND OF WITHIN SAID TOP 500 FEET FOR ANY PURPOSES AS RESERVED IN
DEEDS FROM LEO AUER AND MARIE AUER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, RECORDED MAY 6, 1966 AS DOCUMENT NO. 990, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
PARCEL 1A:
AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS, EGRESS FOR ROAD AND UTILITY PURPOSES OVER THE WEST 30 FEET OF THE SOUTH HALF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 6 NORTH, RANGE 12 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO
BASE AND MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT OF SAID LAND AS CREATED IN DEED RECORDED JUNE 27, 1977 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 77-678921.
Exhibit I
PARCEL 2: APN: 3004-012-003
THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 6 NORTH, RANGE 12 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND
MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OF PALMDALE, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF, EXCEPT ANY PORTION THERE THAT MAY BE INCLUDED IN ESTABLISHED PUBLIC ROAD.
PARCEL 3: APN: 3004-012-018
AN EASEMENT FOR ROAD AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES OVER THE WEST 30 FEET OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 6 NORTH, RANGE 12 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, IN THE
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT OF SAID LAND, AND OVER THE NORTH 30 FEET OF THE WEST HALD OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 2.
EXHIBIT II
AERIAL MAP FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 21-001
EXHIBIT IV
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION
EXHIBIT V
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION
CITY OF PALMDALE
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
INITIAL STUDY /
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Prepared for:
CITY OF PALMDALE
38250 SIERRA HIGHWAY
PALMDALE, CA 93550
Prepared by:
AECOM
999 TOWN & COUNTRY ROAD
ORANGE, CA 92868
December 2021
This space has been intentionally left blank.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION 1
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2
3. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 10
A. Background 10
B. Environmental Factors Potentially Affected 12
C. Determination 13
D. Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 14
4. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 15
I AESTHETICS 15
II AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES 17
III AIR QUALITY 19
IV BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 21
V CULTURAL RESOURCES 24
VI ENERGY 26
VII GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS 27
VIII GEOLOGY AND SOILS 28
IX HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 31
X HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 34
XI LAND USE AND PLANNING 37
XII MINERAL RESOURCES 38
XIII NOISE 39
XIV POPULATION AND HOUSING 41
XV PUBLIC SERVICES 42
XVI RECREATION 43
XVII TRANSPORTATION 44
XVIII TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES 46
XIX UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS 48
XX WILDFIRE 50
XXI MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE 52
5. REFERENCES 54
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FIGURES
Figure 1. Regional Map ........................................................................................................ 4 Figure 2. Vicinity Map ........................................................................................................... 5 Figure 3. Existing General Plan Land Use Designation ..................................................... 6 Figure 4. Proposed General Plan Land Use Designation .................................................. 7 Figure 5. Existing Zoning Designation ................................................................................. 8 Figure 6. Proposed Zoning Designation .............................................................................. 9
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
1. INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose and Background of the Initial Study
The purpose of this Initial Study (IS) is to evaluate if a project would have a significant impact on the environment. The proposed project consists of a General Plan Amendment (GPA) to modify the General Plan land use designation from LDR (Low Density Residential, density of one dwelling per acre) to PF (Public Facilities) and Zone Change (ZC) from R-1-1 (Single Family Residential, minimum lot size, 1 acre) to PF (Public Facilities) for three contiguous parcels totaling approximately 160 acres located within the City of Palmdale (City). No development is proposed in conjunction with this proposed project.
This IS has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970 (Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.) and California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 (State CEQA Guidelines, Sections 15000 et seq.). Pursuant to CEQA, this IS has been prepared to analyze the potential for significant impacts on the environment resulting from implementation of the proposed project. The City is the designated Lead Agency for the proposed project and will be responsible for the proposed project’s environmental review.
B. Lead Agency
City of Palmdale
Economic and Community Development Department
Planning Division
38250 Sierra Highway
Palmdale, CA 93550
C. Technical Studies
The proposed project is a modification to the General Plan land use designation from LDR (Low Density Residential, density of one dwelling per acre) to PF (Public Facilities) and a Zone Change from R-1-1 (Single Family Residential, minimum lot size, one acre) to PF (Public Facilities). No development is proposed in conjunction with the proposed project. Therefore, technical studies are not required at this time.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. Project Location
The approximately 160-acre project site is comprised of three contiguous parcels (Assessor’s Parcel Numbers [APNs] 3004-012-003, 3004-012-018, and 3004-012- 023) located approximately 0.4 mile southwest of the intersection of Tierra Subida Avenue and West Avenue Q-8 in the City, California (see Figure 1, Regional Map, and Figure 2, Vicinity Map). The Antelope Valley Public Landfill and West City Ranch Road border the project site to the south/southwest. The Antelope Valley Freeway (State Route 14 [SR -14]) is located approximately 1 mile east/northeast of the project site.
B. Project Setting
The project site is located in the City within the Antelope Valley, which is situated between the Tehachapi Mountains (to the north) and the San Gabriel Mountains (to the south). The Antelope Valley is an inland basin within the southwestern Mojave Desert (City of Palmdale, 2010). The project site is undeveloped land comprised of rolling hills, slopes covered with desert scrub, and dirt roads. The project site is mostly surrounded by undeveloped land with the exception of existing single family residences to the north and the Antelope Valley Landfill to the south. The California Aqueduct is located approximately one mile south of the project site and SR -14 is located approximately one mile to the east/northeast .
Refer to Figure 2, Vicinity Map.
C. Proposed Actions Addressed in the IS/Negative Declaration (ND)
The proposed project consists of modifying the City General Plan land use designation from LDR (Low Density Residential, density of one dwelling per acre) to PF (Public Facility) and modifying the City zoning designation from R-1-1 (Single Family Residential, minimum l ot size, 1 acre) to PF (Public Facilities) for the following three contiguous parcels: APNs 3004-012-003, 3004-012-018, and 3004- 012-023. Refer to Figures 3 through 6. No development is proposed in conjunction with the proposed project.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
D. Project Components
The proposed project is a GPA and ZC to modify the General Plan from LDR (Low Density Residential, density of one dwelling per acre) to PF (Public Facilities) and modify the City zoning designation from R -1-1 (Single Family Residential, minimum lot size, 1 acre) to PF (Public Facilities). No development is proposed in conjunction with this proposed project. Future dev elopment of the project site would be subject to CEQA review and as such would undergo separate environmental review on a project-by-project basis.
E. Regulatory Requirements, Permits, and Approvals
• Zone Change
• General Plan Amendment
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
Figure 1. Regional Map
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
Figure 2. Vicinity Map
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
Figure 3. Existing General Plan Land Use Designation
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
Figure 4. Proposed General Plan Land Use Designation
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
Figure 5. Existing Zoning Designation
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
Figure 6. Proposed Zoning Designation
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
3. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
A. Background
1. Project Title:
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Palmdale
Economic and Community Development Department
Planning Division
38250 Sierra Highway
Palmdale, CA 93550
3. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Brenda Magaña, Senior Planner
(661) 267-5293
4. Project Location:
The approximately 160-acre project site is comprised of three contiguous parcels (APNs 3004-012-003, 3004-012-018, and 3004-012-023) located approximately 0.4 mile southwest of the intersection of Tierra Subida Avenue and West Avenue Q-8 in the City, California (see Figure 2, Vicinity Map). The Antelope Valley Public Landfill and West City Ranch Road border the project site to the south/southwest. SR -14 is located approximately one mile east/northeast of the project site.
5. Project Applicant’s Name and Address:
Phillip Arklin
Three Arklin, LLC
P.O. Box 85
Valyermo, CA 93563-0085
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
6. Existing Land Use / Zoning / General Plan:
EXISTING
SURROUNDING
LAND USE
ZONING GENERAL PLAN
SITE Vacant Land R-1-1 (Single Family
Residential,
minimum lot size, 1
acre)
LDR (Low Density
Residential, density
of one dwelling per
acre)
NORTH Vacant Land /
Residential Use
R-1-7,000 (Single
Family Residential,
minimum lot size,
7,000 sq. ft.) / R-1-
10,000 (Single
Family Residential,
minimum lot size,
10,000 sq. ft.)
LDR (Low Density
Residential, density
of one dwelling per
acre) / SFR-2
(Single Family
Residential, 0-3
dwellings/acre)
SOUTH Antelope Valley
Public Landfill
PF (Public Facilities)
/ Planned Industrial
(M-4)
PF (Public Facilities)
/ Industrial (IND)
EAST Vacant Land R-1-10,000 (Single
Family Residential,
minimum lot size,
10,000 sq. ft.)
SFR-2 (Single
Family Residential,
0-3 dwellings/acre)
WEST Vacant Land SP (City Ranch
Specific Plan)
SP (City Ranch
Specific Plan)
7. Description of Project:
The proposed project consists of modifying the City General Plan l and use designation from LDR (Low Density Residential, density of one dwelling per acre) to PF (Public Facilities) and modifying the City z oning designation f rom R-1-1 (Single Family Residential, minimum lot size, one acre) to PF (Public Facilities) for three contiguous parcels totaling approximately 160-acres. No development is proposed in conjunction with the proposed project.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
8. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
The project site is located in the City within the Antelope Valley, which is situated between the Tehachapi Mountains (to the north) and the San Gabriel Mountains (to the south). The Antelope Valley is an inland basin within the southwestern Mojave Desert (City of Palmdale, 2010). The project site is undeveloped land comprised of rolling hills, slopes covered with desert scrub, and dirt roads. The project site is mostly surrounded by undeveloped land with the exception of existing single family residences to the north and the Antelope Valley Landfill to the south. The California Aqueduct is located approximately one mile south of the project site and SR-14 is located approximately one mile to the east/north east. Refer to Figure 2, Vicinity Map.
B. Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact”, as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Potentially significant impacts that are mitigated to “Less Than Significant” are now shown here.
Aesthetics Agriculture and
Forestry Resources
Air Quality
Energy
Biological Resources Cultural Resources
Geology and Soils
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Hazards and
Hazardous Materials
Hydrology and Water
Quality
Land Use and
Planning
Mineral Resources Noise
Population and
Housing
Public Services Recreation
Transportation Utilities and Service
Systems
Mandatory Findings
of Significance
Tribal Cultural
Resource
Wildfire
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
C. Determination
On the basis of this initial evaluation: (Select one)
I fin d that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect: 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal s tandards; and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated”. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant eff ects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project.
This initial study was prepared by:
___December 8, 2021____ ____________________________
Date AECOM
This initial study was reviewed by:
______________________ ____________________________
Date Megan Taggart
Planning Manager
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
D. Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Each of the responses in the following environmental checklist considers the whole action involved, including project -level, cumulative, on-site, off -site, indirect, construction, and operational impacts. A brief explanation is provided for all answers and supported by the information sources cited.
1. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone).
2. A “Less Than Significant Impact” applies when the proposed project would not result in a substantial and adverse change in the environment. This impact level does not require mitigation measures.
3. A “Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated” applies when the proposed project would not result in a substantial and adverse change in the environment after additional mitigation measures are applied.
4. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
4. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
I AESTHETICS Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the Project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway?
c) In non -urbanized areas, s ubstantially
degrade the existing visual character or
quality of public views of the site and its
surroundings? (Public views are those that
are experienced from publicly accessible
vantage point). If the project is in an
urbanized area, would the project conflict with
applicable zoning and other regulations
governing scenic quality?
d) Create a new source of substantial l ight or
glare that would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
No Impact. The project site is undeveloped land comprised of rolling hills, slopes covered with desert scrub, and dirt roads. The project site is mostly surrounded by undeveloped land with the exception of existing single-family residences to the north and the Antelope Valley Landfill to the south. The project site does not contain designated scenic vistas or scenic areas nor is it within a designated state scenic highway (City of Palmdale, 1993; California Department of Transportation [Caltrans] 2021). In addition, no development is proposed in conjunction with the proposed project; therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. No impact would occur.
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
No Impact. While the project site is within a half mile of Tierra Subida Avenue (east) and Elizabeth Lake Road (north) which are City designated scenic roadways (City of Palmdale, 1993), views to/from these designated scenic roadways would not change as no development would occur as part of the proposed project. Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway. No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are exper ienced from publicly accessible v antage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
No Impact. Implementation of the proposed project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings as no development is proposed in conjunction with the proposed project. No impact would occur.
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
No Impact. No development is proposed in conjunction with the proposed project; therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not create a new source of substantial light or glare. No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
II AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES In determining whether impacts t o agricultural resources are significant environ mental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997), prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the Project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland,
or Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on the maps prepa r e d
pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public
Resources Code section 12220(g)),
timberland (as defined by Public Resources
Code section 4526), or timberland zone d
Timberland Production (as defined by
Government Code section 51104(g))?
d) Result in the loss of forestland or conver sion
of forestland to non -forest use?
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment, which due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of Farmland
to nonagricultural use or conversion of
forestland to non -forest use?
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use?
No Impact. According to California Department of Conservation (CDOC)’s Important Farml and Finder online mapper, the project site is located on “Other Land” (i.e., vacant and nonagricultural land surrounded on all sides by urban development); thus, the proposed project would not be located on Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of S tatewide Importance (CDOC, 2021a).
Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to nonagricultural use. In addition, no development is proposed in conjunction with the proposed project. No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
No Impact. According to the City’s zoning map, the project site is within the R-1-1 (Single Family Residential, minimum lot size, one acre), which is not an agricultural zoning designation (City of Palmdale, 1994). Furthermore, the project site does not contain agricultural land or Williamson Act contract. Also, no development would result from the proposed project. Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract. No impact would occur.
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public R esources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
No Impact. According to the City’s zoning map, the project site is within R-1-1 (Single Family Residential, minimum lot size, one acre), which is not a forestland or timber land zoning designation (City of Palmdale, 1994). In addition, no development is proposed in conjunction with the proposed project . Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of forestland, timberland, or Timberland Production uses. No impact would occur.
d) Result in the loss of forestland or conversion of forestland to non-forest use?
No Impact. As noted above, the project s ite is zoned R -1-1 (Single Family Residential, minimum lot size, one acre), which is not a forest land or timber land zoning designation. Furthermore, the project site does not contain forest land. In addition, no development is proposed in conjunction with the proposed project .
Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in the loss or conversion of forest land. No impact would occur.
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment , which due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to nonagricultural use or conversion of forestland to non-forest use?
No Impact. As noted above, the project site does not contain farmland or forest land. In addition, no dev elopment is proposed in conjunction with the proposed project. Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not result in other changes to the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, would result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
III AIR QUALITY Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.
Would the Project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
project region is non- attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard ?
c) Expose sensi tive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
d) Result in other emissions (such as those
leading to odors) adversely affecting a
substantial number of people?
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
No Impact. The proposed project is located within the Los Angeles County portion of the Mojave Desert Air Basin (MDAB) (Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District [AVAQMD], 2021a). The AVAQMD is the local agency with the primary responsibility for the control of air pollution throughout the western portion of the MDAB, including the northern desert portion of Los Angeles County where the project site is located (AVAQMD, 2021a). The AVAQMD adopted ozone attainment air quality plans in 2004, 2008, 2010, and 2017 (AVAQMD, 2021b). AVAQMD also adopted a List and Implementation Schedule for District Measures to Reduce Particulate Matter in 2005 (AVAQMD, 2021b). Implementation of t he proposed project would not generate air emissions as no development would occur. Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct the implementation of the applicable air quality plan. No impact would occur.
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
No Impact. As discussed previously, no development is proposed in conjunction with the proposed project. Furthermore, future development would be subject to discretionary review and as such would undergo separate environmental review on a project-by-project basis. Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
No Impact. Implementation of the proposed project would not generate air emissions as no development would occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. No impact would occur.
d) Result in othe r emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
No Impact. As discussed previously, no development is proposed in conjunction with the proposed project. Additionally, future development would be subject to discretionary review and as such would undergo separate environmental review on a project-by-project basis. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in other emissions adversely affect ing a substantial number of people. No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
IV BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the Project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications, on
any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by
the California Department of Fis h and Wildlife
or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Se rvice ?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regiona l
plans, policies or regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife or
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or
federally protected wetlands (including, but
not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coasta l,
etc.) through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or other means ?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of
any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife
species or with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use
of native wildlife nesting sites?
e) Conflict with any local p olicies or ordinances
protecting biological resourc es, such as a
tree preservation policy or ordinance ?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopt e d
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or othe r
approved local, regional , or state habitat
conservation plan?
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
No Impact. As discussed previously, the project site is undeveloped land comprised of rolling hills , slopes covered with desert scrub, and dirt roads .
According to the Environmental Resources Element of the City’s General Plan, several sensitive species may be present in the City, including Mohave ground squirrel, desert tortoise, Cooper’s hawk, and San Diego horned lizard (City of Palmdale, 1993). The project site and vicinity could contain habitat for candidate, sensitive, or special status species or riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Ser vice (USFWS). However, no development would occur in conjunction with the proposed project ; therefore, implementation of the Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect either directly, or though habitat modifications, on any species ident ified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS. No impact would occur.
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
No Impact. According to the USFWS’s online Wetlands Inventory map, a riverine habitat (wetlands contained within a channel) is located at the southern boundary of the project site (USFWS, 2021). However, no development is proposed in conjunction with the proposed project. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies or regulations or by the CDFW or USFWS. No impact would occur.
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federal ly protected wetl ands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
No Impact. As previously mentioned, a riverine habitat is located at the southern boundary of the project s ite (USFWS, 2021). However, no development is proposed in conjunction with the proposed project . Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limi ted to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. No impact would occur.
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or wit h established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nesting sites?
No Impact. No development would occur as a result of the proposed project. Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nesting sites. No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
No Impact. The City has a Native Desert Vegetation Preservation Ordinance (§
14.04) which regulates the removal of California Juniper (City of Palmdale, 2021).
According to the Environmental Resources Element of the City’s General Plan, the project site is a vegetated area covered with desert scrub and California Juniper (City of Palmdale, 1993) . However, no development is proposed in conjunction with the proposed project . Furthermore, future development would be subject to discretionary review and as such would undergo separate environmental review on a project-by-project basis. Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. No impact would occur.
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
No Impact. The project site is not located within any Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) or Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP) ( CDFW, 2021). In addition, no development is proposed in conjunction with the proposed project .
Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with any applicable HCP or NCCP. No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
V CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the Project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource pursuant
to §15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeologi cal resource as
defined in Public Resources Code Section
21083.2 and 21084.1, and CEQA Guidelines
Section 15064.5, respectively?
c) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to in §15064.5?
No Impact. The proposed project is comprised of undeveloped land with a few dirt roads. According to Exhibit ER -6, Potential Historic Structures, in the City’s General Plan – Environmental Resources Element, there are no potential historic structures within the project site (City of Palmdale, 1993). Additionally, no development is proposed in conjunction with the proposed project. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5. No impact would occur.
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21083.2 and 21084.1, and CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, respectively?
No Impact. According to Exhibit ER-7, Archaeological Sensitivity Map, in the City’s General Plan - Environmental Resources Element, the project site and vicinity are located in an area with high archaeological sensitivity (City of Palmdale, 1993); thus, there is a potential for archaeological resources to be present at the project site and vicinity. However, no development or ground disturbance would occur from imp lementation of the proposed project. Furthermore, future development would be subject to discretionary review and as such would undergo separate environmental review on a project-by-project basis. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21083.2 and 21084.1, and CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, respectively, as a result of the project. No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
No Impact. The project site has not been used as a formal cemetery nor previously developed. As discussed previously, no development or ground disturbance would occur from implementation of the proposed project. Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
VI ENERGY Would the Project:
a) Result in potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or
unnecessary consumptio n of energy
resources, during project construction or
operation?
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local p lan
for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?
No Impact. No development nor energy consumption would occur f rom implementation of the proposed project as it involves modification to the General Plan land use designation and zone . Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not result in a potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary energy consumption of energy resources. No impact would occur.
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
No Impact. As discussed previously, no energy consumption would occur from the implementation of the proposed project as no development is proposed. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
VII GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Would the Project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the environment?
b) Conflict with an applica ble plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of greenhou se
gases?
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
No Impact. Implementation of the proposed project would not generate any greenhouse gas emissions as no development would occur. Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a si gnificant impact on the environment. No impact would occur.
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
No Impact. As stated above, implementation of the proposed proj ect would not generate any greenhouse gas emissions . Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
VIII GEOLOGY AND SOILS Would the Project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potent ia l
substantial adverse effects, including the risk
of injury, damage or death involving?
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist -
Priolo Earthquake Fault Map issued by
the State Geologist for the area or based
upon on other substantia l evidence of a
known fault?
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosi on or the los s of topsoil?
c) Be lo cated on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially resu lt in
on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive s oil, as define d in
Table 18- 1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial direct or indir e ct
risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal sys tems
where sewers are not available for the
disposal of wastewater?
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a uniqu e
paleontological resource or site or unique
geological feature?
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of injury, damage or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based upon on other substantial evidence of a known fault?
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
No Impact. According to the CDOC, the project site is located within the Alquist- Priolo Zone for the San Andreas Fault (SAF) (CDOC, 2021c). The nearest identified fault trace is located approximately 400 feet southwest of the project site (CDOC, 2021b). However, no known active fault strands or segments trend across or toward the project site; thus, the probability of surface fault rupture occurring at the project site is considered to be low (Golder Associates Inc, 2019). While there are no active faults from the SAF that trend across or toward the project site, given the large number of recorded earthquakes in the region and their magnitude, the project site is expected to be subject to strong seismic ground shaking. In addition, according to the CDOC, the project site is located within a liquefaction and landslide zone (CDOC, 2021b). However, the proposed project does not include development as it involves modification to the General Plan land use designation and zone change.
Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of injury, damage or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong seismic ground shaking, seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction, or l andslides. Furthermore, future development would be subject to discretionary review and as such would undergo separate environmental review on a project -by-project basis. No impact would occur.
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
No Impact. The proposed project does not include development as it involves modification to the General Plan land use designation and zone. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. No impact would occur.
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
No Impact. As mentioned above, no development is proposed in conjunction with the proposed project. Given t his, no geologic unit would become unstable f rom implementation of the proposed project. No impact would occur.
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property?
No Impact. As mentioned above, no development is proposed in conjunction with the proposed project. Furtherm ore, future development would be subject to discretionary review and as such would undergo separate environmental review on a project-by-project basis. Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not create substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property related to being located on expansive soil. No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
e) Have soils incapable of adequately sup porting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater?
No Impact. As mentioned above, no development is proposed in conjunction with the proposed project. Furthermore, future development would be subject to discretionary review and as such would undergo separate environmental review on a project-by-project basis. Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not involve the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. No impact would occur.
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature?
No Impact. According to the Environmental Resources Element of the City’s General Plan (Exhibit ER -8, Paleontological Sensitivity Map), the project site is located in an area with high potential for paleontological resources (City of Palmdale 1993). However, the proposed project does not include development as it involves modification to the General Plan land use designation and zone.
Furthermore, future development would be subject to discretionary review and as such would undergo separate environmental review on a project-by-project basis.
Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not di rectly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature. No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
IX HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the Project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transpor t ,
use, emission or disposal of hazardou s
materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to th e public or the
environment through reasonable foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one -quarter mile
of an existing or proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list
of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
signific ant hazard to the public or the
environment?
e) For a project located within an airport la nd
use plan area or, where such a plan has not
been adopted, within 2 miles of a public
airport or a publ ic use airport, result in a
safety hazard or excessi ve noise for people
residing or working in the project area?
f) Impair implementation of or physica lly
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
g) Expose people or structures , either directly or
indi rectly, to a significant risk of loss, inju ry or
death involving wildland fires?
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, emission or disposal of hazardous materials?
No Impact. The proposed project does not include development as it involves modification to the General Plan land use designation and zone; thus, implementation of the proposed project would not involve transport, use, emission or disposal of hazardous materials. No impact would occur.
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
No Impact. As previously mentioned, impl ementation of the proposed project would not involve the transport or use of hazardous materials as no development Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
would occur. Furthermore, future development would be subject to discretionary review and as such would undergo separate environmental review on a project - by-project basis. Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not create a significant hazard to the pubic or the environment through reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. No impact would occur.
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
No Impact. No use of hazardous materials would occur as the proposed project does not include development; it involves modification to the General Plan land use designation and zone. Given this, there would be no hazardous emissions or handling of hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. No impact would occur.
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
No Impact. The project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 (California Environmental Protection Agency, 2021; State of Cal ifornia Department of Toxic Substances Control, 2021; State Water Resources Control Board, 2021; United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2021). In addition, no development is proposed in conjunction with the proposed project; thus , no significant hazard to the public or environment would result from implementation of the proposed project. No impact would occur.
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan area or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or a public use airport, result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?
No Impact. The project site is not located within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, nor is it located within an air port land use plan or within the vicinity of a private airstrip (Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Commission [ALUC], 2009; Google Earth Pro, 2021). Additionally, the proposed project does not include development. Given this, the proposed project would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area.
No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
No Impact. The proposed project does not include development as it involves modification to the General Plan land use designation and zone change; therefore, the project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response pl an or emergency evacuation plan. No impact would occur.
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
No Impact. The project site is not located within or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones (California D epartment of Forestry and Fire Protection [CALFIRE], 2021; City of Palmdale, 2016).
Furthermore, the proposed project does not include development. Given this, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
X HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Would the Project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise
substantially degrade surface or ground water
quality ?
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies
or interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that the project may impede
sustainable groundwater management of the
basin ?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or ar ea, including through
the alteration of the course or a stream or river
or through the addition of imperviou s
surfaces, in a manner that would :
i) Result in substantial erosion or
siltation on - or off-site;
ii) substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on - or
offsite;
iii) create or contribute runoff water
which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; or
iv) impede or redirect flood flows?
d) In flood haz ard, tsunami, or seiche z ones , r i s k release of pollutants due to project
inundation?
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a
water qualit y control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
No Impact. The proposed project does not include development as it involves modification to the General Plan land use designation and zone. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality. No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
No Impact. As mentioned above, the proposed project does not include development. Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not result in the decrease of groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin. No impact would occur.
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course or a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner that would:
i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site;
ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite;
iii) create or contrib ute runoff wa ter which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or
iv) impede or redirect flood flows?
No Impact. The proposed project does not include development as it inv olves modification to the General Plan land use designation and zone change; therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course or a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces. No impact would occur.
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
No Impact. The project site is not located within a Federal Em ergency Management Agency (FEMA) 100-year flood plain nor located within a Tsunami Inundation Zone as mapped by the California Geological Survey (FEMA, 2021; California Geological Survey, 2009). In addition, the project site is l ocated in the Mojave Desert at a distance of over 40 miles from the Pacific Ocean and no major water-retaining structures or land-locked bodies of water are located immediately up gradient or in close proximity of the project site (Google Earth Pro, 2021).
Furthermore, the proposed project does not include development as it involves modification to the General Plan land use designation and zone change. Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not result in the release of Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
pollutants due to project inundation from being in a flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zone. No impact would occur.
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
No Impact. The proposed project does not include development as i t involves modification to the General Plan land use designation and zone; therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
XI LAND USE AND PLANNING Would the Project:
a) Physically divide an establishe d community? b) Cause a significant environmental impact due
to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an environmental
effect?
a) Physically divide an established community?
No Impact. The project site is currently undeveloped. Furthermore, the established residential community to the north would not be affected by implementation of the proposed project as no development would occur. Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not physically divide an established community. No impact would occur.
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project is a G eneral Plan Amendment and Zone Change to modify the General Plan from LDR (Low Density Residential, density of one dwelling per acre) to PF (Public Facilities) and modify the City z oning designation from R -1-1 (Single Family Residential, minimum lot size, one acre) to PF (Public Facilities). No development is proposed in conjunction with this proposed project. Given this, t he proposed project would not cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
XII MINERAL RESOURCES Would the Project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to the
region and the residents of the st ate?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific
plan or other land use plan?
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
No Impact. According to the CDOC’s Mineral Land Classification Interactive Web Map and the City’s General Plan (Exhibit ER -1C, State -Classified Mineral Resource Deposits), there are no k nown mineral resources, mineral resource recovery sites, or oil and gas resources on the project site (CDOC, 2021d; City of Palmdale, 1993). Furthermore, the proposed project does not include development as it involves modification to the General Plan land use designation and zone change. Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and residents of the state. No impact would occur.
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
No Impact. As discussed previously, there are no known mineral resources, mineral resource recov ery sites, or oil and gas resources on the project site.
Furthermore, no development would occur. Thus, implementation of the proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan. No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
XIII NOISE Would the Project:
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise levels in
the vicinity of the project in excess of
standards established in the local general
plan or noise ordinance, or applicab le
standards of other agencies?
b) Generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels?
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a
private airstrip or an airport land use plan, or
where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or publ ic
use airport, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area t o
excessive noise levels?
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
No Impact. Implementation of the proposed project would not generate any noise or vibration as no development would occur. Furthermore, future development would be subject to discretionary review and as such would undergo separate environmental review on a project-by-project basis. Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not result in the generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project . No impact would occur.
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
No Impact . As mentioned above, the proposed project does not include development; therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise. No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
No Impact. As discussed previously in Section IX, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of this IS/ND, the proposed project is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. Given this , implementation of the proposed project would not expose people residing or working the project area to excessive noise levels. No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
XIV POPULATION AND HOUSING Would the Project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population
growth in an area, either directly (for example,
by proposing new homes and businesse s) or
indirectly ( for example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
people or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
No Impact. No development or population growth would occur with implementation of the proposed project as it involves modification of the General Plan land use designation from LDR (Low Density Residential, density of one dwelling per acre) to PF (Public Facilities) and zone change from R -1-1 (Single- Family Residential, minimum lot size of one acre) to PF (Public Facilities).
Furthermore, future development would be subject to discretionary review and as such would undergo separate environmental review on a project-by-project basis.
Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not induce population growth in the project area. No impact would occur.
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. As previously mentioned, no development w ould occur with implementation of the proposed project as it involves modification of the General Plan land use designation from LDR (Low Density Residential, density of one dwelling per acre) to PF (Public Facilities) and zone change from R-1-1 (Single- Family Residential, minimum lot size of one acre) to PF (Public Facilities).
Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not displace existing people or housing. No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
XV PUBLIC SERVICES
a) Would the Project r esult in substantial
adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for ne w or
physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significa nt
environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives fo r any of the
following public service s:
i) Fire protection?
ii ) P olice protection?
iii ) S chools?
iv) Parks?
v) Other public facilities?
a) Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other perform ance objectives for any of the following public services:
i) Fire protection?
ii) Police protection?
iii) Schools?
iv) Parks?
v) Other public facilities?
No Impact. The proposed project does not include development as it involves modification to the General Plan land use designation and zone; therefore, population growth and new demands on public services would not occur .
Furthermore, future development would be subject to discretionary review and as such would undergo separate environmental review on a project-by-project basis.
Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, nor the need for new or physically altered government facilities. No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
XVI RECREATION
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood or regional p arks or othe r
recreational facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility would
occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilit ies which
might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment.
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
No Impact. The proposed project does not include development as it involves modification to the General Plan land use designation and zone; therefore, no population growth would occur that would increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities. Furthermore, future development would be subject to discretionary review and as such would undergo separate environmental review on a project -by-project basis. No impact would occur.
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment.
No Impact. As discussed previously, the proposed project does not include development as it involves modification to the General Plan land use designation and zone; therefore, no new or expanded recreational facilities would be built as a result of implementation of the proposed project. No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
XVII TRANSPORTATION Would the Project:
a) Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or
policy addressing the circulation system,
including tra nsit, roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities?
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsist e nt
with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3,
subdivision (b)(1)?
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curve or
dangerous intersections) or incompatib le
uses (e.g. farm equipment)?
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
a) Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
No Impact. No trips would be generated nor would any changes to the circulation system or site access occur with implementation of the proposed project as no development would occur. Furthermore, future development would be subject to discretionary review and as such would undergo separate environmental review on a project-by-project basis. Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities.
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)(1)?
No Impact. As discussed previously , no trips would be generated with implementation of the proposed project as no dev elopment would occur.
Furthermore, future development would be subject to discretionary review and as such would undergo separate environmental review on a project-by-project basis.
Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, Subdivision (b)(1). No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curve or dangerous inter sections) or incompatible uses (e .g., farm equipment)?
No Impact. As discussed previously, no development would occur from implementation of the proposed project. Furthermore, future development would be subject to discretionary review and as such would undergo separate environmental review on a project-by-project basis. Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses. No impact would occur.
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
No Im pact. As discussed previously, no development would occur from implementation of the proposed project. Furthermore, future development would be subject to discretionary review and as such would undergo separate environmental review on a project-by-project basis. Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not result in inadequate emergency access. No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
XVIII TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the Cal ifornia
Register of Historical Resources, or in a local
register of historical resources as define d in
Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k), or
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in
its discretion and supported by substantial
evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria
set forth in subdivision (c) to Public
Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying
the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead
agency shall consider the significance of the
resource to a California Native American
tribe.
Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k)?
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) to Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.
No Impact. Pursuant to the provisions of Assembly Bill 52 and Senate Bill 18, the City is required to send formal notification of projects to tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated in the geographic area. Consultation letters were sent on November 4, 2021, to the following tribes:
i. Fernandeño Tataviam Band of Mission Indians
ii. Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation
iii. San Fernando Band of Mission Indians
iv. San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
v. San Manuel Band of Mission Indians
Through consultation the tribes did not impose requirements to the proposed project because the proposed project does not include development or physical changes to the environment. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resources or to a California Native American tribe. No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
XIX UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the Project:
a) Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water,
wastewater treatment or storm water
drainage, electric power, natural gas, o r
telecommunications facilities the construction
or relocation of which could cause significa nt
environmental effects?
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to
serve the project and reasonably foreseeable
future development dur ing normal, dr y and
multiple dry years ?
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve
the project that it has adequate capacity to
serve the project’s projected demand in
addition to the provider’s exist ing
commitments?
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or
local standards, or in excess of the capacit y
of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the
attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
e) Comply with federal, state and loca l
managemen t and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications fac ilities the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
No Impact. The proposed project does not include development; therefore, population growth and new demands on utilities and service systems would not occur from implementation of the proposed project . Furthermore, f uture development would be subject to discretionary review and as such would undergo separate environmental review on a project -by-project basis. Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities . No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
No Impact. As mentioned above, there would be no development or population growth as a result of the proposed project. Furthermore, future development would be subject to discretionary review and as such would undergo separate environmental review on a project-by-project basis. Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not affect water supply. No impact would occur.
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
No Impact. The proposed project does not include development; therefore, population growth and new demands on wastewater treatment would not occur .
Given this, impl ementation of the proposed project would not affect wastewater treatment capacity. No impact would occur.
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
No Impact. The proposed project does not include development; therefore, no solid waste would be generated from implementation of the proposed project. No impact would occur.
e) Comply with federal, state and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
No Impact. As mentioned above, t he proposed projec t does not include development and would not generate solid waste. Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with any federal, state, and local regulations related to solid waste. No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
XX WILDFIRE If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and othe r
factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby
expose project occupants to, pollut a nt
concentrations from a wildfire or the
uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c) Require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources, power
lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate
fire risk or that ma y result in temporary or
ongoing impacts to the environment?
d) Expose people or structures to significa nt
risks, including downslope or downstre a m
flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff,
post -fire slope instability, or drainage
chan ges?
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructur e (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post -fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
No Impact. As discussed previously in Section IX , Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of this IS/ND, the proposed project does not include development and the project site is not located within or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones (CALFIRE, 2021). Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not cause or exacerbate wildfire risk nor s ubstantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
XXI MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to
substantially degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat
of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop b elow self -
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant
or animal community, substantially reduce
the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminat e
important examples of the major periods of
California history or preh istory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable”
means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of pa st projects,
the effects of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or indir ectly?
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self -sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
No Impact. As discussed previously in Section IV, Biological Resources; Section V, Cultural Resources; and Section XVIII, Tribal Cultural Resources, of this IS/ND, implementation of the proposed project would have no effect on fish or wildlife habitat or population, plant or animal communities, protected species, or important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory because it involves modification to the General Plan land use designation and zone with no development. No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?
No Impact. As discussed throughout this IS/ND, implementation of the proposed project would not result in any significant environmental impacts. Given this, implementation of the proposed project would not result in impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable because it involves modification to the General Plan land use designation and zone with no development . No impact would occur.
c) Does the project have environmental ef fects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
No Impact. As discussed throughout this IS/ND, implementation of the proposed project would not result in environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly because it involves modification to the General Plan land use designation and zone with no development. No impact would occur.
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
5. REFERENCES
Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District (AVAQMD). (2021). District Boundaries. Available at: https://avaqmd.ca.gov/district-boundaries (accessed September 2021).
----. 2021b. Rules and Plans webpage. Available at: https://avaqmd.ca.gov/rules-plans (accessed September 2021).
California Department of Conservation (CDOC). 2021a. California Important Farmland Finder. Available at: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/ (accessed August 2021).
----. 2021b. Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation. Available at:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/EQZApp/app/ (accessed September 2021).
----. 2021c. Fault Activity Map of California. Available at:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/fam/ (accessed August 2021).
----. 2021d. Mineral Land Classification. Available at:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/index.html?map=mlc (accessed September 2021)
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CALFIRE). 2021. Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer. Available at: https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/ (accessed September 2021).
California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2021. NCCP Plan Summaries. Available at:
https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Planning/NCCP/Plans (accessed August 2021).
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2021. State Scenic Highway Map.
Available at:
https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc 8e8057116f1aacaa (accessed August 2021).
California Environmental Protection Agency. 2021. Cortese List Data Resources.
Available at: https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/ (accessed August 2021).
California Geological Survey (CGS). 2009. Tsunami Hazard Area Map. Available at:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/ts_evacuation/ (accessed September 2021).
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
City of Palmdale. 2021. Palmdale Municipal Code. Available at:
https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Palmdale/#!/Palmdale14/Palmdale1404.html#14.04 (accessed August 2021).
----. 2016. City of Palmdale Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. Available at:
https://www.cityofpalmdale.org/DocumentCenter/View/514/Very-High-Fire-Hazard- Zones-PDF (accessed September 2021).
----. 2010. Antelope Valley Public Landfill CUP – Amendment to the Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH #1990010988). Print.
----. 1994. City of Palmdale Zoning. Available at:
https://www.cityofpalmdale.org/DocumentCenter/View/516/Zoning-with-street-labels- PDF?bidId= (accessed August 2021).
----. 1993. City of Palmdale General Plan. Adopted 1993. Available at:
https://www.cityofpalmdale.org/279/General-Plan (accessed August 2021).
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2021. FEMA Flood Map Service Center. 06037C0659F and 06037C0658F. Effective 2008. Available at:
https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search?AddressQuery=1200%20City%20Ranch%20Road% 2C%20Palmdale%20%20A#searchresultsanchor (accessed September 2021).
Golder Associates Inc. 2019. Geotechnical Exploration and Recommendations Report, Proposed Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) Project and Maintenance Building Addition, Antelope Valley Public Landfill – Palmdale, California. August. PDF.
Google Earth Pro. 2021.
Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). 2009. A-NET. Available at:
https://lacounty.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=acf2e87194a54af9 b266bf07547f240a (accessed August 2021).
State of California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). 2021. EnviroStor Database. Available at:
https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/search?cmd=search&reporttype=CORTESE& site_type=CSITES,FUDS&status=ACT,BKLG,COM&reporttitle=HAZARDOUS+WASTE +AND+SUBSTANCES+SITE+LIST+%28CORTESE%29 (accessed August 2021).
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). 2021. GeoTracker Database.
Available at:
https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/search?CMD=search&case_number=&business_ name=&main_street_name=&city=&zip=&county=&SITE_TYPE=LUFT&oilfield=&STAT US=&BRANCH=&MASTER_BASE=&Search=Search (accessed August 2021).
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2021. SEMS Search. Available at:
https://enviro.epa.gov/enviro/efsystemquery.sems?fac_search=primary_name&fac_valu e=&fac_search_type=Beginning&postal_code=&location_address=&add_search_type= Beginning2&city_name=Palmdale&county_name=Los+Angeles&state_code=CA&chemi cal=&program_search=sems&report=basic&page_no=1&output_sql_switch=TRUE&dat abase_type=SEMSh (accessed August 2021).
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFW). 2021a. USFWS Threatened & Endangered Species Active Critical Habitat Report. Available at:
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/report/table/critical-habitat.html (accessed August 2021).
----. 2021b. USFWS Wetlands Mapper. Available at:
https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.html (accessed August 2021).
Initial Study / Negative Declaration
GPA 21-001/ ZC 21-001
December 1, 2021
6. Public Comments
The primary objective and purpose of the Initial Study/Negative Declaration public review process is to obtain comments on the adequacy of the analysis of environmental impacts, the mitigation measures presented, and other analyses contained in the Initial Study prepared on behalf of the City of Palmdale (City). The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that the City decision makers consider the comments received during the public review of the Initial Study/Negative Declaration prior to carr ying out or approving the project ( CEQA Guidelines Section 15074[b]).
The Initial Study/ Negative Declaration was circulated to the public and public agencies for a 30- day public review from December 20, 2021, through January 19, 2022. No comments were received regarding the Initial Study/ Negative Declaration.
CITY OF PALMDALE
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA
ORDINANCE NO. 1581
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALMDALE APPROVING A ZONE CHANGE FROM R-1-1 (SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL, MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF ONE ACRE) TO PF (PUBLIC
FACILITIES) FOR THREE CONTIGUOUS PARCELS TOTALING
APPROXIMATELY 160 ACRES LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 2,500
FEET WEST OF TIERRA SUBIDA AVENUE AND 2,600 FEET SOUTH
OF ELIZABETH LAKE ROAD (ZC 21-001)
A. RECITALS
WHEREAS, Three Arklin, LLC has filed an application requesting approval of Zone Change (ZC) 21-001, described herein (herein referred to as “Application”); WHEREAS, The Application applies to approximately 160 acres, referred to on the Los Angeles County Assessor’s roles as APN’s 3004-012-003, 3004-012-018, and 3004-012-023, legally described on Exhibit I hereto and shown on the map attached hereto as Exhibit II.
WHEREAS, On February 10, 2022, the Planning Commission of the City of Palmdale reviewed the proposed project and recommended approval of the Application by the City Council; and,
WHEREAS, on March 2, 2022, the City Council of the City of Palmdale conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Application and the concluded said hearing on that date. Evidence, both written and oral, was duly presented and considered by the City Council at the aforesaid public hearing, including but not limited to, the staff report dated March 2, 2022.
B. ORDINANCE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALMDALE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A of this Ordinance, are true and correct.
SECTION 2 . Based upon substantial evidence presented to the City Council during the March 2, 2022, public hearing, including public testimony and written and oral staff reports, the City Council specifically finds as follows:
(a) The site of the proposed change in zone is suitable for any of the land uses permitted within the proposed zone district.
The topography of the site consists of slopes and if developed, would need to adhere to Palmdale Municipal Code Chapter 17.100 Ordinance No. 1581
related to Hillside Management; however, no development is proposed at this time. Should development be proposed in the future, the project will undergo separate review and future development will be required to comply with the development standards for the PF zone.
(b) The proposed change in zone is consistent with the General Plan.
The Application consists of a Zone Change to modify the designation of the project area to PF (Public Facilities). In addition to the Application, the applicant has submitted a request for a General Plan Amendment to PF therefore, as amended, the change in zone will continue to be consistent with the General Plan.
(c) The proposed change in zone is reasonable and beneficial at this time.
(d) The proposed change in zone will not have a substantial adverse effect on surrounding properties or the community in general.
The proposed change in zone will bring consistency to existing zoning designations because it will be compatible with the property located to the south of the project site, which is currently within the PF zone and occupied by the Antelope Valley Landfill. Additionally, the property is currently vacant and no development is proposed as part of this project. Furthermore, surrounding properties are substantially vacant with the exception of the property to the south.
SECTION 3 . The City Council hereby finds as follows with respect to the environmental documentation:
(a) The City Council hereby finds that the proposed Negative Declaration prepared in connection with the Application was prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (Exhibit III of Resolution No. CC 2022-022). Also, the Negative Declaration has been reviewed and considered by the City Council, reflects the independent judgment of the City Council, and that based on the Initial Study and the entire record of proceedings, there is no substantial evidence that the proposed project will have a significant effect on the environment.
Ordinance No. 1581
(b) The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Negative Declaration, and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City Council’s decision is based, is the Planning Manager of the City of Palmdale. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Division of the City of Palmdale located at 38250 Sierra Highway, Palmdale, California 93550, telephone (661) 267-5200.
SECTION 4. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth in the above Sections, and based on all other evidence in the record, the City Council hereby approves ZC 21-001 changing the Zoning Map to incorporate the proposed changes as shown in Exhibit IV of this Ordinance.
SECTION 5. Severability. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase in this Ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be unconstitutional or invalid or ineffective by any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity or effectiveness of the remaining portions of this Ordinance or any part thereof. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional, or invalid, or ineffective, provided the basic purposes of this Ordinance and the benefits to the City and the public are not substantially impaired.
Ordinance No. 1581
SECTION 6 . The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and shall cause this ordinance to be published or posted as required by law.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 2nd day of March, 2022. _________________________________
Approved as to form: Steven D. Hofbauer, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________ ________________________________ Christopher L. Beck Shanae S. Smith, City Clerk
City Attorney
I, Shanae Smith, City Clerk of Palmdale, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Palmdale at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 2 nd day of March, 2022, effective the 31st day of March, 2022, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN: ABSENT:
Date:
Shanae S. Smith, City Clerk
EXHIBIT I
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE ASSOCIATED PROPERTIES
FOR ZONE CHANGE 21-001
THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF
PALMDALE, IN THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
PARCEL 1: APN: 3004-012-023
BEING PARCEL A AS SHOWN ON THAT CERTAIN CERTIFICATE OF
COMPLIANCE FOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT, RECORDED SEPTEMBER 16, 2016 AS NO. 20161125330 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY,
CALIFORNIA, ALSO BEING A POTION OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 6 NORTH, RANGE 12 WEST, IN THE CITY OF
PALMDALE, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING
TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT OF SAID LAND APPROVED BY THE SURVEYOR GENERAL ON SEPTEMBER 3, 1855, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 28.
TOGETHER WITH THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 28.
EXCEPT THERE FROM SAID SOUTH HALD 50% MINERAL, OIL, GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES BELOW THE DEPTH OF 500 FEET OF SAID
LAND BUT WITHOUT ANY RIGHT OF ENTRY UPON THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND OF WITHIN SAID TOP 500 FEET FOR ANY PURPOSES AS RESERVED IN
DEEDS FROM LEO AUER AND MARIE AUER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, RECORDED MAY 6, 1966 AS DOCUMENT NO. 990, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
PARCEL 1A:
AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS, EGRESS FOR ROAD AND UTILITY PURPOSES OVER THE WEST 30 FEET OF THE SOUTH HALF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 6 NORTH, RANGE 12 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO
BASE AND MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT OF SAID LAND AS CREATED IN DEED RECORDED JUNE 27, 1977 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 77-678921.
Exhibit I
PARCEL 2: APN: 3004-012-003
THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 6 NORTH, RANGE 12 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND
MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OF PALMDALE, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF, EXCEPT ANY PORTION THERE THAT MAY BE INCLUDED IN ESTABLISHED PUBLIC ROAD.
PARCEL 3: APN: 3004-012-018
AN EASEMENT FOR ROAD AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES OVER THE WEST 30 FEET OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 6 NORTH, RANGE 12 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, IN THE
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT OF SAID LAND, AND OVER THE NORTH 30 FEET OF THE WEST HALD OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 2.
EXHIBIT II
AERIAL MAP FOR ZONE CHANGE 21-001
EXHIBIT IV
EXISTING ZONE
EXHIBIT V
PROPOSED ZONE
City Council Staff Report
DATE: MARCH 2, 2022
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DISTRICT: All
SUBJECT: ADOPT URGENCY ORDINANCE NO . U-1582, AMENDING
SECTION 16.40.120 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO INCREASE THE
INITIAL TERM OF TENTATIVE MAPS BY ONE YEAR, AND TO
INCREASE THE TERM OF CERTAIN PHASED TENTATIVE MAPS
BY ONE ADDITIONAL YEAR
ISSUE
Adopt Urgency Ordinance No. U-1582, amending Section 16.40.120 of the Municipal Code to increase the initial term of tentative maps by one year, and to increase the term of certain phased tentative maps by one additional year.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Receive public testimony;
2. Approve the introduction of proposed Urgency Ordinance No. U-1582; and,
3. Adopt Urgency Ordinance No. U-1582 amending Section 16.40.120 of the Municipal Code to increase the initial term of tentative maps by one year, and to increase the term of certain phased tentative maps by one additional year.
BACKGROUND
Palmdale Municipal Code section 16.40.120 currently establishes that tentative maps have an initial term of 36 months. Effective January 1, 2022, Government Code 66452.6 was amended to allow cities to increase this term to 48 months.
DISCUSSION
The past two years has seen substantial volatility in the construction industry . Supply chain issues, cost increases, labor shortages, and continually changing COVID -19 related mandates has caused uncertainty in the development community . As a result, several subdivision projects which the city previously approvedwere put on hold. As the Report to Mayor and City Council
Re: Ordinance No. U-1582
March 2, 2022
economy begins to recover, there is a renewed interest in reviving projects, however several tentative maps are set to expire this year.
To accelerate the development of much needed housing and to substantiate the City’s business-friendly reputation, staff recommends amending Palmdale Municipal Code (PMC) Section 16.40.120 to extend certain expiring tentative maps. Under the proposed ordinance, tentative maps that are set to expire in 2022 will be extended for an additional 12 months. The time extension would only apply to projects that have already utilized all available discretionary map extensions. The additional time will allow applicants to complete all the requirements necessary to approve and record final maps. The intent is that this provision would be in effect for the remainder of the year and would sunset on December 31, 2022.
Urgency:
There are several tentative maps that are set to expire starting in March 2022. If amendments are not approved, then the applicants will be required to again apply to the city to implement a substantially similar project and for no discernable added benefit.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this item.
STRATEGIC PLAN
Goal III: Invest in infrastructure to improve community livability.
C. Plan and maintain safe and attractive neighborhoods, streets, facilities, and public spaces with exciting programming that promotes active fun for everyone.
Prepared by: Luis Garibay, Director of Economic and
Community Development
Certified as to availability of Funds: Keith Kang, Finance Manager Approved by: Ronda Perez, Acting City Manager
Approved as to form: Christopher Beck, City Attorney
ATTACHMENTS
Proposed Ordinance No. 1582
CITY OF PALMDALE
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA
ORDINANCE NO. U-1582
AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALMDALE, AMENDING
SECTION 16.40.120 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO INCREASE THE
INITIAL TERM OF TENTATIVE MAPS BY ONE YEAR, AND TO
INCREASE THE TERM OF CERTAIN PHASED TENTATIVE MAPS BY
ONE ADDITIONAL YEAR
WHEREAS, Palmdale Municipal Code section 16.40.120 currently establishes that tentative maps have an initial term of 36 months; and effective January 1, 2022, Government Code 66452.6 was amended to allow cities to increase this term to 48 months; and
WHEREAS, The last number of years has seen substantial volatility in the construction industry, and such volatility has been the cause of delays for various subdivision projects which the city previously approved, and which projects are in the public interest, and should have their map terms extended, but for which such projects have already utilized all available discretionary map extensions; and WHEREAS, If such maps are not timely extended, then the applicants will be required to again apply to the city to implement a substantially similar project, and for no discernable added benefit; and
WHEREAS, It is in the public interest to grant such tentative maps an additional year to finalize their maps; and
WHEREAS, Effective January 1, 2022, Government Code section 66452.6 was amended to mandate that cities allow specified tentative maps that have completed phases be extended for an additional 12 months.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALMDALE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Revised Subsection A of Section 16.40.120. Subsection A of Palmdale Municipal Code 16.40.120 is hereby revised as follows through December 31, 2022, after which time such subsection shall revert to how it existed prior to the effective date of this ordinance and shall have no effect on maps which did not use such provision:
(A) The initial approval or conditional approval of a tentative map shall expire 36 months from its adoption by the Planning Commission or, if appealed, from the City Council’s action. If, however, all of the following are true for a particular tentative map, then then the initial or conditional approval of the tentative map shall instead expire 48 months from its adoption by the Planning Commission, or if appealed, from the City Council’s action:
(1) the term of the tentative map has already been extended for the maximum number of Ordinance No. U-1582
years authorized by section 16.40.140; (2) the applicant has not previously, and cannot in the future, use the extension authorized by subsection C of this section. Expiration of an approved or conditionally approved tentative map shall terminate all proceedings and no final or parcel map of all or any portion of the real property included within the tentative map shall be filed without processing a new tentative map in accordance with the provisions of this title. Once a complete and timely filing of a final map, as described in PMC 16.70.050, has been made by the subdivider to the City Engineer, the final processing, approving and recording may lawfully occur after the date of expiration of the tentative map; however, should the City Engineer determine that a complete and timely filing has not been received, the tentative map shall expire on its expiration date, unless a complete and timely filing is received prior to that date.
SECTION 2. Revised Subsection C of Section 16.40.120. Subsection C of Palmdale Municipal Code 16.40.120 of the Palmdale Municipal Code is hereby revised as follows:
(C) If the filing of multiple final maps is authorized under the tentative map approval, pursuant to PMC 16.40.130, and the Director of Planning and the City Engineer determine that a condition of approval of the tentative map is an expenditure in the amount specified under Government Code Section 66452.6(a), including specified adjustments for inflation, for public improvements of public rights-of-way which are outside and/or abut the boundary of the property to be subdivided and reasonably relate to the development of that property, then the tentative map will be extended for 36 months 48 months upon the timely filing of the first phase of the final map within the original approval period of the tentative map.
(1) Except as provided in subsection (C)(2) of this section, the timely filing of subsequent final maps authorized under the tentative map approval pursuant to this subsection shall extend the life of the tentative map for a period of 36 months 48 months from the date of the previously filed final map; provided, that such extensions shall not extend the tentative map more than 10 years. However, a tentative map on property subject to a development agreement may be extended for the period of time provided for in the agreement.
(2) If two or more final maps from the same tentative map are filed within any period of 12 consecutive months, the applicant shall only be entitled to one automatic extension, pursuant to Government Code Section 66452.6(a) and subsection (C) of this section. Notwithstanding anything else in this subsection C to the contrary, the term of any tentative map extended under this subsection C shall not be extended except to the extent required by state law. See Government Code 66452.6(a).
(3) A request by a subdivider for the granting of an automatic time extension shall be processed as an administrative review of the tentative map to reflect conditions of approval, and shall be subject to any fees required by City Council resolution.
SECTION 3. Intent of December 31, 2022 Sunset. It is the intent of the Council that section 1 of this ordinance be implemented in the following manner. It is intended that applicants which use this provision have their maps extended for the full 12 months, Ordinance No. U-1582
notwithstanding the removal of the provision from the municipal code on January 1, 2023.
For example, if a map would have expired on December 31, 2022, but for this ordinance, and such map qualifies for the one year extension authorized by this ordinance, then such map shall be extended through December 31, 2023. If, however, if a map is set to expire on January 1, 2023, then because Section 1 would not apply, such map would not qualify for any one year extension, and shall continue to expire on January 1, 2023.
SECTION 4. CEQA. The City Council finds the approval of this ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to: (a) CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(c)(2) because the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment; (b) CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3) because it has no potential for causing a significant effect on the environment; and under (c) 15378(c)(2), because CEQA does not apply to procedure making. This ordinance merely changes the period of time under which construction is allowed – it does not authorize any construction which would not already have been analyzed under CEQA.
SECTION 5. Urgency. This Ordinance shall take effect immediately because of the need for the preservation of the public peace, health and safety for the reasons set forth in the Whereas clauses in the beginning of this Ordinance.
SECTION 6. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional. [continued on next page]
Ordinance No. U-1582
SECTION 7. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and shall cause this ordinance to be published or posted as required by law.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this ___ day of __________, 2022. ______________________________
Steven D. Hofbauer, Mayor
Approved to form: :
ATTEST:
_______________________________ _______________________________ Christopher L. Beck Shanae S. Smith, City Clerk
City Attorney
I, Shanae S. Smith, City Clerk of Palmdale, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was duly introduced, passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Palmdale at a regular meeting of said Council held on the ______ day of ________, 2022 by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES: ______________________________________________________________ ABSTAIN: ______________________ ABSENT: _____________________________ Date: ____
Shanae S. Smith, City Clerk
City Council Staff Report
DATE: MARCH 2, 2022
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT, CITY CLERK DIVISION
CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE
DISTRICT: ALL
SUBJECT: ORDINANCE NO. 1579, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PALMDALE ADOPTING A MAP DESCRIBING VOTING
DISTRICT BOUNDARIES AND AMENDING CHAPTER4.10 OF TITLE
4 OF THE PALMDALE MUNICIPAL CODE
ISSUE
Adopt Ordinance No. 1579 adopting a map describing voting district boundaries and amending Chapter 4.10 of Title 4 of the Palmdale Municipal Code.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Introduce Proposed Ordinance No. 1579;
2. Receive public testimony regarding Proposed Ordinance No. 1579; and
3. Adopt Ordinance No. 1579
BACKGROUND
Every ten years, California cities with by -district election systems must use new census data to review and, if needed redraw district lines to refl ect how local populations have changed. This process, called redistricting, ensures all districts have nearly equal population. Pursuant to California Elections Code §21622, the redistricting process for the City of Palmdale must be completed by April 17, 2022.
The City of Palmdale adopted its current district boundaries in 2016 based on 2010 census data, as required by law. The district boundaries must now be reconsidered using the 2020 census data and in compliance with the Fair and Inclusive Redistricting for Municipalities and Political Subdivisions (“ FAIR MAPS”) Act, which was adopted by the California legislature as AB 849 and took effect January 1, 2020. AB 1276 is a subsequent clean-up of AB 849 and took effect on January 1, 2021.
Report to Mayor and City Council
Re: Ordinance No. 1579
March 2, 2022
FAIR MAPS ACT and REDISTRICTING REQUIREMENTS:
Under the Act, the City shall draw and adopt district boundaries using the following criteria, in the listed order of priority (See, California Elections Code §21621, et. al.):
1) Comply with the federal requirements of equal population and the Voting Rights Act;
2) Geographically contiguous;
3) Undivided neighborhoods and “communities of interest” (socio-economic geographic areas that should be kept together);
4) Easily identifiable boundaries;
5) Geographic compactness (do not bypass one group of people to get to a more distant group of people); and,
6) Shall not favor or discriminate against a political party.
Once the prioritized criteria are met, other traditional districting principles can be considered, such as:
1) Minimize the number of voters delayed from voting in 2022 to 2024; 2) Respect voters’ choices / continuity in office; and
3) Future population growth.
By law, the City must hold at least four public hearings that enable community members to provide input on the drawing of district boundary maps:
At least one public hearing must be held before the City Council or Advisory Redistricting Commission draws a draft map or maps of the proposed district boundaries;
At least two of the public hearings shall be held after the City Council or Advisory Redistricting Commission has drawn a draft map or maps of the proposed district boundaries; and
At least one public hearing or public workshop shall be held on a Saturday, on a Sunday, or after 6 p.m. on a weekday Monday through Friday.
To increase the accessibility of these hearings, the City of Palmdale must additionally take the following steps:
At least one public hearing or public workshop shall be held on a Saturday, on a Sunday, or after 6 p.m. on a weekday Monday through Friday; Public hearings shall be accessible to persons with disabilities; and If a public hearing is consolidated with a regular or special meeting of the council that includes other substantive agenda items, the public hearing must begin at a fixed time regardless of its order on the agenda.
Report to Mayor and City Council
Re: Ordinance No. 1579
March 2, 2022
In accordance with the requirements of the FAIR MAPS Act, the City of Palmdale conducted the following Public Hearings and Community Workshops:
September 14, 2021 First Meeting Public Hearing
Council Chamber, 38300 Sierra Highway,
Suite B, Palmdale
October 12, 2021 District 1 Community Workshop
Holiday Inn, 38630 5th Street West,
Palmdale
October 16, 2021 District 4 Community Workshop
Knight High School – Theater, 37423 70th
Street East, Palmdale
October 16, 2021 District 3 Community Workshop
Palmdale Oasis Park Recreation Center –
Gymnasium, 3850 East Avenue S,
Palmdale
October 25, 2021 District 2 Community Workshop
Marie Kerr Park Recreation Center, 2723-
A West Rancho Vista Blvd., Palmdale
November 3, 2021 Second Public Hearing
City Council Meeting in the Council
Chamber, 38300 Sierra Highway, Suite B,
Palmdale
January 12, 2022 Third Public Hearing
City Council Meeting in the Council
Chamber, 38300 Sierra Highway, Suite B,
Palmdale
February 2, 2022 Fourth Public Hearing
City Council Meeting in the Council
Chamber, 38300 Sierra Highway, Suite B,
Palmdale
February 16, 2022 Fifth Public Hearing
City Council Meeting in the Council
Chamber, 38300 Sierra Highway, Suite B,
Palmdale
DISCUSSION
On February 16, 2022, the City Council held the Fifth Public Hearing to discuss and consider the three proposed district boundary maps (ALVA Map, Public Map 208, NDC Purple Map) recommended by the Advisory Redistricting Commission. After receiving input from the public, the City Council voted to adopt the NDC Pink map and directed staff to return to the March 2, 2022 City Council meeting to introduce Ordinance No. 1579, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Palmdale Adopting a Map Report to Mayor and City Council
Re: Ordinance No. 1579
March 2, 2022
Describing Voting Boundaries and Amending Chapter 4.10 of Title 4 of the Palmdale Municipal Code.
FISCAL IMPACT
Proposed Ordinance No. 1579 does not have any direct financial impact.
STRATEGIC PLAN
Goal I: Maintain effective public safety and protection for life, property, and the environment.
C. Use a variety of methods to communicate timely, useful, and trusted information about city programs, services, and policies.
Goal II: Ensure long-term fiscal health of the City and maintain funding for services.
C. Involve and expand engagement to enhance public oversight and transparency.
Prepared by: Andrew S. Pletcher, Deputy City Attorney
Certified as to availability of Funds: Keith Kang, Finance Manager Approved by: Ronda Perez, Interim City Manager
Approved as to form: Christopher Beck, City Attorney
ATTACHMENTS
1. Ordinance No. 1579
CITY OF PALMDALE
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA
ORDINANCE NO. 1579
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALMDALE
ADOPTING A MAP DESCRIBING VOT ING DISTRICT BOUNDARIES AND AMENDING CHAPTER 4.10 OF TITLE 4 OF THE PALMDALE MUNICIPAL CODE
WHEREAS, California Elections Code Section 21601 requires that fo llowing each decennial federal census, and using that census as a basis, the City Council shall, if necessary, adjust the boundaries of any o r all of the Council districts of the City so that the districts shall be as nearly equ al in population as may be and shall co mply with the applicable provisions of federal and state legal or other requirements;
WHEREAS, on September 27, 2021, the California Statewide Database provided the City of Palmdale (“City”) with an official population estimate of 170,394; and
WHEREAS, throughout the foregoing process, the City engaged in public outreach and engagement, as required by California Elections Code Section 21608; and
WHEREAS, on September 14, 2021, pursuant to California Elections Code Section 21627.1, the Palmdale Advisory Redistricting Commission held the First Public Hearing on the redistricting process where the public was invited to provide input for the redrawing of election district boundaries; and
WHEREAS, on November 3, 2021, pursuant to California Elections Code Section 21627.1, the City Co uncil held a Second Public Hearing on the redistricting process where the public was invited to provide input for the redr awing of election district boundaries; and
WHEREAS, on January 12, 2022, pursuant to California Elections Code Section 21627.1, the City Council held a Third Publ ic Hearing on the redistricting process where the public was invited to provide input for the red rawing of election district bou ndaries; and
WHEREAS, on February 2, 2022, the City Council he ld a Fourth Public Hearing to review the two proposed district boundary maps recommended by the Advisory Redistricting Commission and receive input from the public; and
WHEREAS, on February 16, 2022, the City Council he ld a Fifth Public Hearing to review t he three proposed district boundary map s recommended by the Advisory Redistricting Commission, re ceive input from the public, and adopt a map to bring back formal adoption; and
Ordinance No. 1579
WHEREAS, the City Council now desires to adopt this Ordinance No. 1579 adopting the map as attached hereto describing the boundaries of each City Council district in the City to comply with the timeline proscribed by California Election Code Section 21622.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALMDALE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The above recita ls are true and corre ct and incorporated herein by this reference.
SECTION 2. The adopted map describing the City of Palmdale ’s boundaries following the 2020 federal decennial census in accordance with California Elections Code Section 21601 is Exhibit “A” attached hereto.
SECTION 3. Section 4.10.0 10 of the Palmda le Municipal Code is amended in its entirety to read as follows:
4.10.010 District Boundaries/Map
The following distri ct boundaries are set forth in a map attached to the ordinance codified in this chapter as Exhibit “A” and incorporated into this chapter by this reference.
SECTION 4. Section 4.10.020 of the Palmdale Municipal Code i s deleted in its entirety.
SECTION 5. Severability. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase in this Ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be unconstitutional or invalid or ineffective by any court of co mpetent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity or effectiveness of the remaining portions of this Ordinance or any part thereof. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragr aph, sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one (1) or more subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional, or invalid, or ineffective, provided the basic purposes of this Ordinance and the benefits to the City and the public are not substantially impaired.
SECTION 6. The City Council finds the approval of this ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to CEQA Gui delines Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. Alternatively, the City Council finds the approval of this Ordinance No. 1579
ordinance is not a project under CEQA Regulation Section 15061 (b)(3) because it has no potential for causing a significant effect on the environment.
SECTION 7. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and shall cause this ordinance to be published or posted as required by law.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 2nd day of March, 2022.
________________________________
Approved as to form: Steven D. Hofbauer, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________ ________________________________ Christopher Beck Shanae S. Smith, City Clerk
City Attorney
I, Shanae s. Smith, City Clerk of Palmdale, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was duly introduced, passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Palmdale at a regular meeting of said Council held on the ___ ___ day of _____________, 20__ _ effective on the ____ day of ___________, 20___ by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:___________________________________________________________
ABSTAIN:______________________ABSENT:___________________________
Date:
Shanae S. Smith, City Clerk
Ordinance No. 1579
Exhibit A
NDC Pink Map
Map of City of Palmdale District Boundaries
following Federal Decennial Census of 2020
Ordinance No. 1579
District 1 2 3 4 Total
2020 2020 Census (Adjusted) 42,089 42,379 43,295 42,631 170,394 Deviation from ideal -510 -220 697 33 1,206
% Deviation -1.20% -0.52% 1.64% 0.08% 2.83%
% Hisp 65% 40% 70% 72% 62%
% NH White 13% 34% 13% 8% 17%
% NH Black 16% 13% 12% 15% 14%
% Asian-American 4% 9% 3% 3% 5%
Total 21,499 26,041 24,004 21,884 93,428
% Hisp 58% 32% 58% 60% 52%
% NH White 21% 44% 23% 15% 27%
% NH Black 14% 13% 13% 21% 15%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 5% 10% 5% 3% 6%
Total 19,336 26,475 21,264 19,964 87,039
% Latino est. 54% 32% 58% 61% 50%
% Spanish-Surnamed 49% 29% 52% 56% 45%
% Asian-Surnamed 1% 3% 1% 1% 2%
% Filipino-Surnamed 1% 2% 1% 2% 2%
% NH White est. 30% 52% 28% 18% 33%
% NH Black 18% 14% 15% 23% 17%
Total 12,760 20,737 14,632 13,223 61,352
% Latino est. 52% 30% 57% 61% 48%
% Spanish-Surnamed 48% 28% 52% 56% 44%
% Asian-Surnamed 2% 3% 1% 1% 2%
% Filipino-Surnamed 1% 2% 1% 2% 2%
% NH White est. 31% 53% 29% 17% 35%
% NH Black est. 17% 13% 14% 22% 16%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 38,088 38,180 39,923 39,703 155,894 age0-19 34% 29% 32% 37% 33%
age20-60 53% 53% 54% 51% 53%
age60plus 13% 18% 14% 12% 14%
immigrants 26% 20% 27% 26% 25%
naturalized 50% 70% 57% 51% 56%
english 54% 71% 50% 48% 56%
spanish 43% 21% 45% 49% 39%
asian-lang 2% 5% 3% 2% 3%
other lang 1% 4% 2% 1% 2%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less
than Very Well" 20% 11% 22% 24% 19%
hs-grad 52% 49% 53% 52% 52%
bachelor 8% 18% 8% 8% 11%
graduatedegree 2% 10% 3% 2% 4%
Child in Household child-under18 48% 41% 45% 57% 47%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 59% 63% 60% 56% 60%
income 0-25k 27% 10% 18% 19% 18%
income 25-50k 24% 16% 25% 26% 23%
income 50-75k 17% 13% 22% 20% 18%
income 75-200k 30% 51% 33% 33% 37%
income 200k-plus 2% 11% 2% 2% 4%
single family 67% 95% 90% 87% 85%
multi-family 33% 5% 10% 13% 15%
rented 51% 23% 32% 34% 35%
owned 49% 77% 68% 66% 65%
Total population data from the California adjustment to the 2020 Decennial Census. Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database. Latino voter registration and turnout data are Spanish-surname counts adjusted using Census Population Department undercount estimates. NH White and NH Black registration and turnout counts estimated by NDC.
Citizen Voting Age Pop., Age, Immigration, and other demographics from the 2015-2019 American Community Survey and Special Tabulation 5-year data.
Housing Stats
Household Income
Education (among those
age 25+)
2020 Total Pop
City of Palmdale - NDC Pink Map
Language spoken at home
Immigration
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Age
Voter Registration (Nov
2020)
Voter Turnout (Nov
2020)
Ordinance No. 1579
City Council Staff Report
DATE: MARCH 2, 2022
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CITY ATTORNEY/FINANCE/CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE
DISTRICT: ALL
SUBJECT: ORDINANCE NO. 1577, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALMDALE TO PREVENT THE
USE OF MANDATORY COVID -19 VACCINATIONS AND THE
USE OF VACCINE PASSPORTS
ISSUE
Adoption of Ordinance No. 15 77 banning the use of vaccine mandates in the City of Palmdale.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council receive public testimony and consider the Ordinance.
BACKGROUND
At the City Council meeting on February 16, 2022, Council directed staff to return with this item at the March 2, 2022, meeting of the City Council.
DISCUSSION
The impacts and effects of passing a ban on vaccine mandates can be considered based on both present vaccine mandates, and those that may exist in the future. As such, while we are able to analyze present and possible effects of passing this Ordinance, it is speculative to determine the true risks, harms and losses associated with this Ordinance as new laws and mandates may be passed from an authority authorized to do so, which may conflict with the within Ordinance. The proposed tenants of the Ordinance ar e discussed separately below:
SECTION 1:
No Palmdale government entity, or its subdivisions, agents, or assigns shall be permitted to issue vaccine passports, vaccine passes, or other standardized documentation for the purpose of certifying an individual ’s COVID -19 vaccination status to a third party, or otherwise publish or share any individual’s COVID-19 vaccination record or similar health information.
Report to Mayor and City Council
Re: Vaccine Mandate Ban
March 2, 2022
At present, it does not immediately seem that this section of the Ordinance would conflict with existing law, however, that is not to say that an entity (federal, state or local) will not pass a law or mandate requiring the City of Palmdale to act in this capacity. At present, and as discussed below, the health authority for the City of Palmdale is the Director of the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health, Dr. Barbara Ferrer, and Los Angeles County Health Officer, Dr. Muntu Davis.
SECTION 2:
Businesses in Palmdale are prohibited from requiring patrons or customers to provide any documentation certifying COVID-19 vaccination or post-transmission recovery to gain access to, entry upon, or service from the business.
This section would likely conflict with conflict with the Order of the Health Officer from the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health requiring proof of vaccination to attend bars, breweries, wineries, and distilleries. This order is set to be amended on February 25, 2022, that will allow businesses to forgo mask requirements after a patron has demonstrated proof of vaccination.
This section would likely conflict with the Palmdale Municipal Code that establishes the Los Angeles County Health Code as the Health Code of the City of Palmdale. California Health and Safety Code 101460 requires that every governing body of a city shall appoint a public health officer, except when the city has made other arrangements…for the county to exercise the same powers and duties within the city, as are conferred upon city health officers by law.
In the case of the City of Palmdale, the public health officer is County Health Officer Dr.
Muntu Davis, under the Direction of Director Ferrer, as described above, and legislating in this space would likely conflict with a previously delegated authority.
SECTION 3.
The City and all businesses in Palmdale shall not require the COVID-19 vaccination, regular COVID-19 testing or screening as a requirement of employment.
Over the past several months, a variety of laws mandating vaccination as a requirement of employment have been both presented, stricken down, or sustained. The United States Occupational Safety and Health Administration order requiring vaccination or testing by all employers with over 100 employees was stricken down by the United States Supreme Court on January 13, 2022. However, the United States Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services order requiring vaccination for health care workers at facilities that received Medicare of Medicaid remains in effect.
Report to Mayor and City Council
Re: Vaccine Mandate Ban
March 2, 2022
If the within Ordinance were to pass, the City may have a law that would cause employers within the City to choose between violating the federal mandate, the County of Los Angeles mandate, or this Ordinance of the City of Palmdale.
To resolve the discrepancies between the City of Palmdale Ordinance banning vaccine mandates and future or previously issued vaccine mandate requirements, it is conceivable that the City of Palmdale could be subject to litigation from any group or organization covered by another mandate, including employers, labor unions, advocacy groups, individuals, or other similarly situated plaintiff. Likewise, the City of Palmdale could be subject of litigation from entities that have issued the vaccine mandates, including the federal government, the County of Los Angeles, and/or the State of California.
SECTION 4.
All businesses must comply with this order to be eligible for permits, grants or contracts issued or funded through the City of Palmdale.
This section would likely involve similar issues to section 2 above as it involves legislating in a sphere that has previously been delegated to the County of Los Angeles.
FISCAL IMPACT
Potentially significant with exposures to litigation as described above, exposure to damages, attorney fees, and potential loss of funding form the federal, state and local level.
Prepared by: Christopher Beck, City Attorney
Certified as to availability of Funds: Keith Kang, Finance Manager Approved by: Ronda Perez, Acting City Manager
Approved as to form: Christopher Beck, City Attorney
ATTACHMENTS
None
CITY OF PALMDALE
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA
ORDINANCE NO. 1577
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALMDALE TO PREVENT THE USE OF MANDATORY COVID-19 VACCINATIONS AND THE USE
OF VACCINE PASSPORTS
WHEREAS, autonomy over one's body is a human right enshrined in 5th and 14th Amendments; and
WHEREAS, multiple vaccine options are freely available to those who choose them for personal Protection, and
WHEREAS, individual COVID-19 vaccination records are private health information which should not be shared by mandate; and
WHEREAS, individuals may have infection-acquired immunity, and others are unable to obtain a COVID-19 vaccination due to health, religious, or other reasons; and WHEREAS, so-called COVID-19 vaccine passports reduce individual freedom and will harm patient privacy; and
WHEREAS, requiring so-called COVID-19 vaccine passports for taking part in everyday life – such as attending a sporting event, patronizing a restaurant, or going to a movie theater – would create two classes of citizens based on vaccination; and WHEREAS, it is necessary to protect the fundamental rights and privacies of people and allow the free flow of commerce within the City; and WHEREAS, the residents of the City of Palmdale have signed a petition requesting the City Council take action on this matter; and
WHEREAS, the City of Palmdale Charter states its purpose is to "restore to our community the historic principles of self-governance inherent in the doctrine of home- rule"; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PALMDALE DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. No Palmdale government entity, or its subdivisions, agents, or assigns shall be permitted to issue vaccine passports, vaccine passes, or other standardized documentation for the purpose of certifying an individual’s COVID-19 vaccination status to a third party, or otherwise publish or share any individual’s COVID- 19 vaccination record or similar health information.
SECTION 2. Businesses in Palmdale are prohibited from requiring patrons or customers to provide any documentation certifying COVID-19 vaccination or post- transmission recovery to gain access to, entry upon, or service from the business.
SECTION 3. The City and all businesses in Palmdale shall not require the COVID-19 vaccination, regular COVID-19 testing or screening as a requirement of employment.
SECTION 4. All businesses must comply with this order to be eligible for permits, grants or contracts issued or funded through the City of Palmdale.
SECTION 5. Severability. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase in this Ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be unconstitutional or invalid or ineffective by any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity or effectiveness of the remaining portions of this Ordinance or any part thereof. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one (1) or more subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional, or invalid, or ineffective, provided the basic purposes of this Ordinance and the benefits to the City and the public are not substantially impaired.
SECTION 6. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause this Ordinance to be published or posted as required by law.
SECTION 7. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect 30 days after its adoption.
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 2nd day of March, 2022. ________________________________
Approved as to form: Steven D. Hofbauer, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________ ________________________________ Christopher L. Beck Shanae S. Smith, City Clerk
City Attorney
I, Shanae S. Smith, City Clerk of Palmdale, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was duly introduced, passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Palmdale at a regular meeting of said Council held on the ______ day of _____________, 20___ effective on the ____ day of ___________, 20___ by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:___________________________________________________________ ABSTAIN:______________________ ABSENT: ___________________________ Date:
Shanae S. Smith, City Clerk
City Council Staff Report
DATE: March 2, 2022
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
DISTRICT: ALL
SUBJECT: APPROVE NOMINATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE BOARD OF
DIRECTORS OF VISIT PALMDALE
ISSUE
Approve nominations for appointment to the Board of Directors of Visit Palmdale.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council approve one (1) nominee for the Visit Palmdale Board of Directors.
BACKGROUND
On October 5, 2021, the Palmdale City Council authorized the creation of the Palmdale Tourism Improvement District (PTID) with the adoption of Resolution No. CC 2021 -096.
A PTID is a partnership between the City and hotels in Palmdale to create additional tourism and visitor opportunities that both visitors and residents can enjoy. The benefits an improvement district provides can come in a variety of forms such as signature events, enhancing current tourism attractions, development of additional destinations and infrastructure improvements. An increase in tourism and business travel positively impacts hotels, restaurants, and local small businesses.
Visit Palmdale is the governing board of the PTID. The board will have the responsibility of managing the services and programs provided by the PTID in Palmdale.
The Board of Directors for Visit Palmdale is made up of seven (7) directors; four (4) from Palmdale businesses who represent the PTID, one (1) City Councilmember, one (1) City staff person, and one (1) person who represents tourism and the non -lodging hospitality sector in Palmdale. This mirrors the formation of Destination Lancaster’s Board of Directors when the board was first established. Each member is appointed for a three (3) year term.
Report to Mayor and City Council
Re: Visit Palmdale Approve Nomination
March 2, 2022
DISCUSSION
The City Council is responsible for the appointment of the three individuals to the Visit Palmdale Board of Directors. Per the Visit Palmdale Bylaws, the Directors shall be appointed by the Mayor, subject to the approval of a majority of the City Council.
On December 23, 2021 , the City posted the vacancy for an at -large board member for the Visit Palmdale Board of Directors on the City Website and through a public notice in the AV Press. At the January 19, 2022 City Council meeting, the Council voted to extend the public member vacancy until February 7, 2022 and appointed two (2) of the three (3) positions. The City Council and the City staff representatives were selected for the board.
The City Council is required to appoint the public member to the board.
The following public members applied and met the minimum requirements for the public member position on the Visit Palmdale Board of Directors:
1. Donald Hoperich
2. Falakika Moore
3. Samantha Schmitz
Appointment of the nominees would allow Visit Palmdale to complete essential tasks that require approval of a full board.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this item.
STRATEGIC PLAN
Goal IV: Maintain a desirable community where everyone wants to live, work and play.
D. Develop and maintain diverse programs and events that inspire growth, pride and lifelong learning.
Prepared by: Luis Gonzalez, Economic Development
Coordinator
Certified as to availability of Funds: Keith Kang, Finance Manager Approved by: Ronda Perez, Acting City Manager
Approved as to form: Christopher Beck, City Attorney
City Council Staff Report
DATE: MARCH 2, 2022
TO HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT
CITY CLERK DIVISION
DISTRICT: ALL
SUBJECT: APPROVE DISTRICT 4 ALTERNATE MEMBER NOMINATION FOR
APPOINTMENT TO THE MEASURE AV OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE
ISSUE
Approve District 4 Alternate Member nomination for appointment to the Measure AV Oversight Committee.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council approve alternate member nomination for one of the following applicants for appointment to the Measure AV Oversight Committee for the remaining balance of a two-year term set to expire April 2023:
1. Glenn Anthony Flood 2. Engel Thedford
3. Aaron M. Stickel 4. Marmissi Masters
5. Alenna Schofield 6. Jonathan Flores
7. Colby Estes 8. Michael Wong
9. Leslie Vickers
BACKGROUND
At the General Municipal Election held on November 3, 2020, voters approved the enactment of a local ¾ cent transaction and use tax in the City of Palmdale. The measure allows for local control of sales tax dollars, ensure s long-term fiscal sustainability, and allows the City to continue to fund reliable essential services for the community. The revenues and expenditures from the tax are to be regularly reviewed by a citizens advisory committee to ensure the funds collected are expended for the purposes specified in the Measure AV Ballot language and to provide enhanced transparency and public participation. The City Council shall appoint a seven -member committee and by resolution, adopt guidelines for the duties of a citizens oversight committee, later name d Measure AV Oversight Committee (Committee”).
Report to Mayor and City Council
Re: Approval of District 4 Alternate Member
March 2, 2022
DISCUSSION
On April 6, 2021, seven (7) Committee members and seven (7) alternate members were appointed to the Committee. The Committee has an opportunity to review, comment and make recommendations on proposed expenditures which may include, but not be limited to, receiving semi-annual reports from City staff each fiscal year on revenues and expenditures from the tax imposed by Ordinance No. 1549.
On December 15, 2021, Eric Ohlsen was appointed as the Regular Member to District 4, replacing Maribel Briseno, who had accepted full-time employment with the City. The Office of the City Clerk received subsequent notice from District 4 Alternate Member Roger Villasenor, indicating his resignation form the alternate position due to personal reasons.
On January 19, 2022, the City Council directed the City Clerk to extend the recruitment period for the vacancy to afford additional members of the community the opportunity to apply to fill the position. A Notice of Vacancy was advertised in the Antelope Valley Press on January 20, 2022, posted, and made available on the City’s website. Staff received four (4) applications by the February 8, 2022, deadline, in addition to the five (5) applicants presented to Council at the January 19, 2022, City Council meeting.
On February 16, 2022, this item was tabled to the March 2, 2022, City Council meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this item, as the alternate member position does not receive compensation for service.
STRATEGIC PLAN
Goal II: Ensure long-term fiscal health of the City and maintain funding for services.
C. Involve and expand engagement to enhance public oversight and transparency.
Prepared by: Shanae Smith, City Clerk
Certified as to availability of Funds: Keith Kang, Finance Manager Approved by: Ronda Perez, Acting City Manager
Approved as to form: Christopher Beck, City Attorney
ATTACHMENTS
1. Ordinance No. 1561
2. Measure AV By-laws
CITY
OF
PALMDALE
COUNTY
OF
LOS
ANGELES
,
CALIFORNIA
ORDINANCE
NO
.
1561
AN
ORDINANCE
OF
THE
CITY
COUNCIL
OF
THE
CITY
OF
PALMDALE
AMENDING
THE
PALMDALE
MUNICIPAL
CODE
SECTION
2.08 .
030
REGARDING
APPOINTMENTS
TO
BOARDS
AND
COMMISSIONS
BY
THE
CITY
COUNCIL
WHEREAS
,
On
July
2 ,
2008
,
the
City
Council
passed
and
adopted
Ordinance
No
.
1357
that
amended
Section
2.08 of
the
Palmdale
Municipal
Code
(
PMC
)
.
WHEREAS
,
PMC
Section
2.08 .
030
governs
the
manner
in
which
appointments
are
made
to
boards
and
commissions
of
the
City
Council
.
WHEREAS
,
The
method
and
manner
of
appointments
pursuant
to
the
amended
PMC
2.08 .
030
is
such
that
the
mayor
is
responsible
for
all
appointments
to
said
boards
and
commissions
,
with
ratification
by
the
City
Council
.
WHEREAS
,
Under
the
PMC
2.08 .
030
,
the
mayor
is
to
nominate
all
persons
to
boards
and
commissions
,
and
there
is
no
‘
second
’
required
for
such
nomination
.
WHEREAS
,
Under
the
PMC
2.08 .
030
,
city
council
members
do
not
have
the
ability
to
nominate
persons
to
boards
and
commissions
.
THE
CITY
COUNCIL
OF
THE
CITY
OF
PALMDALE
DOES
ORDAIN
AS
FOLLOWS
:
SECTION
1 .
Amend
Palmdale
Municipal
Code
Section
2.08 .
030
Repeal
and
replace
Palmdale
Municipal
Code
Section
2.08 .
030
to
read
as
follows
:
PMC
2.08 .
030
:
Appointments
to
Boards
,
Commissions
,
and
Committees
Unless
otherwise
specifically
provided
in
this
code
or
by
State
Law
,
the
City
Council
shall
make
all
appointments
to
boards
,
commissions
and
committees
of
the
City
as
follows
unless
otherwise
formed
by
Resolution
:
Ordinance
No
.
1561
Page
2 of
4 A
.
City
Council
boards
,
commissions
and
committees
shall
consist
of
a
minimum
of
five
members
,
of
whom
shall
be
nominated
by
each
City
Councilmember
and
the
Mayor
,
subject
to
approval
by
the
City
Council
for
appointment
.
All
members
shall
be
voting
members
of
the
board
,
commission
,
or
committee
.
No
member
shall
be
a
member
of
the
City
Council
.
It
is
preferable
that
City
Councilmember
’
s
appointee
reside
within
the
Councilmember
’
s
district
,
however
,
is
not
required
when
subject
matter
expertise
is
desirable
.
The
Mayor
may
nominate
an
individual
that
represents
the
City
at
large
whom
may
reside
in
any
district
.
Members
serve
at
the
pleasure
of
the
City
Council
and
may
be
removed
prior
to
the
expiration
of
their
term
by
a
vote
of
a
majority
of
the
members
of
the
City
Council
.
B
.
All
board
and
commission
vacancies
shall
be
advertised
,
seeking
volunteers
willing
and
desiring
to
be
appointed
to
fill
such
vacancies
.
Any
person
seeking
to
be
so
appointed
must
complete
and
submit
the
city
volunteer
application
,
together
with
any
other
information
requested
by
the
City
Council
as
appropriate
for
a
specific
board
or
commission
.
C
.
All
such
applications
shall
be
provided
to
the
Mayor
and
City
Council
for
review
,
who
shall
,
at
a
regularly
scheduled
City
Council
meeting
,
nominate
,
from
among
such
applicants
,
the
persons
whom
the
Mayor
and
a
City
Councilmember
desires
to
appoint
by
making
a
motion
which
need
not
be
seconded
^
for
each
such
appointment
.
D
.
If
the
nomination
by
the
Mayor
and
City
Councilmember
is
approved
by
a
majority
vote
of
the
City
Council
,
the
nominating
City
Councilmember
may
then
proceed
to
appoint
the
person
to
the
board
or
commission
under
consideration
.
E
.
If
the
specific
nomination
by
the
Mayor
and
/
or
City
Councilmember
is
not
approved
by
a
majority
vote
of
the
City
Council
,
the
City
Council
will
nominate
,
by
motion
,
a
different
candidate
until
someone
is
approved
by
majority
vote
of
the
City
Council
for
the
position
under
consideration
.
F
.
All
members
of
boards
,
commissions
and
committees
serve
at
the
pleasure
of
the
City
Council
and
are
subject
to
removal
by
a
majority
vote
of
the
City
Council
.
SECTION
2 .
Severability
.
If
any
section
,
subsection
,
subdivision
,
paragraph
,
sentence
,
clause
or
phrase
in
this
Ordinance
or
any
part
thereof
is
for
any
reason
held
to
be
unconstitutional
or
invalid
or
ineffective
by
any
court
of
competent
jurisdiction
,
such
decision
shall
not
affect
the
validity
or
effectiveness
of
the
remaining
portions
of
this
Ordinance
or
any
part
thereof
.
The
City
Council
hereby
declares
that
it
would
have
passed
each
section
,
subsection
,
subdivision
,
paragraph
,
sentence
,
clause
or
phrase
thereof
irrespective
of
the
fact
that
any
one
(
1 )
or
more
subsections
,
subdivisions
,
paragraphs
,
Ordinance
No
.
1561
Page
3 of
4 sentences
,
clauses
or
phrases
be
declared
unconstitutional
,
or
invalid
,
or
ineffective
,
provided
the
basic
purposes
of
this
Ordinance
and
the
benefits
to
the
City
and
the
public
are
not
substantially
impaired
.
SECTION
3 .
The
City
Council
finds
the
approval
of
this
ordinance
is
not
subject
to
the
California
Environmental
Quality
Act
(
"
CEQA
"
)
pursuant
to
CEQA
Guidelines
Sections
15060
(
c
)
(
2 )
(
the
activity
will
not
result
in
a
direct
or
reasonably
foreseeable
indirect
physical
change
in
the
environment
)
and
15060
(
c
)
(
3 )
(
the
activity
is
not
a
project
as
defined
in
Section
15378
)
of
the
CEQA
Guidelines
,
California
Code
of
Regulations
,
Title
14 ,
Chapter
3 ,
because
it
has
no
potential
for
resulting
in
physical
change
to
the
environment
,
directly
or
indirectly
.
Alternatively
,
the
City
Council
finds
the
approval
of
this
ordinance
is
not
a
project
under
CEQA
Regulation
Section
15061
(
b
)
(
3 )
because
it
has
no
potential
for
causing
a
significant
effect
on
the
environment
.
SECTION
4 .
The
City
Clerk
shall
certify
to
the
adoption
of
this
ordinance
and
shall
cause
this
ordinance
to
be
published
or
posted
as
required
by
law
.
PASSED
,
APPROVED
and
ADOPTED
this
2 nd
day
of
March
2021
^
.
Steven
D
.
Hofbauer
,
Mayor
Approved
as
to
form
:
ATTEST
/
>
m
mtF
-
Shanae
S
.
Smith
,
City
Clerk
Christopher
Beck
City
Attorney
,
Ordinance
No
.
1561
Page
4 of
4 I
,
Shanae
s
.
Smith
,
City
Clerk
of
Palmdale
,
California
,
do
hereby
certify
that
the
foregoing
Ordinance
was
duly
introduced
,
passed
,
approved
,
and
adopted
by
the
City
Council
of
the
City
of
Palmdale
at
a
regular
meeting
of
said
Council
held
on
the
2 nd
day
of
,
20 21
effective
on
the
1 st
day
of
April
March
,
2021
_
by
the
following
roll
call
vote
:
AYES
:
Bettencourt
,
Carrillo
,
Loa
,
Bishop
Hobauer
NOES
:
None
None
ABSTAIN
:
ABSENT
:
/
z
Date
:
/
Shanae
S
.
Smith
,
City
Clerk
CITY OF PALMDALE
MEASURE AV OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE
BYLAWS
ARTICLE I – ESTABLISHMENT AND PURPOSE
A. Name. Official name of the committee shall be Measure AV Oversight Committee (the “Committee”)
B. Compensation. No compensation shall be provided for attendance to Committee meetings. Reimbursement shall only be given for expenses actually incurred in connection to serving on the Committee.
C. Establishment. Measure AV, approved in November 2020, calls for the establishment of a committee to ensure that all funds from the measure are appropriately used.
D. Purpose. The purpose of this Committee is set forth in Measure AV. (Protecting Palmdale's long-term financial stability; maintaining essential city services; repairing streets/potholes; addressing homelessness; maintaining 911 emergency response; keeping public areas safe/clean for all; retaining local businesses; protecting local water sources; maintaining veterans, senior, mental health, community programs; by establishing a ¾-cent sales tax; requiring citizen oversight, public spending disclosures; all funds used locally in Palmdale). These Bylaws are specifically made subject to the applicable provisions of Measure AV as to the duties and rights of the Committee. The Committee is subject to the Ralph M. Brown Public Meetings Act of the State of California and shall conduct its meetings in accordance with the provisions thereof.
E. Administrative Support. The City shall give all necessary administrative support to the Committee, as is consistent with the Committee’s purpose.
F. Duties. The duties of this Committee are:
a. To ensure that all funds from the three-quarters cent sales tax are spent in accordance with Measure AV.
b. To prepare an annual written report setting forth the purposes for which Measure AV funds were expended in the preceding year and the amount spent in each category.
ARTICLE II – POSITIONS AND TERMS
A. Committee Members. Committee Members shall consist of seven (7) members and (7) alternatives.
B. Committee Additions and Subtractions. The City Council may, by unanimous decision, vote to add or subtract the number of members on the Committee, but shall not go lower than five (5) total members. The Committee shall always remain at an odd number.
C. Term Length. Each member of the Committee shall be appointed for a two (2) year term.
D. Term Limit. Committee members are limited to a three (3) term limit for serving on the Committee.
E. Committee Vacancy. Should a vacancy arise from a member resigning or other matters the following shall happen:
a. Replacement will be filled by a Committee alternate member. b. A Replacement for that alternate shall be picked by the City Council and voted in by majority vote.
c. If a vacancy is filled and there is greater than a year left on the term, it shall count as a full term for the appointed Committee Member’s term limit.
If less than a year remains on the term, it shall not count towards the Committee Member’s term limit.
F. Forfeiture. Should any Committee member miss three (3) consecutive Committee meetings without any prior consent or notice to the Committee, they shall forfeit their membership on the Committee. All forfeited Committee positions shall be subject to Article II, Section E, for the purpose of their vacancy.
G. Chair. The Committee shall appoint one member to serve as the Chair of the Committee by a simple majority vote. The Chair shall preside at all meetings of the Committee. The Chair is responsible for keeping order and decorum during the Committee’s meetings.
H. Vice-Chair. The Committee shall appoint one member to serve as the Vice-Chair of the Committee by simple majority vote. The Vice-Chair shall perform the duties of the chair in the absence or incapacity of the Chair, until such time as a new Chair is selected or appointed. Should both the Chair and Vice-Chair be absence or incapacitated, the Committee shall vote by simple majority to appoint an interim Chair and Vice-Chair for the purpose of that current meeting and any subsequent meetings until either the Chair or Vice-Chair are able to return to their duties.
I. Staff Secretary. City staff shall appoint one member to serve as the Staff Secretary of the Committee. The Staff Secretary shall keep the minutes of all official meetings of the Committee, which shall be open for inspection by any member of the public. The Staff Secretary shall sign reports and correspondence for the Committee, along with setting meeting dates; providing agendas to each Committee member prior to each official meeting. The Staff Secretary shall inform Committee members of all available data gathered by City staff pertinent to each item on said agenda. The Staff Secretary shall inform Committee members of the time and place of any special meeting. The Staff Secretary shall make available to the Committee all correspondence addressed to the Committee.
ARTICLE III – MEETINGS
A. Rules. All meetings will fall under rules set by the Ralph M. Brown Act (Cal. Gov’t Code §54950 et seq.) (“Brown Act”).
B. Meeting Dates. Use of set dates and locations shall be established to meet no less than four (4) times a year. These set dates can be changed by resolution as needed.
C. Specials Meetings and Emergency. Special Meetings can be called by the Chair or Vice Chair with five days prior notice. Emergency meetings can be called as needed.
D. Open and Public Meetings. All meetings concerning all Committee actions and deliberations shall be open and allow for anyone in the public to attend.
E. Closed Sessions. Closed sessions are allowed during regular or special meeting as is needed by circumstance and permitted by law.
F. Public Hearings. Public hearings are to be conducted during regular or special meetings of the Committee.
G. Agenda. An agenda shall be published to the public and sent out to each Committee member no less than seventy-two (72) hours before the meeting takes place. All agendas should include time, date, and location that the meetings take place along with the type of meeting (Regular, Special, or Emergency). Any items not on the agenda will be placed in the non-agenda items portion of the meeting.
H. Minutes. Minutes of the proceedings of the Committee and all documents received and reports issued shall be a matter of public record and be made available on an Internet website maintained by the Committee.
ARTICLE IV. – CONDUCT OF MEETINGS
A. Order of Business. The regular order of business shall be:
1. Call to Order
2. Approval of Prior Meetings Minutes
3. Consideration and Action of Agenda Items
4. Non-Agenda Items
5. Public Comment
6. Adjournment
The order of business can be modified as needed.
B. Parliamentary Procedure. All proceedings before the Committee may be guided by the rules of parliamentary procedure set forth in Robert’s Rules of Order, but failure to follow Robert’s Rules of Order shall not affect the validity of any action or motion duly taken or adopted by the Committee at any lawfully held meeting.
C. Presentations to the Committee. Any person desiring to address the Committee shall be requested, when recognized by the Chair, to give his or her name and address for the record. The Chair may, in the interest of facilitating the business of Committee, set in advance of the presentation of testimony reasonable time limits for oral presentations. Persons may be required to submit written testimony in lieu of oral testimony if the Chair determines that a reasonable opportunity for oral presentations has been provided, and in such a case, the matter may be continued to a later date to allow a reasonable time for such submittals to occur.
D. Attendance. Members shall be considered present at the Committee meeting if they are there physically, on the phone, or using a video conferencing application.
ARTICLE V. – VOTING AND QUORUM
A. Roll Call Vote. A roll call vote may be required in voting upon any motion of the Committee in the discretion of the Chair.
B. Quorum. A majority of the currently appointed members of the Committee shall constitute a quorum for the purpose of conducting its business and exercising its powers and for all other official purposes, except that less than a quorum may adjourn from time to time until a quorum is obtained.
C. Number of Votes Required for Action. All actions require a motion and a second. No action or recommendation of the Committee shall be valid and binding unless a quorum is present and the motion is approved a simple majority of the members present. Each member shall have one vote. No votes may be cast by proxy. Tie votes shall be considered as denial of the motion.
D. Conflicts of Interest. The Committee shall be subject to conflict of interest in accordance with the Fair Political Practices Act. City Councilpersons shall not vote for any person who presents a conflict of interest with them.
E. Motion to Reconsider. The Committee may reconsider a matter during the meeting at which the vote was taken, provided all members who were present when the matter was discussed and voted upon are still present, all persons who addressed the Committee regarding the matter are still present, and the motion to reconsider is made by a member who voted with the prevailing side. A motion for reconsideration shall have precedence over every motion except a motion to adjourn. A final vote on any matter may also be placed on any future agenda for reconsideration by the Committee or any member of the Committee at the meeting at which the actions was taken or at any later time. Any interested person may request that an action be reconsidered, provided that such a request must be in writing and filed with the Palmdale City Clerk within ten calendar days of the action of the Committee.
ARTICLE VI. - AMENDMENTS.
Any amendment to these Bylaws shall be approved by a simple majority vote of the Committee of the entire Committee.
City Council Staff Report
DATE: MARCH 2, 2022
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT
CITY CLERK DIVISION
DISTRICT: ALL
SUBJECT: APPROVE NOMINATIONS FOR APPOINTMENTS OF THRE E
COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND ONE ALTERNATE COMMITTEE
MEMBER TO THE HUMAN RIGHTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
ISSUE
Approve nominations for appointment of three (3) Committee Members and one (1) Alternate Committee Member to the Human Rights Advisory Committee.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends pursuant to Chapter 2.55 of the Palmdale Municipal Code, that the City Council approve nominations for appointments to the Human Rights Advisory Committee (“Committee”) as follows:
1.Appoint three (3) individuals to serve as Committee Members on the Human Rights Advisory Committee for the balance of the term to expire on April 30, 2023; and
2.Appoint one (1) individual to serve as the Alternate Committee Member on the Human Rights Advisory Committee for the balance of the term to expire on April 30,2023.
1. Glen Abram 6.Mary Hansel
2. Breanna Chico 7. Daniel Hendricks
3. Catherine Daughtry 8.Rudolpho Perez
4. Darby Edwards 9. Shushanik Petrosyan
5. Lorraine Hadden 10. Stephanie Rodgers
BACKGROUND
At the September 2, 2020, City Council meeting, the City Council approved Ordinance No. 1550, adding Chapter 2.55 to the Palmdale Municipal Code creating the Palmdale Report to Mayor and City Council
Re: Approval of Human Rights Advisory Committee Appointments March 2, 2022
Human Rights Advisory Committee (“Committee”). The purpose of creating the Committee is to promote continued dialogue with various segments of the community in the hopes of building and maintaining a more inclusive community.
DISCUSSION
Under Ordinance No. 1550, the Committee was created by the City Council to act in an advisory capacity to the Mayor, City Council and City Manager. The Committee would provide advice and actionable recommendations to the Mayor, City Council and City Manager in their efforts to build and maintain an inclusive community by cultivating awareness, increasing diversity, encouraging sensitivity, promoting equity, and improving relations with various segments of the community. The City’ s membership to the Human Rights Advisory Committee shall consist of seven (7) members and one alternate Committee Member, for a 2-year term to expire on April 30, 2023.
Since its inception, the Committee has met and conducted multiple meetings. The City Council had also approved a new Diversity Equity and Inclusion Specialist position in 2021 to aid the Committee in carrying out its mission. Over the course of the past three months, City Clerk had received notice of resignations from three (3) Committee members and one (1) Alternate Committee member, citing personal reasons, as well as scheduling conflicts.
A Notice of Vacancy was advertised in the AV Press for interested citizens to apply. The Communications Division also provided a press release to the public, including the application submittal deadline. The Classified Ad and the job posting were made available on the City’s website. Staff received ten (10) applications prior to the February 17, 2022, 6:00 p.m. submittal deadline. The appointment process was consistent with Chapter 2.55 of the Palmdale Municipal Code and Ordinance No. 1550, Ordinance No. 1561, and the Human Rights Advisory Committee By-laws, referenced in Attachments 1, 2 and 3.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this item, as member positions do not receive compensation for service.
STRATEGIC PLAN
Goal II: Ensure long-term fiscal health of the City and maintain funding for services.
C. Involve and expand engagement to enhance public oversight and transparency.
Prepared by: Shanae Smith, City Clerk
Report to Mayor and City Council
Re: Approval of Human Rights Advisory Committee Appointments March 2, 2022
Certified as to availability of Funds: Keith Kang, Finance Manager Approved by: Ronda Perez, Acting City Manager
Approved as to form: Christopher Beck, City Attorney
ATTACHMENTS
1. Ordinance No. 1550
2. Ordinance No. 1561
3. Human Rights Advisory Committee By-laws
CITY OF PALMDALE
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA
ORDINANCE NO. 1550
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALMDALE ADDING CHAPTER 2,55 TO THE PALMDALE MUNICIPAL CODE
CREATING THE PALMDALE HUMAN RIGHTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palmdale desires to establish the Palmdale Human Rights Advisory Committee to promote continued dialogue with various segments of the community in the hopes of building and maintaining a more inclusive community; and
WHEREAS, the City Council discussed and agreed to move forward with the creation of a Human Rights Advisory Committee at the August 4th Council meet¡ng.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALMDALE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. A new Chapter 2.55, entitled "Palmdale Human Rights Advisory Committee" is added to the Palmdale Municipal Code to read as follows:
Chapter 2.55
Palmdale Human Rights Advisory Committee
2.55.010. Establishment and Purpose. A Human Rights Advisory Commiitee is created by the City Council of the City of Palmdale to act in an advisory capacity to the Mayor, City Council and City Manager. The purpose of the Palmdale Human Rights Advisory Committee is to provide advice and actionable recommendations to the Mayor, City Council and City Manager in their effods to build and maintain an inclusive community by cultivating awareness, increasing diversity, encouraging sensitivity, promoting equity, and improving relations with various segments of the community.
2.55.020. Membership. The Palmdale Human Rights Advisory Committee shall have seven (7) Members. All Committee Members shall be appointed pursuant to Section 2.08.030 of the Palmdale Municipal Code.
Ordinance No. 1550
2.55.030. Term of Office. The term of each Committee Member shall be two (2) years, commencing on the date of appointment. A Committee Member may be reappointed for additional terms. All Committee Members serve at the pleasure of the Mayor and Clty Council. Any vacancy on the Committee shall be filled pursuant to Section 2.08.030 of the Palmdale Municipal Code. 2,55.040. Qualifications. The Mayor and Council shall strive to approve Committee Members with experience in any of the following areas: education; housing; employment; race relations; social equity; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTO) rights; gender equality; civil rights; and the rights of any other minority or historically marginalized communities.
SECTION 2. Severabilitv. lf any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase in this Ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be unconstitutional or invalid or ineffective by any coutt of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity or effectiveness of the remaining portions of this Ordinance or any part thereof. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one (1) or more subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional, or ínvalid, or ineffective, provided the basic purposes of this Ordinance and the benefits to the City and the public are not substantially impaired.
CITY
OF
PALMDALE
COUNTY
OF
LOS
ANGELES
,
CALIFORNIA
ORDINANCE
NO
.
1561
AN
ORDINANCE
OF
THE
CITY
COUNCIL
OF
THE
CITY
OF
PALMDALE
AMENDING
THE
PALMDALE
MUNICIPAL
CODE
SECTION
2.08 .
030
REGARDING
APPOINTMENTS
TO
BOARDS
AND
COMMISSIONS
BY
THE
CITY
COUNCIL
WHEREAS
,
On
July
2 ,
2008
,
the
City
Council
passed
and
adopted
Ordinance
No
.
1357
that
amended
Section
2.08 of
the
Palmdale
Municipal
Code
(
PMC
)
.
WHEREAS
,
PMC
Section
2.08 .
030
governs
the
manner
in
which
appointments
are
made
to
boards
and
commissions
of
the
City
Council
.
WHEREAS
,
The
method
and
manner
of
appointments
pursuant
to
the
amended
PMC
2.08 .
030
is
such
that
the
mayor
is
responsible
for
all
appointments
to
said
boards
and
commissions
,
with
ratification
by
the
City
Council
.
WHEREAS
,
Under
the
PMC
2.08 .
030
,
the
mayor
is
to
nominate
all
persons
to
boards
and
commissions
,
and
there
is
no
‘
second
’
required
for
such
nomination
.
WHEREAS
,
Under
the
PMC
2.08 .
030
,
city
council
members
do
not
have
the
ability
to
nominate
persons
to
boards
and
commissions
.
THE
CITY
COUNCIL
OF
THE
CITY
OF
PALMDALE
DOES
ORDAIN
AS
FOLLOWS
:
SECTION
1 .
Amend
Palmdale
Municipal
Code
Section
2.08 .
030
Repeal
and
replace
Palmdale
Municipal
Code
Section
2.08 .
030
to
read
as
follows
:
PMC
2.08 .
030
:
Appointments
to
Boards
,
Commissions
,
and
Committees
Unless
otherwise
specifically
provided
in
this
code
or
by
State
Law
,
the
City
Council
shall
make
all
appointments
to
boards
,
commissions
and
committees
of
the
City
as
follows
unless
otherwise
formed
by
Resolution
:
Ordinance
No
.
1561
Page
2 of
4 A
.
City
Council
boards
,
commissions
and
committees
shall
consist
of
a
minimum
of
five
members
,
of
whom
shall
be
nominated
by
each
City
Councilmember
and
the
Mayor
,
subject
to
approval
by
the
City
Council
for
appointment
.
All
members
shall
be
voting
members
of
the
board
,
commission
,
or
committee
.
No
member
shall
be
a
member
of
the
City
Council
.
It
is
preferable
that
City
Councilmember
’
s
appointee
reside
within
the
Councilmember
’
s
district
,
however
,
is
not
required
when
subject
matter
expertise
is
desirable
.
The
Mayor
may
nominate
an
individual
that
represents
the
City
at
large
whom
may
reside
in
any
district
.
Members
serve
at
the
pleasure
of
the
City
Council
and
may
be
removed
prior
to
the
expiration
of
their
term
by
a
vote
of
a
majority
of
the
members
of
the
City
Council
.
B
.
All
board
and
commission
vacancies
shall
be
advertised
,
seeking
volunteers
willing
and
desiring
to
be
appointed
to
fill
such
vacancies
.
Any
person
seeking
to
be
so
appointed
must
complete
and
submit
the
city
volunteer
application
,
together
with
any
other
information
requested
by
the
City
Council
as
appropriate
for
a
specific
board
or
commission
.
C
.
All
such
applications
shall
be
provided
to
the
Mayor
and
City
Council
for
review
,
who
shall
,
at
a
regularly
scheduled
City
Council
meeting
,
nominate
,
from
among
such
applicants
,
the
persons
whom
the
Mayor
and
a
City
Councilmember
desires
to
appoint
by
making
a
motion
which
need
not
be
seconded
^
for
each
such
appointment
.
D
.
If
the
nomination
by
the
Mayor
and
City
Councilmember
is
approved
by
a
majority
vote
of
the
City
Council
,
the
nominating
City
Councilmember
may
then
proceed
to
appoint
the
person
to
the
board
or
commission
under
consideration
.
E
.
If
the
specific
nomination
by
the
Mayor
and
/
or
City
Councilmember
is
not
approved
by
a
majority
vote
of
the
City
Council
,
the
City
Council
will
nominate
,
by
motion
,
a
different
candidate
until
someone
is
approved
by
majority
vote
of
the
City
Council
for
the
position
under
consideration
.
F
.
All
members
of
boards
,
commissions
and
committees
serve
at
the
pleasure
of
the
City
Council
and
are
subject
to
removal
by
a
majority
vote
of
the
City
Council
.
SECTION
2 .
Severability
.
If
any
section
,
subsection
,
subdivision
,
paragraph
,
sentence
,
clause
or
phrase
in
this
Ordinance
or
any
part
thereof
is
for
any
reason
held
to
be
unconstitutional
or
invalid
or
ineffective
by
any
court
of
competent
jurisdiction
,
such
decision
shall
not
affect
the
validity
or
effectiveness
of
the
remaining
portions
of
this
Ordinance
or
any
part
thereof
.
The
City
Council
hereby
declares
that
it
would
have
passed
each
section
,
subsection
,
subdivision
,
paragraph
,
sentence
,
clause
or
phrase
thereof
irrespective
of
the
fact
that
any
one
(
1 )
or
more
subsections
,
subdivisions
,
paragraphs
,
Ordinance
No
.
1561
Page
3 of
4 sentences
,
clauses
or
phrases
be
declared
unconstitutional
,
or
invalid
,
or
ineffective
,
provided
the
basic
purposes
of
this
Ordinance
and
the
benefits
to
the
City
and
the
public
are
not
substantially
impaired
.
SECTION
3 .
The
City
Council
finds
the
approval
of
this
ordinance
is
not
subject
to
the
California
Environmental
Quality
Act
(
"
CEQA
"
)
pursuant
to
CEQA
Guidelines
Sections
15060
(
c
)
(
2 )
(
the
activity
will
not
result
in
a
direct
or
reasonably
foreseeable
indirect
physical
change
in
the
environment
)
and
15060
(
c
)
(
3 )
(
the
activity
is
not
a
project
as
defined
in
Section
15378
)
of
the
CEQA
Guidelines
,
California
Code
of
Regulations
,
Title
14 ,
Chapter
3 ,
because
it
has
no
potential
for
resulting
in
physical
change
to
the
environment
,
directly
or
indirectly
.
Alternatively
,
the
City
Council
finds
the
approval
of
this
ordinance
is
not
a
project
under
CEQA
Regulation
Section
15061
(
b
)
(
3 )
because
it
has
no
potential
for
causing
a
significant
effect
on
the
environment
.
SECTION
4 .
The
City
Clerk
shall
certify
to
the
adoption
of
this
ordinance
and
shall
cause
this
ordinance
to
be
published
or
posted
as
required
by
law
.
PASSED
,
APPROVED
and
ADOPTED
this
2 nd
day
of
March
2021
^
.
Steven
D
.
Hofbauer
,
Mayor
Approved
as
to
form
:
ATTEST
/
>
m
mtF
-
Shanae
S
.
Smith
,
City
Clerk
Christopher
Beck
City
Attorney
,
Ordinance
No
.
1561
Page
4 of
4 I
,
Shanae
s
.
Smith
,
City
Clerk
of
Palmdale
,
California
,
do
hereby
certify
that
the
foregoing
Ordinance
was
duly
introduced
,
passed
,
approved
,
and
adopted
by
the
City
Council
of
the
City
of
Palmdale
at
a
regular
meeting
of
said
Council
held
on
the
2 nd
day
of
,
20 21
effective
on
the
1 st
day
of
April
March
,
2021
_
by
the
following
roll
call
vote
:
AYES
:
Bettencourt
,
Carrillo
,
Loa
,
Bishop
Hobauer
NOES
:
None
None
ABSTAIN
:
ABSENT
:
/
z
Date
:
/
Shanae
S
.
Smith
,
City
Clerk
CITY OF PALMDALE
HUMAN RIGHTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
BYLAWS
ARTICLE I – ESTABLISHMENT AND PURPOSE
A. Name. Official name of the committee shall be Human Rights Advisory Committee (the “Committee”)
B. Compensation. No compensation shall be provided for attendance to committee meetings. Reimbursement shall only be given for expenses actually incurred in connection to serving the Committee.
C. Establishment. The Human Rights Advisory Committee was created in September of 2020, in response to the direction of City Council establishing a committee to promote continued dialogue with various segments of the community in the hopes of building and maintaining a more inclusive community.
D. Purpose. The committee is to provide advice and actionable recommendations to the Mayor, City Council and City Manager in their efforts to build and maintain an inclusive community by cultivating awareness, increasing diversity, encouraging sensitivity, promoting equity, and improving relations with various segments of the community.
E. Administrative Support. The City shall give the necessary administrative support to the Committee, as is consistent with the Committee’s Purpose.
F. Duties.
A. Advise the City Manager and City Council on policy and programs related to diversity, equity, and inclusion.
B. Promote best practices in diversity and inclusion.
C. Meet with and develop effective relationships with key stakeholders regarding the City’s diversity efforts.
D. Support opportunities to celebrate rich traditions and diverse cultures in the City.
ARTICLE II – POSITIONS AND TERMS
A. Committee Members. Committee Members shall consist of seven (7) members and (1) alternative.
B. Committee Additions and Subtractions. The City Council may, by unanimous decision, vote to add or subtract the number of members on the Committee, but shall not go lower than five (5) total members. The Committee shall always remain at an odd number.
C. Term Length. Each member of the Committee shall be appointed for a two (2) year term.
D. Term Limit. Committee members are limited to a three (3) term limit for serving on the Committee.
E. Committee Vacancy. Should a vacancy arise from a member resigning or other matters the following shall happen.
a. Replacement will be filled by a Committee alternate member. b. A Replacement for that alternate shall be picked by the City Council and voted in by majority vote.
c. If a vacancy is filled and there is greater than a year left on the term, it shall count as a full term for the appointed Committee Member’s term limit. If less than a year remains on the term, it shall not count towards the Committee Member’s term limit.
F. Forfeiture. Should any Committee member miss three (3) consecutive Committee meetings without any prior consent or notice to the Committee, they shall forfeit their membership on the Committee. All forfeited Committee positions shall be subject to Article II, Section E, for the purpose of their vacancy.
G. Chair. The Committee shall appoint one member to serve as the Chair of the Committee by a simple majority vote. The Chair shall preside at all meetings of the Committee. The Chair is responsible for keeping order and decorum during the Committee’s meetings.
H. Vice-Chair. The Committee shall appoint one member to serve as the Vice-Chair of the Committee by simple majority vote. The Vice-Chair shall perform the duties of the chair in the absence or incapacity of the Chair, until such time as a new Chair is selected or appointed. Should both the Chair and Vice-Chair be absence or incapacitated, the Committee shall vote by simple majority to appoint an interim Chair and Vice-Chair for the purpose of that current meeting and any subsequent meetings until either the Chair or Vice-Chair are able to return to their duties.
I. Staff Secretary. City staff shall appoint one member to serve as the Staff Secretary of the Committee. The Staff Secretary shall keep the minutes of all official meetings of the Committee, which shall be open for inspection by any member of the public. The Staff Secretary shall sign reports and correspondence for the Committee, along with setting meeting dates; providing agendas to each Committee member prior to each official meeting. The Staff Secretary shall inform Committee members of all available data gathered by City staff pertinent to each item on said agenda. The Staff Secretary shall inform Committee members of the time and place of any special meeting. The Staff Secretary shall make available to the Committee all correspondence addressed to the Committee.
ARTICLE III – MEETINGS
A. Rules. All meetings will fall under rules set by the Ralph M. Brown Act (Cal. Gov’t Code §54950 et seq.) (“Brown Act”).
B. Meeting Dates. Use of set dates and locations shall be established to meet no less than four (4) times a year. These set dates can be changed by resolution as needed.
C. Special Meetings and Emergency. Special Meetings can be called by the Chair or Vice Chair with five days prior notice. Emergency meetings can be called as needed.
D. Open and Public Meetings. All meetings concerning all Committee actions and deliberations shall be open and allow for anyone in the public to attend.
E. Closed Sessions. Closed sessions are allowed during regular or special meeting as is needed by circumstance and permitted by law.
F. Public Hearings. Public hearings are to be conducted during regular or special meetings of the Committee.
G. Agenda. An agenda shall be published to the public and sent out to each Committee member no less than seventy-two (72) hours before the meeting takes place. All agendas should include time, date, and location that the meetings take place along with the type of meeting (Regular, Special, or Emergency). Any items not on the agenda will be placed in the non-agenda items portion of the meeting.
H. Minutes. Minutes of the proceedings of the Committee and all documents received and reports issued shall be a matter of public record and be made available on an Internet website maintained by the Committee.
ARTICLE IV. – CONDUCT OF MEETINGS
A. Order of Business. The regular order of business shall be:
a. Call to Order
b. Approval of Prior Meetings Minutes
c. Consideration and Action of Agenda Items
d. Non-Agenda Items
e. Public Comment
f. Adjournment
g. The order of business can be modified as needed.
B. Parliamentary Procedure. All proceedings before the Committee may be guided by the rules of parliamentary procedure set forth in Robert’s Rules of Order, but failure to follow Robert’s Rules of Order shall not affect the validity of any action or motion duly taken or adopted by the Committee at any lawfully held meeting.
C. Presentations to the Committee. Any person desiring to address the Committee shall be requested, when recognized by the Chair, to give his or her name and address for the record. The Chair may, in the interest of facilitating the business of Committee, set in advance of the presentation of testimony reasonable time limits for oral presentations. Persons may be required to submit written testimony in lieu of oral testimony if the Chair determines that a reasonable opportunity for oral presentations has been provided, and in such a case, the matter may be continued to a later date to allow a reasonable time for such submittals to occur.
D. Attendance. Members shall be considered present at the Committee meeting if they are there physically, on the phone, or using a video conferencing application.
ARTICLE V. – VOTING AND QUORUM
A. Roll Call Vote. A roll call vote may be required in voting upon any motion of the Committee in the discretion of the Chair.
B. Quorum. A majority of the currently appointed members of the Committee shall constitute a quorum for the purpose of conducting its business and exercising its powers and for all other official purposes, except that less than a quorum may adjourn from time to time until a quorum is obtained.
C. Number of Votes Required for Action. All actions require a motion and a second. No action or recommendation of the Committee shall be valid and binding unless a quorum is present and the motion is approved a simple majority of the members present. Each member shall have one vote. No votes may be cast by proxy. Tie votes shall be considered as denial of the motion.
D. Conflicts of Interest. The Committee shall be subject to conflict of interest in accordance with the Fair Political Practices Act. City Councilpersons shall not vote for any person who presents a conflict of interest with them.
E. Motion to Reconsider. The Committee may reconsider a matter during the meeting at which the vote was taken, provided all members who were present when the matter was discussed and voted upon are still present, all persons who addressed the Committee regarding the matter are still present, and the motion to reconsider is made by a member who voted with the prevailing side. A motion for reconsideration shall have precedence over every motion except a motion to adjourn. A final vote on any matter may also be placed on any future agenda for reconsideration by the Committee or any member of the Committee at the meeting at which the actions was taken or at any later time. Any interested person may request that an action be reconsidered, provided that such a request must be in writing and filed with the Palmdale City Clerk within ten calendar days of the action of the Committee.
ARTICLE VI. - AMENDMENTS.
Any amendment to these Bylaws shall be approved by a simple majority vote of the Committee of the entire Committee.
City Council Staff Report
DATE: MARCH 2, 2022
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE
DISTRICT: ALL
SUBJECT: DISCUSS POTENTIAL MOVE TO FIVE COUNCIL DISTRICTS
AND ROTATING MAYOR
ISSUE
Council to provide direction to staff to produce a comprehensive report on the process, possibility, and method of moving to five Council districts and a rotating mayor?
RECOMMENDATION
Discuss the matter and direct staff as appropriate.
BACKGROUND
The City of Palmdale presently has four Council districts and a directly elected mayor.
At present, the Council and the City are in the process of completing statutorily required redistricting and should complete the process shortly.
DISCUSSION
If, on d iscussion of the Council, the Council agrees to direct staff to produce a comprehensive report on the process, possibility, and method of moving to five Council districts and a rotating mayor, staff will produce such report and return to Council.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action.
Report to Mayor and City Council
Re: Council Districts
March 2, 2022
STRATEGIC PLAN
Goal II: Ensure long-term fiscal health of the City and maintain funding for services.
C. Involve and expand engagement to enhance public oversight and transparency.
Prepared by: Christopher Beck, City Attorney
Certified as to availability of Funds: Keith Kang, Finance Manager Approved by: Ronda Perez, Acting City Manager
Approved as to form: Christopher Beck, City Attorney
ATTACHMENTS
None.
CITY OF PALMDALE
OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Clerk
FROM: Laura Bettencourt, Councilmember
SUBJECT: Monthly Informational Report – Events and Meetings DATE: March 2, 2022
During the period February 1, through February 28, 2022, I attended the following meetings and events:
February 2: Regular Council Meeting
February 7: Emergency Closed Session Meeting
February 16: City Council Workshop
February 23: Citizens Advisory Committee Meeting