Gloria Olmos, Mayor
Manuel Acosta, Mayor Pro Tem
Richard Angel, Councilmember
Hector Delgado, Councilmember
Gracie Retamoza, Councilmember
Rachel Barbosa, City Manager
Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk
Anthony R. Taylor, City Attorney
CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTH EL MONTE CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
May 10, 2022, 6:00 PM
1415 Santa Anita Avenue, South El Monte, CA 91733
***SPECIAL NOTICE REGARDING COVID-19***
On September 16, 2021, Governor Newsom signed AB 361, which modified the Brown Act to allow for teleconferencing participation at local legislative body public meetings during a proclaimed state of emergency. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54953(e) as amended by AB 361, City Council is authorized to hold public meetings via teleconferencing and to make public meetings accessible telephonically or otherwise electronically available to all members of the public seeking to observe and to address the local legislative body. Public participation will be allowed via the information below.
PUBLIC COMMENT
To participate during public comment via teleconference, see below:
Link: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/86581711880
Webinar ID: 865 8171 1880
Or Call In: 1 669 900 6833, when prompted, enter 86581711880#
LIVE STREAMING OF MEETINGS
The City of South El Monte live streams the City Council Meetings over the Internet at https://www.cityofsouthelmonte.org/129/City-Council-Agendas-Minutes after the meetings, recordings are immediately posted. NOTE: Your attendance at this public meeting may result in the streaming and recording of your image and/or voice.
AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, if you require a disability-related modification or accommodation to attend or participate in this meeting, including auxiliary aids or services, please call the City Clerk’s office at (626) 579-6540 ext. 3280 or ext. 3220 at least 72 hours prior to the meeting.
GENERAL COMMENT
Members of the public wishing to submit a general comment or a comment on an agenda item, can email [email protected] or call (626) 579-6540 ext. 3280 to leave a voicemail message. All comments received an hour before the scheduled meeting will be read during public comment and made part of the record.
MEETINGS
The City Council holds regular meetings on the second and fourth Tuesday of every month. Regular meetings start at 6 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1415 Santa Anita Avenue, South El Monte, California. Special and Adjourned Regular meetings start time are to be determined.
POSTING LOCATIONS OF AGENDA AND/OR CANCELLATION NOTICES Regular meeting agendas will be posted at least 72 hours before the meeting (GC 54954(a)(1)).
Agenda and Cancellation Notices can be viewed online and are also posted at the following three (3) locations: City Hall located at 1415 Santa Anita Avenue, Senior Center located at 1556 Central Avenue and the Community Center located at 1530 Central Avenue, South El Monte, California.
VIEWING OF AGENDA PACKETS
Full agenda packet can be viewed either at www.cityofsouthelmonte.org/129/CityCouncil-Agendas-Minutes or in the City Clerk’s Office during normal business hours Monday through Thursday 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Closed on Fridays and major holidays.
ISSUES RELATED TO AGENDA
For issues related to the agenda, including a disability-related accommodation necessary to participate in this meeting, please contact:
Donna G. Schwartz, CMC, City Clerk
Ph (626) 579-6540 ext. 3280
Cell (626) 274-4842
Paola Lara, Deputy City Clerk
Ph (626) 579-6540 ext. 3220
Cell (626) 374-1998
AGENDA BEGINS ON THE FOLLOWING PAGE
1. ROLL CALL
Councilmembers: Angel, Delgado, Retamoza, Mayor Pro Tem Acosta and Mayor Olmos
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Councilmember Gracie Retamoza
3. INVOCATION
Pastor Don Antelo, Calvary Chapel of South El Monte
4. PRESENTATIONS
4.a. Proclamation Proclaiming May 15-21, 2022, as National Public Works Week
4.b. Presentation of Plaque to the El Monte/South El Monte Chamber of Commerce, In Recognition of Their "100th Anniversary" and 57 Years of Partnership with the City of South El Monte
4.c. Presentation by SiFi Networks on FiberCity
5. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA AND WAIVER OF FULL READING OF
ORDINANCES
By motion of the City Council, this is the time to notify the public of any changes to the agenda, remove items from the consent calendar for individual consideration and/or rearrange the order of the agenda.
6. PUBLIC COMMENT
Speakers may provide public comments on any matter within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City Council, including items on the agenda. Each speaker will be limited to five minutes. Unless a majority of the Council objects, the Mayor may provide speakers more or less time to speak. All comments or queries shall be addressed to the Council as a body and not to any specific member thereof.
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2(a)(2), the Ralph M. Brown Act, no action or discussion by the City Council shall be undertaken on any item not appearing on the posted agenda, except to briefly provide information, ask for clarification, provide direction to staff, or schedule a matter for a future meeting.
7. CONSENT CALENDAR
Items on the consent calendar are considered to be routine and customary and are enacted by a single motion with the exception of items previously removed by a member of the City Council during "Approval of the Agenda" for individual consideration. Any items removed shall be individually considered immediately after taking action on the Consent Calendar.
7.a. – 7.c. next page.
CONSENT CALENDAR (CONTINUED)
7.a. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE REGULAR CITY
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 26, 2022
Staff is requesting approval of Minutes for the April 26, 2022 Regular City Council Meeting.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of April 26, 2022.
7.b. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 22-32, APPROVING WARRANTS FOR THE PERIOD OF APRIL 27, 2022,
THROUGH MAY 10, 2022
Authorizing payment of City expenditures for the period of April 27, 2022, through May 10, 2022 totaling $907,394.50.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council adopt Resolution No. 22-32, authorizing payment of City expenditures.
7.c. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 22-33,
PROCLAIMING A LOCAL EMERGENCY PERSISTS AND
AUTHORIZING THE USE OF REMOTE TELECONFERENCE MEETING
PROCEDURES BY THE CITY'S LEGISLATIVE BODIES AS
AUTHORIZED BY GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54953(e) ET SEQ.
FOR THE PERIOD OF MAY 10 THROUGH JUNE 8, 2022
On September 16, 2021, Governor Newsom signed AB 361 into law. AB 361 was made effective October 1, 2021. Pursuant to AB 361, staff recommends consideration of Resolution No. 22-33, proclaiming a local emergency persists and authorizing the use of remote meeting procedures by the City’s legislative bodies, which can include meetings held via a virtual platform (e.g. Zoom), for the period of May 10, 2022 through June 8, 2022.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council adopt Resolution No. 22-33, proclaiming a local emergency persists and authorizing the use of alternative meeting procedures by the City’s legislative bodies, such as utilizing a virtual platform (e.g. Zoom) for the period of May 10, 2022 through June 8, 2022.
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS - None
9. GENERAL BUSINESS
9.a. CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION CONCERNING
POTENTIAL FUTURE CANNABIS REGULATIONS AND TAXES
The City Attorney's Office has prepared this staff report to provide a discussion about the legal parameters that governs the City’s actions, as well as the history of the City’s regulations of cannabis. The City Attorney’s office seeks guidance on how to proceed.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council discuss the item and provide direction to City Staff about the Council's preferred option.
9.b. FACILITY FEE WAIVER REQUEST FROM EL MONTE/ SOUTH EL
MONTE JETS FOR THE USE OF THE SOUTH EL MONTE COMMUNITY
CENTER FACILITY, NEW TEMPLE PARK FIELDS, AND SHIVLELY
PARK FIELD
The El Monte/South El Monte Jets (Jets) are requesting a reservation fee waiver for the use of South El Monte Community Center Gym, Amphitheater, and Dance Room to host cheerleading practice, sports physicals, and season banquets. Additionally, the Jets are requesting to use the New Temple Park fields and Shively Park field to host football practices and games.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council discuss and consider the facility reservation fee waiver requested by the Jets in the amount of $14,060.00
10. COMMITTEE REPORTS, INCLUDING AB 1234 REPORTS
AB 1234, section 53232.3(d) requires Members of a legislative body to provide brief reports on meetings attended at the expense of the local agency (i.e., League of California Cities Conferences, ICSC conferences, etc.) at the next regular meeting of the legislative body.
11. CORRESPONDENCE
11.a. LETTER FROM SOUTH EL MONTE NATIONAL LITTLE LEAGUE (SEMNLL) REQUESTING A FEE WAIVER FOR THE LABOR COST TO
INSTALL ONE BASEBALL AND TWO SOFTBALL FIELD FENCES
The South El Monte National Little League is requesting to waive fees for the labor cost to install one baseball and two softball field fences at New Temple Park.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council discuss and consider the fee waiver request by SEMNLL for the labor cost of installing one baseball and two softball field fences in the amount of $1,150.00.
12. COUNCILMEMBERS’ AGENDA - None
13. CLOSED SESSION
13.a. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6
City Negotiator: City Manager
Employee Organizations: South El Monte Employees Association and the South El Monte Executive Management Team Association
14. ADJOURNMENT
Tuesday, May 24, 2022, at 6:00 p.m.
I Donna G. Schwartz, hereby certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing agenda was posted not less than 72 hours at the following locations: City of South El Monte City Hall, Senior Center and Community Center and made available at www.cityofsouthelmonte.org on this 5th day of May 2022.
City Clerk, CMC
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 4.a.
DATE: May 10, 2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
APPROVED BY: Rachel Barbosa, City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: Donna Schwartz, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Proclamation Proclaiming May 15-21, 2022, as National Public Works Week
SUMMARY:
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
FISCAL IMPACT:
DISCUSSION:
ATTACHMENT(S):
A. National Public Works Week
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 4.b.
DATE: May 10, 2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
APPROVED BY: Rachel Barbosa, City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: Dianna Gomez, Executive Assistant
SUBJECT: Presentation of Plaque to the El Monte/South El Monte Chamber of Commerce, In Recognition of Their "100th Anniversary" and 57 Years of Partnership with the City of South El Monte SUMMARY:
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
FISCAL IMPACT:
DISCUSSION:
ATTACHMENT(S):
None
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 4.c.
DATE: May 10, 2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
APPROVED BY: Rachel Barbosa, City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: Colby Cataldi, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Presentation by SiFi Networks on FiberCity
SUMMARY: Fiber Optic Network System for community benefit.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
FISCAL IMPACT: N/A
DISCUSSION: N/A
ATTACHMENT(S):
A. Presentation
FiberCity Investment ®
Connected Community
Changing the Status Quo
Driving Equality
* GigabitNow is just one of many ISPs using the FiberCity® network Pricing that Supports Everyone
Personalized Communication
Network Installation
Future-Proofed Network
Finished Product
Neighborhood Engagement
Community Awareness
Open Access Networks
PROJECT CAPITAL PRE-ALLOCATED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION
OPEN ACCESS NETWORK TO CREATE MULTI-ISP COMPETITION
CITYWIDE NETWORK SERVING EVERY PREMISE
LOW-COST GIGABIT BROADBAND PROGRAM SUPPORTING VULNERABLE FAMILIES
ZERO CAPITAL INVESTMENT FROM THE CITY TOWARDS NETWORK CONSTRUCTION
NONEXCLUSIVE USE OF THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAYS
ALL APPLICABLE CITY EXPENSES REIMBURSED
Key Partnership Terms
ISP’S SUBJECT TO ALL APPLICABLE FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL FEES
NETWORK MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION RESPONSIBILITY OF SIFI
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a.
DATE: May 10, 2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
APPROVED BY: Rachel Barbosa, City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: Donna Schwartz, City Clerk
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APRIL 26, 2022
SUMMARY: Staff is requesting approval of Minutes for the April 26, 2022 Regular City Council Meeting.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of April 26, 2022.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
DISCUSSION: None.
ATTACHMENT(S):
A. Minutes
CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
TUESDAY, APRIL 26, 2022 - 6:00 PM
1. ROLL CALL
Mayor Olmos called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM
PRESENT: Councilmember(s): Angel, Delgado, Retamoza, Mayor Pro Tem Acosta, and Mayor Olmos
STAFF PRESENT: Rachel Barbosa, City Manager; Anthony R. Taylor, City Attorney; Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk; Rene Salas, Deputy City Manager; Colby Cataldi, Community Development Director; William Fox, Interim Finance Director; Jayson Perez, Recreation Coordinator; and Nancy Rodriguez, Recreation Specialist.
STAFF ABSENT: Paola Lara, Deputy City Clerk.
Zoom was provided for the Public to participate during public comment via teleconference.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Mayor Gloria Olmos led the Pledge of Allegiance.
3. INVOCATION – Mayor Gloria Olmos offered the Invocation.
4. PRESENTATIONS: None.
4.a. Mayor Olmos read a proclamation proclaiming May 1–7, 2022, as Municipal Clerks Week.
4.b. City Council received a report from Interim Finance Director William Fox on Fiscal Year 2021-22 Third Quarter Financial Update.
4.c. City Council received a report from the Sheriff’s Department and discussed matters concerning law enforcement in the City for the month of March.
4.d. City Council received a report from Community Development Director Colby Cataldi on Code Enforcement and Public Safety activities for the month of March.
Councilmember Delgado directed staff be vigilant on the weekends for a taco vendor that sets up at the Shell gas station, requested an update on the property for Republic Iron Works as there was a large amount of trash in the back of the property, and directed staff address a vehicle that has
been parked on Central and Klingerman for a few weeks and has flat tire and several citations.
5. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA AND WAIVER OF FULL READING OF
ORDINANCES
A motion was made by Councilmember Delgado, seconded by Councilmember Retamoza, to approve the agenda. Motion carried 5-0, by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmember(s): Angel, Delgado, Retamoza, Mayor Pro Tem Acosta and Mayor Olmos
NAYS: Councilmember(s): None
6. PUBLIC COMMENT
Mayor Olmos opened public comment, there being none, closed public comment.
7. CONSENT CALENDAR
City Attorney Anthony R. Taylor read the title of Ordinance No. 1258.
A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Acosta, seconded by Councilmember Delgado to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 5-0 by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmember(s): Angel, Delgado, Retamoza, Mayor Pro Tem Acosta, and Mayor Olmos
NAYS: Councilmember(s): None
7.a. Approved Minutes for the Regular City Council Meeting held April 12, 2022.
7.b. Adopted Resolution No. 22-28, approving warrants for the period of April 13, 2022 through April 26, 2022 totaling $472,118.96
7.c. Adopted Ordinance No. 1258 amending the zoning designation for properties located at 2540 Rosemead Boulevard (APN 8102-037-020), 2559 and 2603 Chico Avenue (APNs 8102-037-017 and 8102-037-024, respectively), and APN 8102-037-022, to change the existing zoning designation from commercial-manufacturing to multi-family residential.
7.d. Adopted Resolution No. 22-29, approving Amendment No. 9 to agreement subaward number ENP202110 with the County of Los Angeles for Elderly Nutrition Program Services and authorizing the City Manager, or her designee, to execute the same.
7.e. Adopted Resolution No. 22-30, approving Second Amendment to City Manager's contract to implement a 3% salary increase effective March 22, 2022.
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
9. GENERAL BUSINESS
9.a. APPOINTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSIONER
Mayor Olmos announced the item.
A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Acosta, seconded by Councilmember Angel to appoint David Mai to the Community Services commission. Motion carried 5-0 by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmember(s): Angel, Delgado, Retamoza, Mayor Pro Tem Acosta and Mayor Olmos
NAYS: Councilmember(s): None
9.b. CONSIDERATION FOR AUTHORIZATION TO SEEK REQUEST FOR
PROPOSALS (RFP) FOR PLANNING & ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR
THE PREPARATION OF A LOCAL ROADWAY SAFETY PLAN (LRSP)
Mayor Olmos announced the item.
Community Development Director Colby Cataldi presented the staff report.
A motion was made by Councilmember Angel, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Acosta to approve an RFP for Planning & Engineering Services for the Preparation of a LRSP and authorize staff to solicit proposals. Motion carried 5-0 by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmember(s): Angel, Delgado, Retamoza, Mayor Pro Tem Acosta, and Mayor Olmos
NAYS: Councilmember(s): None
9.c. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 22-31,
APPROVING A PRIVATE PLACEMENT LEASE FINANCING TO PAY
OFF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM
UNFUNDED PENSION OBLIGATION
Mayor Olmos announced the item.
Interim Finance Director William Fox introduced Dan Massiello, Kosmont Transaction Services, who presented a PowerPoint (via zoom) on the City’s Unfunded Accrued Liability Refinancing with Lease Revenue Bond, Final Approvals and Transaction Update.
A motion was made by Councilmember Delgado, seconded by Councilmember Angel to adopt Resolution No. 22-31, approving the terms of a private placement lease financing, approving the form of and authorizing the execution and delivery of a site lease and lease agreement, a trust agreement, and authorizing required actions in connection with the execution and, authorizing other matters relating to the financing. Motion carried 5-0 by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmember(s): Angel, Delgado, Retamoza, Mayor Pro Tem Acosta, and Mayor Olmos
NAYS: Councilmember(s): None
10. COMMITTEE REPORTS, INCLUDING AB 1234 REPORTS
Mayor Pro Tem Acosta announced his attendance at the City of South El Monte’s Annual Easter Breakfast and El Monte/South El Monte Chamber of Commerce 100th Anniversary Gala.
Councilmember Retamoza announced her attendance at the City of South El Monte’s Annual Easter Breakfast and El Monte/South El Monte Chamber of Commerce 100th Anniversary Gala.
Councilmember Delgado announced his attendance at the City of South El Monte’s Annual Easter Breakfast.
Councilmember Angel announced his attendance at the Community Services Senior Drive-Thru Easter event, City of South El Monte’s Annual Easter Breakfast, and El Monte/South El Monte Chamber of Commerce 100th Anniversary Gala.
Mayor Olmos announced her attendance at the City of South El Monte’s Annual Easter Breakfast, El Monte/South El Monte Chamber of Commerce 100th Anniversary Gala, and announced SEAACA still has adoption opportunities.
Mayor Pro Tem Acosta announced the City received the Milestone of Growth Achievement Award.
11. CORRESPONDENCE:
11.a. LETTER FROM CHRISTOPHER HEALY, TEACHER WITH SOUTH EL
MONTE HIGH SCHOOL, REQUESTING A FACILITY RESERVATION
FEE WAIVER FOR USE OF THE SOUTH EL MONTE SENIOR CENTER
DINING ROOM
Mayor Olmos announced the item.
Recreation Coordinator Jayson Perez presented the staff report.
A motion was made by Councilmember Angel, seconded by Councilmember Delgado to approve the facility reservation fee waiver requested by Christopher Healy, Teacher with South El Monte High School in the amount of $1,632.46.
Motion carried 5-0 by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmember(s): Angel, Delgado, Retamoza, Mayor Pro Tem Acosta, and Mayor Olmos
NAYS: Councilmember(s): None
12. COUNCILMEMBERS’ AGENDA: None
13. CLOSED SESSION:
At 7:26 p.m. City Attorney Anthony R. Taylor recessed Council into closed session.
13.a. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(4) – [One case] At 8:01 p.m. Mayor Olmos reconvened to open session.
City Attorney Anthony R. Taylor announced City Council discussed item 13.a. No action taken, nothing to report.
14. RECESS COUNCIL MEETING
Mayor Olmos recessed the meeting at 8:01 p.m. to the Successor Agency meeting.
Mayor Olmos reconvened the meeting at 8:02 p.m.
15. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business coming before this body, at 8:03 p.m. Mayor Olmos adjourned the meeting in memory of Johan Memo Rosales, Amelia Rios, and Maria De La Paz Castillo, to a regular meeting on Tuesday, May 10, 2022, at 6:00 p.m.
______________________________ ______________________
Donna G. Schwartz, CMC, City Clerk Gloria Olmos, Mayor
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.b.
DATE: May 10, 2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
APPROVED BY: Rachel Barbosa, City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: William Fox, Interim Finance Director
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 22- 32, APPROVING WARRANTS FOR THE PERIOD OF APRIL
27, 2022, THROUGH MAY 10, 2022
SUMMARY: Authorizing payment of City expenditures for the period of April 27, 2022, through May 10, 2022 totaling $907,394.50.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council adopt Resolution No. 22- 32, authorizing payment of City expenditures.
FISCAL IMPACT:
DISCUSSION:
ATTACHMENT(S):
A. Resolution No. 22-32
B. Warrants
RESOLUTION NO. 22-32
A RESOLUTION OF THE SOUTH EL MONTE CITY COUNCIL
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS FOR THE
PERIOD OF APRIL 27, 2022, THROUGH MAY 10, 2022,
TOTALING $907,394.50
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE, AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: That in accordance with Section 37202 of the Government Code, the Finance Director hereby certifies to the accuracy of the following demands and the availability of funds for payment thereof.
_____________________________________
Finance Director
SECTION 2: That the following claims and demands have been audited as required by law and that the same are hereby allowed in the amount hereafter set forth.
CLAIMANT CLAIM PERIOD WARRANT #’S AMOUNT
FY 21/22 Electronic Warrants 04/27/2022-05/10/2022 DFT0000089- DFT0000112
$112,062.30
FY 21/22 Hand Typed Warrants 04/27/2022-05/10/2022 10171-10182 $26,570.70 FY 21/22 Regular Warrants 04/27/2022-05/10/2022 10183-10241 $635,620.22 Payroll Check PPE 04/30/2022 1020-1026 $6,176.75
Payroll Direct Deposit PPE 04/30/2022 1301-1397 $126,964.53 TOTAL EXPENDITURES RESOLUTION NO. 22-32 $907,394.50
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 10th day of May 2022. __________________________________
Gloria Olmos, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS:
CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE )
I, Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk of the City of South El Monte, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution, being Resolution No. 22-32, was duly passed and approved by the City Council of the City of South El Monte at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 10th day of May 2022, and that said Resolution was adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.c.
DATE: May 10, 2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
APPROVED BY: Rachel Barbosa, City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: Anthony R. Taylor, City Attorney
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 22- 33, PROCLAIMING A LOCAL EMERGENCY PERSISTS AND
AUTHORIZING THE USE OF REMOTE TELECONFERENCE
MEETING PROCEDURES BY THE CITY'S LEGISLATIVE
BODIES AS AUTHORIZED BY GOVERNMENT CODE
SECTION 54953(e) ET SEQ. FOR THE PERIOD OF MAY 10
THROUGH JUNE 8, 2022
SUMMARY: On September 16, 2021, Governor Newsom signed AB 361 into law. AB 361 was made effective October 1, 2021. Pursuant to AB 361, staff recommends consideration of Resolution No. 22-33, proclaiming a local emergency persists and authorizing the use of remote meeting procedures by the City’s legislative bodies, which can include meetings held via a virtual platform (e.g. Zoom), for the period of May 10, 2022 through June 8, 2022.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council adopt Resolution No. 22- 33, proclaiming a local emergency persists and authorizing the use of alternative meeting procedures by the City’s legislative bodies, such as utilizing a virtual platform (e.g. Zoom) for the period of May 10, 2022 through June 8, 2022.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
DISCUSSION: In March of 2020, at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, Governor Newsom proclaimed a State of Emergency in California, and issued Executive Order N25-20 to facilitate the ability of legislative bodies to meet using remote/virtual platforms to comply with health orders. Since that time, several other Executive Orders have been issued that further modified the requirements related to the conduct of teleconferenced meetings and the right of public participation during the state of emergency. The Executive Orders collectively operated to remove certain requirements for teleconferenced meetings, including that each teleconference location be accessible to the public, and that members of the public be able to address the legislative body at each teleconference location.
The Executive Orders allowed the City Council and each of the City’s legislative bodies, commissions, and committees subject to the Brown Act to modify how meetings were conducted to protect the health and safety of the legislative bodies, staff, and the public, while ensuring transparency and accessibility for open and public meetings. However, those executive orders expired on October 1, 2021.
On September 16, 2021, Governor Newsom signed AB 361 into law. AB 361 was made effective October 1, 2021, to correspond to the timing of expiration of the executive orders.
AB 361 allows legislative bodies to continue to utilize remote/virtual platforms for meetings during a state of emergency proclaimed by the Governor that includes the City, provided that one of the following three criteria is met with respect to the meeting:
i) State or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing; or
ii) The legislative body is meeting for the purpose of determining, by majority vote, whether as a result of the state of emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees; or
iii) The legislative body has previously determined, by majority vote, that, as a result of the state of emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.
These provisions of AB 361 are effective until January 1, 2024. This means these provisions may be invoked any time there is a proclaimed state of emergency by the Governor (e.g., wildfires) and the City Council can make at least one of the enumerated findings.
On October 26, 2021, City Council adopted Resolution No. 21-69 proclaiming a local emergency persists and authorizing the use of remote teleconference procedures by the City’s legislative bodies for the period of October 26 through November 25, 2021. To avoid a lapse in time between meetings and the effective date of Resolution No. 21-69, on November 9, 2021, City Council adopted Resolution No. 21-72 proclaiming a local emergency persists and authorizing the use of remote teleconference procedures by the City’s legislative bodies for the period of November 9 through December 9, 2021. Since then, City Council has adopted the following resolutions authorizing the same: Resolution No. 21-78 adopted on December 14, 2021 for the period of December 14, 2021 through January 12, 2022; Resolution No. 22-02 adopted on January 11, 2022 for the period of January 11, 2022 through February 9, 2022; Resolution No. 22-11 adopted February 8, 2022 for the period of February 8, 2022 through March 9, 2022; Resolution No. 22-18 adopted March 8, 2022 for the period of March 8, 2022 through April 6, 2022; and Resolution No. 22-23 adopted April 12, 2022 for the period of April 12, 2022 through May 12, 2022.
In large part due to the Omicron variant, there has been a sharp surge of Covid-19 positive cases since December 2021. In large part due to the Omicron variant, there has been a sharp surge of Covid-19 positive cases since December 2021. The CDC indicators and thresholds measuring community transmission of COVID-19 within the County of Los Angeles continue to be at a substantial level. The Omicron variant is the predominant strain in Los Angeles County and spreads more easily than the original virus. While the Omicron BA.1 variant is currently the dominant variant in Los Angeles
County, there is a gradual increase in the level of the BA.2 subvariant in the County. The BA.2 subvariant is highly transmissible, and has become the dominant variant in many countries, including some that are facing renewed surges in cases and increased hospitalizations.
In light of the continuing COVID-19 emergency, and the continued threats to health and safety posed by indoor meetings with large attendance, staff recommends adoption of the proposed resolution making the findings required to invoke AB 361. Doing so will allow the meetings of the City Council and each of the City’s legislative bodies to continue to occur by teleconference, without adhering to the teleconferencing requirements set out in Government Code Section 54953(b)(3) that would otherwise apply absent invocation of AB 361.
Continued reliance on AB 361 will require adoption of a new resolution making the required findings every 30 days.
ATTACHMENT(S):
A. Resolution No. 22-33
RESOLUTION NO. 22-33
A RESOLUTION OF THE SOUTH EL MONTE CITY COUNCIL
PROCLAIMING A LOCAL EMERGENCY PERSISTS AND
AUTHORIZING THE USE OF REMOTE TELECONFERENCE
MEETING PROCEDURES BY THE CITY’S LEGISLATIVE
BODIES, AS AUTHORIZED BY GOVERNMENT CODE
SECTION 54953(e) ET SEQ., FOR THE PERIOD OF MAY 10,
2022 THROUGH JUNE 8, 2022
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of South El Monte is committed to preserving and nurturing public access, transparency, observation and participation in its meetings and the meetings of each of its legislative bodies (as that term is defined in Government Code section 54952, including commissions, boards and committees subject to the Brown Act); and WHEREAS, all meetings of the City’s legislative bodies are open and public, as required by the Ralph M. Brown Act, codified as Government Code section 54950 et seq., so that any member of the public may attend, participate, and observe the City’s legislative bodies conduct their business; and
WHEREAS, the Brown Act, as amended by Assembly Bill 361 (2021), amending Government Code section 54953(e) et seq., allows for remote teleconferencing observation and participation in meetings by members of a legislative body and members of the public, without compliance with the requirements of Government Code section 54953(b)(3) regarding, subject to the existence of certain conditions; and
WHEREAS, the initial required condition is a declaration of a state of emergency by the Governor pursuant to the California Emergency Services Act, Government Code section 8625, proclaiming the existence of conditions of disaster or of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within the state and within the boundaries of the City, as provided in Government Code section 8558; and
WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, pursuant to Government Code section 8625, Governor Newsom declared the existence of a state of emergency for the State of California, in response to the outbreak of respiratory illness due to a novel coronavirus (a disease now known as COVID19); and WHEREAS, also on March 4, 2020, the County of Los Angeles followed suit and declared the existence of a state of emergency for the County of Los Angeles; and WHEREAS, on March 12, 2020, out of an abundance of caution to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the community, the Mayor of the City of South El Monte proclaimed a local emergency due to the public health threat caused by COVID-19; and WHEREAS, the Mayor’s proclamation found that conditions of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property have arisen within the City as a result of the COVID-19 virus and that these conditions are or are likely to be beyond the control of the services, personnel, equipment, and facilities of the City; and
WHEREAS, on March 16, 2020, the City’s Director of Emergency Services declared a local emergency for the City pursuant to Chapter 2.32 of the South El Monte Municipal Code, finding that conditions of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property have arisen within the City as a result of the COVID-19 virus and that these conditions are or are likely to be beyond the control of the services, personnel, equipment, and facilities of the City; and WHEREAS, on March 17, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 20-24, ratifying the proclamation of a local emergency in response to COVID-19; and WHEREAS, Government Code section 54953(e) further requires that state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing; or, the legislative body of the City finds that meeting in person would present imminent risk to the health and safety of attendees; and
WHEREAS, the State of California and County of Los Angeles Department of Public Health officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing, County officials are requiring masking in an effort to slow the continuously high level of transmission of COVID-19 throughout Los Angeles County, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (“CDC”) continue to recommend physical distancing; and
WHEREAS, in large part due to the Omicron variant, there has been a sharp surge of Covid-19 positive cases since December 2021. The CDC indicators and thresholds measuring community transmission of COVID-19 within the County of Los Angeles continue to be at a substantial level. The Omicron variant is the predominant strain in Los Angeles County and spreads more easily than the original virus. While the Omicron BA.1 variant is currently the dominant variant in Los Angeles County, there is a gradual increase in the level of the BA.2 subvariant in the County. The BA.2 subvariant is highly transmissible, and has become the dominant variant in many countries, including some that are facing renewed surges in cases and increased hospitalizations; and
WHEREAS, the Council hereby finds that such emergency conditions persist in the City, such that meeting in person for the meetings of the legislative bodies of the City would present imminent risk to the health and safety of attendees as a result of the increased risk of the spread of the COVID-19 virus among those in attendance; and
WHEREAS, the Council hereby finds that the state of emergency due to the COVID-19 virus and the conditions related thereto has caused, and will continue to cause, conditions of extreme peril to the safety of persons within the City that are likely to be beyond the control of services, personnel, equipment, and facilities of the City, and thereby affirms, authorizes, and proclaims that the existence of a local emergency persists throughout the City, and ratifies the proclamation of state of emergency by the Governor of the State of California; and WHEREAS, the Council hereby finds that, as a consequence of the existing local emergency, the legislative bodies of the City shall conduct their meetings without compliance with Government Code section 54953(b)(3), and shall instead comply with the remote teleconference meeting requirements as authorized by Government Code section 54953(e) et seq.; and WHEREAS, the Council affirms that the City will allow for observation and participation by Councilmembers, members of the City’s legislative bodies, and the public by allowing public participation and comment in real time via Zoom or by telephone, as well as allowing limited inPage 46 of 97 person attendance for certain legislative bodies of the City, as will be duly indicated in the agendas of the legislative bodies, respectively, in an effort to protect the constitutional and statutory rights of all attendees.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE FINDS, RESOLVES, AND ORDERS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated herein Resolution by reference.
Section 2. The Council hereby recognizes and affirms the existence and conditions of a state of emergency as proclaimed by the Governor, the existence of emergency conditions in the City, and affirms, authorizes, and proclaims that the existence of a local emergency persists throughout the City.
Section 3. The Council hereby ratifies the Governor of the State of California’s Proclamation of State of Emergency, effective as of its issuance date of March 4, 2020.
Section 4. Further, the Council finds that holding the meetings of the City’s legislative bodies in person with no limitations to attendance would present imminent risk to the health and safety of attendees as a result of the increased risk of the spread of the COVID-19 virus among those in attendance, and that the State of California and County of Los Angeles Department of Public Health officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing in connection with the COVID-19 emergency, as required by Government Code section 54953(e) et seq.
Section 5. The City Manager and legislative bodies of the City are hereby authorized and directed to take all actions necessary to carry out the intent and purpose of this Resolution including, conducting open and public meetings via teleconference in accordance with Government Code section 54953(e) et seq. and other applicable provisions of the Brown Act.
Section 6. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption and shall be effective until the earlier of (i) June 8, 2022, or (ii) such time the Council adopts a subsequent resolution in accordance with Government Code section 54953(e)(3) to extend the time during which the legislative bodies (as that term is defined in Government Code §54952, including commissions, boards and committees subject to the Brown Act) of the City may continue to teleconference without compliance with Government Code section 54953(b)(3).
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of May 2022.
________________________
Gloria Olmos, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS:
CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE )
I, Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk of the City of South El Monte, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution, being Resolution No. 22-33, was duly passed and approved by the City Council of the City of South El Monte at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 10th day of May 2022, and that said Resolution was adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Donna G. Schwartz, City Clerk
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.a.
DATE: May 10, 2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
APPROVED BY: Rachel Barbosa, City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: Anthony R. Taylor, City Attorney
SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION
CONCERNING POTENTIAL FUTURE CANNABIS
REGULATIONS AND TAXES
SUMMARY: The City Attorney's Office has prepared this staff report to provide a discussion about the legal parameters that governs the City’s actions, as well as the history of the City’s regulations of cannabis. The City Attorney’s office seeks guidance on how to proceed.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council discuss the item and provide direction to City Staff about the Council's preferred option.
FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact at this time. There is an opportunity for revenue generation from cannabis businesses. However, the City cannot increase its sales tax rate and any potential increased revenue generation from a cannabis business would have to occur through a different type of tax or fee.
DISCUSSION: For the City Council's consideration, the options are as follows:
1) Take no action and continue to ban cannabis businesses in the City. 2) Direct city staff to prepare and agendize for a future planning commission and council meeting consideration of new business and zoning regulations to govern cannabis cultivation and sales.
3) Direct the City Attorney to draft a measure in the next 30 days that the City Council could submit to the voters for the November 2022 election that includes provisions relating to the implementation of cannabis business taxes and zoning regulations.
1. Background
a. State Regulations
In 1996, California voters approved Proposition 215, the Compassionate Use Act (codified at Health and Safety Code § 11362.5) to ensure that seriously ill Californians have the right to obtain and use cannabis for medical purposes without fear of criminal prosecution under limited, specified circumstances.
In 2004, the State Legislature enacted SB 420, the Medical Marijuana Program Act (codified at Health and Safety Code section 11362.7 et seq.), to clarify the scope of the Compassionate Use Act, provide additional statutory guidance regarding medical cannabis use, and allow cities and counties to adopt supplemental rules and regulations.
In 2015, the Governor signed the Medical Marijuana Regulation and Safety Act (“MMRSA”), creating a comprehensive state licensing system for the commercial cultivation, manufacture, retail sale, transport, distribution, delivery, and testing of medical cannabis, all subject to local control. One of the purposes of MMRSA was to ensure uniformity among jurisdictions that wished to allow commercial cannabis operations. MMRSA’s name was changed to the Medical Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (“MCRSA”) in 2016.
Proposition 64, the Adult Use of Marijuana Act (“AUMA”) was approved by California voters at the November 2016 election. The purpose of AUMA was to establish a comprehensive system to legalize, control and regulate the cultivation, processing, manufacture, distribution, testing, and sale of nonmedical cannabis, including cannabis products. Under AUMA, adults, age 21 and older, are legally entitled to possess and grow certain amounts of cannabis at home for personal use.
On June 27, 2017, the Governor signed SB 94, the Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (“MAUCRSA”), effectively repealing MCRSA and merging certain provisions of MCRSA into the provisions of AUMA to create a comprehensive state law licensing and regulatory framework applicable to all types of commercial cannabis activities. MAUCRSA preserves the dual licensing scheme applicable to commercial cannabis uses, requiring all cannabis businesses to have a required state license applicable to the commercial cannabis activities in which they engage, and also authorizing cities to adopt their own ordinances permitting, regulating and/or prohibiting the various types of commercial cannabis uses and activities. Under MAUCRSA, cannabis businesses are required to comply with local ordinances and obtain any required local permits in addition to complying with state regulations to obtain the required state licenses. Local agencies retain the right to prohibit all commercial cannabis activities.
Under MAUCRSA, three state licensing authorities, the Bureau of Cannabis Control, the Department of Food and Agriculture, and the Department of Public Health, were empowered to issue state licenses authorizing the various types of commercial cannabis uses, and to promulgate regulations applicable to the state licensing process. All three state licensing authorities promulgated regulations and began issuing state licenses around 2017-2018. In 2021, the three state licensing authorities were merged into one centralized agency for all state cannabis regulation, the newly-created Department of Cannabis Control (“DCC”). The separate regulations of each for the three former licensing authorities were also merged into one consolidated set of State licensing regulations administered and enforced by the DCC, codified as Division 19 of Title 4 of the California Code of Regulations. Additional modifications are currently being proposed by the DCC to streamline and strengthen the regulatory framework.
2. Federal Regulations Relating to Cannabis
Despite legalization in California, cannabis remains illegal under federal law as a Schedule 1 Controlled Substance. Federal law prevails over state law where the two conflict. However, U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland has made it clear that the U.S.
Department of Justice (DOJ) does not consider enforcement of the federal Controlled Substances Act against cannabis in states which have legalized it a priority of the DOJ or an efficient use of the DOJ’s resources, although prior Attorney General guidance establishing a more formal policy of non-prosecution against state-legal cannabis that been rescinded during the Trump administration has not been reinstated. Additionally, federal budget legislation originally known as the Rohrabacher-Farr Amendment, prohibiting the DOJ from spending funds to interfere with the implementation of state medical cannabis laws, was originally passed in 2014, has been continually renewed since that time, and most recently has been renewed such that it will remain in effect until through at least September 30, 2022.
3. History of City Regulations
The following is a brief history of cannabis regulations in South El Monte:
May 8, 2007/June 12, 2007: City Council adopts a moratorium on establishment of cannabis dispensaries.
December 8, 2009: City Council adopts an interim ordinance regulating medical cannabis dispensaries.
January 5, 2010: City Council extends the interim ordinance.
January 26, 2010: City Council adopts an ordinance regulating medical cannabis dispensaries.
March 9, 2010: the City Council approved a development agreement with a Farm Assist Remedies Ministry to build an operate a medical marijuana dispensary in accordance with state law.
September 14, 2010: City Council adopts a resolution opposing Proposition 19, the “Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010.”
September 28, 2010: The City Council adopts regulations permitting medical cannabis dispensaries.
January 11, 2011: City Council adopts numerical limit on the number of medical cannabis dispensaries (2 max).
August 16, 2011: City Council reduces the total number of medical cannabis dispensaries to 1.
April 23, 2014: City Council adopts a resolution denying a request to amend the Zoning Code to allow medical cannabis dispensaries within the commercial-manufacturing zone.
December 15, 2014: City Council adopts a resolution opposing an initiative measure circulated in 2014 that would increase the total number of medical cannabis dispensaries that may be established in the City and impose related regulations.
January 13, 2015: City Council bans all medical cannabis dispensaries.
January 26, 2016: City Council bans all cultivation of cannabis.
January 26, 2016: City Council adopts a resolution establishing administrative penalties for violations of the ban on cannabis cultivation, deliveries, and dispensaries.
October 24, 2017: City Council bans all commercial cannabis activities.
April 14, 2020: a voter-initiated measure was submitted by Wilhans Ili to the City Clerk’s Office (“Measure”). The Measure was drafted by the proponent and his attorney (and not by the City Attorney). Since then, the Measure’s proponents gathered sufficient signatures for legally required submittal to the voters of the Measure at a City election, without the City deciding the legal validity of the Measure. Consequently, on December 8, 2020, the City Council directed that the Measure be placed on the November 8, 2022, general municipal election (as required by law), and the City Council requested a report be prepared concerning the Measure.
4. Report Concerning the Initiative Measure
The Measure proposes to impose a 6% excise tax on retail sales of cannabis and edibles.
This imposes a sales and use tax or a transactions and use tax (both of which are commonly referred to as a “sales tax”) upon all retail sales of cannabis and cannabis products within the City.
The Measure’s proposed sales tax conflicts with Measure ES and Chapter 3.06 of the Municipal Code (adopted in 2020 by the City’s voters), which has already placed the City’s sales tax rate at the maximum rate allowed by law. Therefore, no additional revenue is anticipated to be generated by the Measure.
Revenue & Taxation Code Section 34011(f) prohibits the City from imposing sales and use tax upon the retail sales of medicinal cannabis. On its face, the text of the Measure indicates that its tax is to be imposed upon both medicinal and recreational cannabis.
This is a violation of and preempted by Revenue & Taxation Code Section 34011(f).
The Measure also allows up to 10 cannabis businesses. However, the Measure does not take into account that cannabis businesses cannot be near sensitive areas (such as schools, parks, day cares and churches) and in a city the size of South El Monte there are very limited locations where a cannabis business could be located.
The City Attorney will prepare an Impartial Analysis in July 2022 concerning the Measure.
5. Regulations of Other Cities
In preparing this report, staff reviewed the regulations of Santa Ana, El Monte, Baldwin Park, and Montebello. The following is a comparison of the surveyed cities and their distance from sensitive receptors (e.g., schools, parks, residential uses):
Santa Ana: 1000 feet from schools, parks, and existing residential zones; 500 feet from each other.
El Monte: 800 feet from schools, day care center, or youth center.
Baldwin Park: 600 feet from schools, day care center, or youth center; 50 feet from a residential zone.
Montebello: 600 feet from schools providing instruction in kindergarten or any grades one through 12, day care center, youth center, or residentially zoned property.
It should be noted that the cities of West Covina, City of Industry, Rosemead, Temple City, Monterey Park, Whittier, and Pico Rivera prohibit commercial cannabis activities.
6. Potential City Commercial Cannabis Regulations
a. Regulatory Authority
The City retains full regulatory and land use authority over commercial cannabis uses ad activities pursuant to its police power, allowing it a wide range of options for a potential cannabis ordinance amendment, should the City Council see fit to pursue one. Some key considerations include the following:
• Selecting the zones in which to permit commercial cannabis land uses (or certain types of them). The City could also create an overlay zoning designation and provide that commercial cannabis uses may only be only permitted within the overlay zone. • The City may also establish buffers around sensitive uses, in which areas commercial cannabis activities would be prohibited even if otherwise permitted in the subject zone.
The default buffers provided in state law for state licensees are 600 feet from an existing school, daycare center, or youth center, unless the DCC or a local jurisdiction specifies a different radius. Accordingly, the City could specify a higher or lower radius requirement and could establish different or additional sensitive uses that are subject to the buffer requirement.
• Determining which types of commercial cannabis activities to permit. The simplest way to make distinctions as to which types of commercial cannabis activities to permit is to follow the delineations of the state commercial cannabis license types under state regulations, as follows: (i) Retailers (including delivery); (ii) Distributors; (iii) Manufacturers; (iv) Cultivators; (v) Testing Laboratories; (vi) Microbusinesses; and (vii) Cannabis Events. The City can select which of these types of cannabis businesses it wishes to permit and which to prohibit.
• Establishing a regulatory permit requirement for the types of commercial cannabis activities that may be permitted.
• Alternatively, the City could require a land use entitlement such as a conditional use permit. However, requiring a regulatory permit as opposed to a conditional use permit has the advantage that the granting of the regulatory permit does not constitute a vested right and that the regulatory permit may be revoked without a hearing in the event of a violation (and the ordinance would expressly state the same). If cannabis businesses are instead permitted subject to a CUP, once the CUP is issued it can be difficult to revoke,
even if/when a permittee proves not to be a good member of the City’s business community. A regulatory permit can be revoked without the same due process and vested rights concerns.
• However, the approval of the regulatory permit could be made discretionary depending on the required findings for approval and the designated approval authority for the permit. Doing so carries the advantage of making it more difficult for an applicant to compel issuance of a permit via legal proceedings in the event a permit application is denied by the City.
• Enactment of such a permit requirement will generally require establishment of an open and transparent application process with objective criteria, including required application contents, a process for review and approval of applications, a process for annual permit renewal and required inspections if desired, and provisions for suspension and/or revocation of permits and other remedies in the event of violations. Following adoption of an ordinance, application forms would need to be developed to implement the ordinance, among other tasks such as application fee adoption (discussed below), before applications would be accepted for processing.
• Establishing operational requirements that must be met by cannabis businesses in order to obtain/maintain the required City regulatory permit. • The operational requirements can be more stringent than those set forth in the State regulations, which apply to state licensing of the businesses. Because the businesses cannot operate lawfully in the City without a state license, there is no need to duplicate state regulations in the City’s ordinance.
• Rather, the City’s ordinance could state that in order to obtain a City regulatory permit, the business must hold a valid state license, in addition to meeting the requirements necessary to obtain the City regulatory permit. Then any City operational standards could function as supplemental to the state standards.
• Examples of operational requirements the City may wish to consider are on-site security requirements, cannabis business employee background check requirements, requirements that all cannabis operations be conducted indoors, measures to prevent off-site odors, fire safety requirements, insurance requirements, and recordkeeping requirements.
• Establishing an application fee to fund administration of the regulatory program, including the costs of application processing and any required permit inspections. The amount of the fee would generally be set by a separate resolution following a fee study or analysis to estimate the reasonable costs of processing an application. A deposit system may also be used in lieu of a set fee.
If the City Council desires to submit a ballot measure to the voters at the November 8, 2022, election, then the City Council would have to submit an adopted resolution calling the election on the ballot measure and requesting that the election be consolidated with the November 2022 general election to the County Registrar by early July 2022.The resolution would have to include (i) the full proposed ordinance, and (ii) the ballot label language which summarizes the key terms of the proposed tax ordinance for the voters. b. Taxation Authority
The City may also enact a commercial cannabis tax, with voter approval. However, a cannabis zoning ordinance, without a tax component, does not require voter approval.
A cannabis tax measure could be made to apply to all cannabis businesses in the City and could establish a maximum tax rate as a percentage of gross receipts of such businesses, and/or a per-square-foot tax rate applicable to all space used for commercial cannabis activity or cannabis cultivation. The Council could then at any subsequent time, by resolution, set and adjust the actual tax rate anywhere within the authorized range, up to the maximum rate authorized by the voters.
Examples of other cities’ cannabis tax rates include (not included in the comparison chart): (1) Suisun City – up to 15% of proceeds and up to $25 per square foot of space used for commercial cannabis activities (as of 2018; subject to automatic CPI increases); (2) Hesperia – 1-6% of proceeds and up to $15 per square foot of cultivation area (as of 2018; subject to automatic CPI increases); (3) Desert Hot Springs (10% of proceeds and $10 per square foot of cultivation (as of 2015; subject to automatic CPI increases); (4) Perris – 10% of proceeds for dispensaries and $25 per square foot of cultivation space (as of 2016; subject to automatic CPI increases); and (5) Carson – up to $25 per square foot of cultivation area and up to 18% of proceeds of cannabis operations.
It should be noted that the State also imposes significant taxes on cannabis businesses (15-percent cannabis excise tax is imposed upon all purchasers of cannabis or cannabis products sold at retail; cultivation tax of $10.08 per dry-weight ounce of flower, $3 per dry-weight ounce of leaves, and $1.41 per ounce of fresh cannabis plant). So, if the City wants to promote/attract legal commercial cannabis businesses, it should set the rates at levels that do not make the overall costs of doing business in the City prohibitive. In some cases, cities do not wish to attract commercial cannabis businesses even though they adopt a tax, so they intentionally set the rates at prohibitive levels to deter businesses from seeking to commence operations in the city. Alternatively, they may seek voter authorization for a high maximum rate but set the actual rate far lower.
If the City Council sees fit to adopt a cannabis ordinance permitting any commercial cannabis activities, it is advisable to do so concurrently with, or subsequent to, adoption of a cannabis tax ordinance, to ensure that no applicants are able to obtain permits prior to imposition of the tax requirement.
If prepared as a “general tax” (i.e., a tax imposed for general governmental purposes), only a simple majority voter approval would be required to pass a cannabis tax measure, and it would need to be voted on at a general election unless the tax measure is proposed by the voters rather than the City Council. If prepared as a “special tax,” (i.e., a tax imposed for specific purposes, including taxes imposed for specific purposes and placed into a general fund), two-thirds voter approval would be required.
An election for the purpose of imposing a "general tax" must be consolidated with a regularly scheduled general election for members of the city council, except in cases of emergency declared by a unanimous vote of the council. A regularly scheduled general election will take place on November 8, 2022. To place a commercial cannabis tax measure before City voters on the November 2022 ballot, the City Council would have to approve a proposed tax ordinance by a two-thirds vote, and would have to submit an adopted resolution calling the election on the ballot measure and requesting that the election be consolidated with the November 2022 general election to the County
Registrar by year July 2022. The resolution would have to include (i) the full proposed tax ordinance, and (ii) the ballot label language which summarizes the key terms of the proposed tax ordinance for the voters by describing the tax rate and methodology, stating the duration of the tax, and providing an estimate of the amount of money the tax is expected to raise annually.
Findings under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) are required for both a zoning ordinance regulating cannabis businesses and for a cannabis ballot measure. If a development project, such as a project proposed through a development agreement were to be proposed, that project must be analyzed under CEQA before approval.
ATTACHMENT(S):
None
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9.b.
DATE: May 10, 2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
APPROVED BY: Rachel Barbosa, City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: Rene Salas, Deputy City Manager
SUBJECT: FACILITY FEE WAIVER REQUEST FROM EL MONTE/ SOUTH
EL MONTE JETS FOR THE USE OF THE SOUTH EL MONTE
COMMUNITY CENTER FACILITY, NEW TEMPLE PARK
FIELDS, AND SHIVLELY PARK FIELD
SUMMARY: The El Monte/South El Monte Jets (Jets) are requesting a reservation fee waiver for the use of South El Monte Community Center Gym, Amphitheater, and Dance Room to host cheerleading practice, sports physicals, and season banquets. Additionally, the Jets are requesting to use the New Temple Park fields and Shively Park field to host football practices and games.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council discuss and consider the facility reservation fee waiver requested by the Jets in the amount of $14,060.00 FISCAL IMPACT: If approved in accordance with the Facility Reservations Regulations and Fee Schedule, the City will waive the facility rental fees in the amount of $14,060.00 and the Jets will be responsible for all remaining costs including, but not limited to, lighting, insurance coverage, staff fees, and refundable deposits.
This amount may vary based upon updates or further changes to the reservation. Any increases in the requested waiver amounts will require City Council approval and should be submitted in a timely order by the Jets in a letter format.
Please see Attachment A - Jets Reservation Fees Details, summarizing the fees associated with the reservation request.
DISCUSSION: The City has been a long-time sponsor and supporter of the Jets. The City has designated the Jets as a City grandfathered-youth sports group that has firstuse- right refusal to use the fields during their agreed-upon season. The Jets are a nonprofit organization composed of volunteers, who serve the City by providing affordable flag football, tackle football, and cheerleading programs for children ages 5-12.
The fee waiver includes the rental of the following City Facilities with the corresponding dates and times:
Shively Park Field
Dates: July 5, 2022 to July 28, 2022
Days: Tuesdays, Wednesdays, Thursdays
Time: 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Activity: Football and Cheer Practice
New Temple Park Fields
Dates: August 2, 2022 to November 30, 2022
Days: Tuesdays, Wednesdays, Thursdays
Time: 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Activity: Football and Cheer Practice
Community Center Amphitheater
Dates: November 1, 2022 to January 31, 2023
Days: Tuesdays, Wednesday, Thursdays
Time: 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.
Activity: Cheer Practice
Date: May 21, 2022 and June 24, 2022
Days: Saturday and Friday
Times: Saturday- 10:00 am-12:00 pm and Friday- 6:00 p.m. - 8:00 p.m.
Activity: Cheer Team Uniform Fitting
Community Center Dance Room
Date: June 5, 2022
Day: Sunday
TIme: 9:00 a.m. -11:00 a.m.
Activity: Participant Sports Physicals
Community Center Gymnasium
Date: December 11, 2022
Day: Sunday
Time: 12:00 p.m. -7:00 p.m.
Activity: End of Season Banquet
According to the current City Council approved Facility Reservation Regulations and Fee Schedule, community partners and non-profit organizations are permitted a fee waiver request which solely covers the facility reservation rental fee. All other fees related to the facility rental use such as, but not limited to, staff time, insurance coverage, lighting fees, etc. are the responsibility of the Jets.
ATTACHMENT(S):
A. Jets Reservation Fees Details
B. Jets Fee Waiver Request Letter
C. Jets Reservation Applications
ATTACHMENT A
Jets Reservation Fees Details
Fee Description Units Total
Shively Park Field Rental Fee $50/hour x 36 hours $1,800.00 New Temple Park Rental Fee $50/hour x 144 hours $7,200.00 Community Center Gym Rental
Fee
$100/hour x 6 hours $600.00
Community Center Amphitheater
Rental Fee
$50/hour x 88 hours $4,400.00
Community Center Dance Room
Rental Fee
$20/hour x 3 hours $60.00
Total Waived Fees $14,060
Fee Description Units Total
Shively Park Light Fee $30/hour x 12 hours $360.00
New Temple Park Light Fee $30/hour x 99 hours $2,970.00 Community Center Gym Rental
Staff Time
$15/hour x 6 hours x (2) Staff $180.00
Community Center Amphitheater
Rental Staff Time
$15/hour x 3 hours x (1) staff $45.00
Community Center Dance Room
Rental
$15/hour x 3 hours x (1) staff $45.00
Shively Park Field Damage
Deposit
$500.00 (Refundable) $500.00
New Temple Park Damage
Deposit
$500.00 (Refundable) $500.00
Community Center Gym Damage
Deposit
$500.00 (Refundable) $500.00
Community Center Amphitheater
Damage Deposit
$500.00 (Refundable) $500.00
Insurance Coverage Agency will Provide -
Total Non- Waived Fees $5,600.00
Total fees waived: $14,060.00
Total fees charged to Jets Organization: $5,600.00
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 11.a.
DATE: May 10, 2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
APPROVED BY: Rachel Barbosa, City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: Rene Salas, Deputy City Manager
SUBJECT: LETTER FROM SOUTH EL MONTE NATIONAL LITTLE
LEAGUE (SEMNLL) REQUESTING A FEE WAIVER FOR THE
LABOR COST TO INSTALL ONE BASEBALL AND TWO
SOFTBALL FIELD FENCES
SUMMARY: The South El Monte National Little League (SEMNLL) is requesting to waive fees for the labor cost to install one baseball and two softball field fences at New Temple Park.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council discuss and consider the fee waiver request by SEMNLL for the labor cost of installing one baseball and two softball field fences in the amount of $1,150.00.
FISCAL IMPACT:
DISCUSSION:
ATTACHMENT(S):
A. Letter from SEMNLL for Installation of Fences Fees Waived